On 1 Aug 96 at 16:43, orgpsych@csra.net wrote:
> An organization should exist to provide value to some one or some
> group. Too often, though, the purpose of existence is to provide
> moeny to people (such as shareholders).
I disagree with this only because it seems to be reductionist and not
systems thinking. Two points. A company that only provides value to
shareholders will soon provide no value to its shareholders, because it
will be bankrupt. Second, lest we forget that those shareholders are often
people like you and I--retirement funds, for example,mutual funds, etc,
almost any investments, mean that you and I are the shareholders.
> I generally agree with his sentiments. I offer this thought for
> consideration. If LO principles and wholistic, systemic thinking
> becomes the norm and we begin to learn at the organizational level,
> doesn't that constitute a change in the organization such that a
> system other than pure capitalism is then operating? If this is so,
> then, isn't LO a means to that end?
I doubt it. Changing what happens within a company is like changing the
manager of a baseball team for someone with totally different principles.
The GAME is still the same, it is still played the same, but the team
function internally in a different way.
Robert Bacal, CEO, Institute For Cooperative Communication
dbt359@freenet.mb.ca, Located in Winnipeg,Canada.
*For articles on management, change, training,communication, etc,
visit our home page at: http://www.winnipeg.freenet.mb.ca/~dbt359
--"Robert Bacal" <dbt359@freenet.mb.ca>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>