On 2 May 1996, Keith Cowan wrote:
> One of the issues deserving some discussion here is the various aspects of
> learning. Just as individuals have multiple ways of learning, so do
> organizations? I have made the assertion that true learning is only
> demonstrated through actions (as opposed to knowledge in the brain) or
> practice versus theory, and there would be a parallel in any organization.
> That is, by observing the overall behaviour to infer abilities of the
> whole.
>
> In his 1983 book, Frames of the Mind: the Theory of Multiple Intelligences
> (Basic Books), Howard Gardner of Harvard defines six types of
> intelligence: spatial or visual, interpersonal, intrapersonal
> (self-awareness and understanding), natural (recognizing patterns and
> distinctions around us), logical and linguistic. He uses some interesting
> examples of skills among leaders that are not detectable in normal
> intelligence tests (e.g. Maggie Thatcher, Michael Jordan, Pavarotti, Ron
> Reagan).
>
> I would suggest that the first three aspects of the six are more important
> to the success of an organization than the last three. This is not to say
> that an org does not need to be logical and articulate but that those are
> meeting requirements and that a learning org. is demonstrating the
> abilities in the other categories. What do you think? ...Keith
I think I would go with the interpersonal, intrapersonal
(intra-organizational if you will), natural, and linguistic as particular
keys to organizational "style" and learning. I would put the
visual/spatial and logical as a shade lower than these in importance. I
would also add a "creative" intelligence factor that Gardner may have
spread out over a couple of his categories.
But, hey, that's just my take on it.
-- Tobin Quereau Austin Community College quereau@austin.cc.tx.usLearning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>