mdarling@warren.med.harvard.edu wrote:
> With the above in mind, I have always struggled to understand how the Five
> Disciplines comprise a set that emanates from some principle. They feel
> somewhat random to me.
Me too. But Peter is such a good communicator, speaker and writer, that i
don't care. Besides, if there are underlying principles, which there
probably are, they would work with every manifestation. The same goes for
TQM: another application of the principles, different shape.
> If I were to take up a quest for
> finding first principles of organizational learning, I would start with
> organizations (or analogous systems) that are accomplishing this and, like
> the mathematician who has coined a new, predictable operation, try to
> describe why, and under what conditions, that operation is successful.
>
> Has anyone out there tried to do this?
I didn't, but it might work. I search for the principles inside myself.
Same principles, different shape. I also search in books (like
Machiavelli's 'The Prince'(Il Principe):-)) and this list. It is also why
i call my work 'logistical de-veloping': trying to remove layer after
layer in search of principles. That is the nice thing about principles:
same principles, always around, different shape, different form.
Jan
PS Drs is about the same as MSc or MBA, not Dr or Dr s
--Drs J.C. Lelie CPIM janlelie@pop.pi.net (J.C. Lelie) @date@ @time@ CREATECH/LOGISENS - Sparring Partner in Logistical Development - + (31) 70 3243475 Fax: idem or + (31) 40 2443225
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>