On Tue, 29 Aug 1995, Dr. Ivan Blanco wrote:
[ ... snip down to what caught my eye... ]
> The other thing I did (if the members were not piggybacking on each
> other's ideas), was to do the piggybacking myself. I would combine
> different ideas (re-writing them, etc.), asking the members if they agreed
> on my combination, e.g., Am I keeping the original meaning/intention of
> the ideas by combining them? With this, I took away individual ownership
> for any single idea and transfered that ownership to the team.
I think that's a very important operation: taking the names off ideas.
At one place I once worked, the CEO invariably tacked onto every idea that
came up the name of the person who suggested it. His model was evidently
that ideas needed "sponsors". But this made rational discourse all but
impossible, since any attempt to examine an idea was necessarily interpreted
as examining its sponsor.
Another instance of the difference between "debate" and "dialog".
--
Regards
Jim Michmerhuizen
web residence at http://world.std.com/~jamzen/
-----------------------------------------------------^---------------------
. . . . . . . . . . Actions speak louder than words . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . but not as clearly . . . . . . . . . .