Roxanne S. Abbas wrote:
>[snip] Most of my clients
> function in the same manner and assist me by sharing the successes of our
> work with professional organizations or potential clients of mine.
>
> The only client that I recall being unwilling to do this was 3M. They
> were not only unwilling to share their learning with other businesses;
> they required me to sign a contract stating that whatever I developed
> while working for them would become their property and I was prohibited
> from using it again. Although I can understand their rationale, this
> practice of restricting the flow of learning violates my value system and
> I am no longer willing to work under this constraint.
With all due respect, your value system may need further examination.
Being a LO should not mean that the LO must share its trade secrets on
an unrestricted basis to its consultants or the outside world. Would it
be fair for 3M to spend $5M on some R&D project, then after you come in
for 10 hours you take everything you just learned and carry it
unrestricted to your next consulting job? Tha doesn't sound fair to me.
Perhaps the LO needs to be very open within itself and its strategic
partners (i.e. consultants like you) but outside the organization the
competitive information is not disclosed or used. As another example,
you may run your business "open book" to your employees, but will you
respond to this message with attachments of your client list, or tax
returns? I wouldn't if I were you.
BTW, I don't think Intel or IBM or Microsoft is willing to share its
trade secrets either (unless and until it makes good business sense).
By keeping its information ITS information (after all it is paying for
the development), perhaps 3M is more free to be more open, and a better
LO. I have found this to be so with those of my clients who have
"locked down."
[Host's Note: Welcome Richard... I believe this is the first time you've
posted here on the LO list. In my opinion, this topic is worth a lively
discussion to define the areas in which free flow of learning is
appropriate and distinguish this from areas in which developments are
appropriately kept private for competitive advantage. I do believe that
you and Roxanne are talking about very different circumstances. I suggest
we begin by clarifying these... and see what we can develop together on
this topic. ...Rick]
-- rkb
--"Richard K. Berger" <rkberger@rkb.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BERGER LAW OFFICE ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tel. (508) 478-9647 _/|\_ FAX: (508) 478-9648 rkberger@rkb.com __|__ http://www.rkb.com ~~~~ "Aggressively Protecting Business & Employee Rights" ~~~~~~~~~~~~
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>