>we can use to balance the two extremes of no involvement
>(authoritarian rule) and too much involvement (democracy?).
Can you describe an exammple of too much involvement and the basis for
that judgement?
>When my managment decided they wanted to implement a new process, they
>formed a team of 5 to work on the project full-time...........
> ....... We were also encouraged to come forward and share
>thoughts and ideas throughout the process, even when there were no
>meetings. These five people, I believe, did an excellent job in
>"facilitating" the project. I spent between 2 and 4 hours per week with
>my involvement, as did others. At first, I was not happy with the thought
>that we were not included as "full-time" for the 10 weeks. No that it is
>completed, I think that this would have been a waste of time and would
>have hindered the process.
>
>All of the users were encouraged to share with others what we were doing
>and to get feedback. I also provided feedback that enabled these original
>5 team members to enhance their roll-out training in such a way, as to aid
>community buy-in.
Seems like your managment used representative groups with a consultive
process thereby enabling participation of all who were interested. Do you
think the project would have the same degree of "buy in" if the full time
team members hadn't facilitated the involvement of other folks such as
yourself.?
I'm really pleased to see some case histories of organizational design
experience in this forum.
-- Gerald Handford ghandford@ccinet.ab.ca