Michael says,
Rol, I think we need to maintain a distinction between human
influence and human control.
We have something to say about human systems but we do not have
control. This is a way I've found that works for managers. It is
not any use to say, "We can't do anything but observe."
If this were true, then it still wouldn't help. I think,
fortunately, that we have something to say but that doesn't take us
all the way to control.
If the systems - or the universe - is chaotice - then we don't have
anything to say. If it is complex, adaptive and emergent, then we
can have a great deal to say. But we don't have control.
This either/or dichotomy is part of our problem. We speak as if it's
either control or nothing.
== end quote ==
I pretty much agree with this, but I tend to think that 'observation' and
'control' are two ends of a spectrum of impact on other people, and
anywhere in between can be defined as 'influence'. Influence really can
border on control on the one hand, and influence can be so negligible as
to be nearly impossible to detect on the other.
The _only_ exception to this is our ability to influence ourselves. My
own influence on myself is very high, and whether it is 'control' or not
is too abstract for me to figure out. However, I _can_ decide after
careful thought to accept responsibility to change something. This is not
the same as accepting blame. It is more like committing oneself to a
certain work.
In project management parlance, my resources consist of one person-life,
and I can invest it any way I choose.
--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/>