Mike asks,
> Why call it "bottom up"? It isn't. As his example shows it is neither
> top nor bottom. In this approach, the very idea of top and bottom make no
> sense. It might be better to call it emergent, or systemic, or complex or
> living or ??
Absolutely. . .but when I wrote it I had no idea was "emergent" meant; I
hadn't made the connection between systemic thinking and messaging
systems. I started the next version for GroupWise 5 back in April or May.
I called it "A Systemic Design Methodology," but I was hired as Quality
Manager in July and never got to complete the document.
I did, however, give a number of presentations on the new methodology to
many customers. The first hour or so of my presentation focused on
teaching people to think systemically. I especially focused on helping
them convert from the mechanistic view of cause and effect, to a more
systemic view.
I probably gave the presentation to three or four hundred people, and I
was amazed at how quickly some people grasped systemic thinking. Other
people couldn't quite get the arms around the idea. I felt bad for those
people because I simply didn't have the time to help them with their
struggle.
No one has picked up where I left off, for a number of reasons. First, I'm
one of two people in my department who even begins to comprehend the fact
that the mechanistic model of the world is totally unsuitable for
designing networks and messaging system. The other person (who was the
colleague I trusted most in working on the first version), is so busy with
other projects he just can't fit it in.
In conclusion what I found most interesting was that as I presented the
new methodology to customers they inevitably began to question the
structure of their own organizations (not just their networks). In a
strange way they began to see networks and messaging systems as something
that are alive. . .almost as if they were the circulatory system for the
organization. . .which caused them to start thinking about their
organizations as also being alive. . .
That was the greatest thrill in presenting the methodology. . .it changed
the way people thought. . .it often shattered their mechanistic view of
the world, and helped them walk into a world that was much more alive,
interactive, responsive, and exciting!
-- Ben Compton The Accidental Learning Group Work: (801) 222-6178 Improving Business through Science and Art bcompton@geocities.com http://www.e-ad.com/ben/BEN.HTMLearning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>