Traditional Wisdom LO9126

Rol Fessenden (76234.3636@CompuServe.COM)
14 Aug 96 22:45:23 EDT

Replying to LO9083 --

On the subject of whether or not management is to blame (or responsible)
for the shambles we sometimes find in organizations, a couple of comments.

It is worth defining the terrain a bit, and we seem to mix 'system' and
'culture' without being exact about what we mean. According to my
dictionary (not Michael's), the relevant definitions seem to be:

System -- A set of facts, principles, rules, classified or arranged in a
regular, orderly form so as to show a logical plan linking the various
parts. Also, a regular, orderly way of doing something. Order, method,
regularity.

Culture -- The concepts, habits, skills, arts, instruments, institutions,
of a given people in a given period.

to vastly oversimplify, I will characterize system as 'task' and culture
as 'tools'. I hasten to repeat, vast oversimplification, but a useful
one. Especially if we think of tool very broadly to include, mental
models, ways of thinking, biases, mental blocks, systemic thinking, and so
forth.

When we characterize the system as faulty, we are therefore referring to
the way we do the tasks. When we say the culture is faulty, we are in
essence saying our tool set is not up to snuff.

Today, the role of management/leadership is -- or is quickly becoming --
to manage the tool set. This is equivalent to saying we are becoming a
LO. This is a new responsibility, because not so long ago, management's
task was to manage the tasks. To blame management for not doing its new
job well is -- only my opinion -- to ignore the rapidly changing task we
have set for them. One that is still not fully defined. They -- like we
-- need time to adjust to this new notion. Not to be argumentative, but
how many of us who are now enthusiasts of LO were quality enthusiasts 10
years ago? That was the best there was at the time. Even we who can see
the light now did not 10 years ago recognize LO as a tool set. So why
should we be surprised when management/leadership does not always
recognize it? And given the rapid rate of change of 'isms' it is no
wonder that management/leadership is cautious to join any particular one.
Like the weather in Maine, if you don't like it, just wait a minute.

My second point is that I notice that this is the 3rd or 5th time in 10
months that this issue of blaming management has come up, and it makes me
wonder why it is such a hot button. Why is there so much anger out there?
If we have read the books we know that there is value in attacking the
problem, but not a lot of value in attacking people.

I am really intending this to be a constructive question in the spirit of
inquiry, not a challenge, not a sideways whack at anyone, but a genuine
question for us LO'ers to ponder. Perhaps a new thread. In the spirit of
5 why's, I would like to hear the first answer (I can pretty much guess
that from the conversation), but what I would love to hear more about is
the second, third, and fourth levels-down answers to 'why'.

Send answers to me privately, and I will collect them and report. Looking
forward to hearing.

-- 

Rol Fessenden LL Bean, Inc. 76234.3636@compuserve.com

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>