In LO11913 Harold wrote:
> I value the comments of the regular contributors. All of these people are
> far more learned than I.
I got this idea started and decided to wait a while before contributing
anything further. I wanted to see what I could learn (about others and
about myself) from the responses that were generated. It has been worth
the wait.
A few people have asked where the idea of an inner circle could come from.
How could such a thing happen (here)? I think Harold has provided a
genuine glimpse into such a phenomenon.
A comment was made about the "professor-like" quality of some of the
posts. Putting these two ideas together I have to wonder just how much we
all conspire to create such a phenomenon. Those who feel that their
contributions are not as worthy for whatever reason coupled with those who
are used to stating their views in affirmative, declarative ways.
Maybe I'm just paranoid (not altogether out of the question) but this
seems like a very fertile field in which to grow such a perception.
A few have kind of blown this whole idea off as the product of someone's
imagination. Let me become blatantly guilty of something I mentioned
earlier: The expert "quotation."
Chris Argyris wrote extensively about the organizational defensive
routine. We get a mixed message, we can't talk about it, and we can't
talk about the fact that we can't talk about it. When someone tries they
are chastised through various means ranging from passive (simply ignoring
the comment) to very active (attacking the person and their views).
I haven't been attacked and don't perceive anyone else to have been,
either. On the passive end, though, perhaps we are showing a very human
set of dynamics here.
--Clyde Howell orgpsych@csra.net
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>