Greetings, Malcolm. You asked
"So my question, dear friends, is this: what sorts of steps do we take to
make it possible for traditionally disempowered, knowledge-poor (in the
sense of things like basic understanding of the financial structures and
external customer requirements that drive the business) staff to choose to
broaden their own individual and common knowledge base, without
reinforcing the paternalistic structures that allowed them to languish
there in the first place?"
How do you know from the frame of reference of the "traditionally
disempowered, knowledge-poor" people that you have in mind that they want
to change to some other condition? If they have not told you verbally or
inferentially through body language (which you then checked out through
clear, specific dialogue with them), then it seems that your question is
paternalistic, i.e., it seems that you think you know that they would
benefit from your change for them.
If you have not done this, then you might want to engage in dialogue with
these folks to learn if they have a felt need to change. after you've ahd
these conversations you and they can determine how to remove the shackles
if they want them removed.
It may not be a parallel analogy, but some of you may have seen the
Discovery Channel program on Travels into Darkest Borneo that describes
the plight of the Purnam (?) Indians. Some people want to bring these
Indians into civilization. They don't want it. They just want their
forest left alone so they can continue to subsist on the paste they beat
out of palm trees. Are we qualified to judge that change would benefit
them? I'm not.
Later.
-- Willard Jule 75272.3452@compuserve.com