Curt asks regarding Chaos and
For example, does tacit knowledge (of the impact of chaos),
as above, imply an intuitive
understanding of probable new emergent states of the system, or does
it imply an intuitive understanding of the system's current state? or
both?
Is it even possible to demonstrate empirically chaotic behavior in an
organizational setting, except through computer simulation?
== end quote ==
Actual experience indicates that so far, tacit knowledge can open your
eyes to the risks you are setting free when you initiate change. It can
scare the hell out of you, it can force you to think hard, take a deep
breath, gulp, perhaps back down, but not tell you what in reality will
occur if you go forward. Corporate life as you know it is at risk. Your
job is at risk. This is scary stuff.
With respect to your second question, chaos cannot be demonstrated in real
life situations because real life is already so complex that it cannot be
modeled with a computer. Did chaos cause this outcome to occur, or was
this very predictable? I cannot tell, but in retrospect, what happened
seems reasonable, and therefore seems predictable by someone who is 'smart
enough'. Chaotic behavior is not predictable no matter how smart you are.
--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/>