RE: [ba-ohs-talk] What are we trying to accomplish?
John (01)
Thank you for pointing this out. It is the embrace of this very
diversity of perspectives that will help us move in the direction of the
civil society. (02)
The point about conscious direction reminds me of a review of a new book
about Rudyard Kipling, who is described as a man of permanent
contradictions. (Just think of his poem IF...) We will both pine for
conscious direction and want to subvert it. This zig zag path will
continue and in the oscillations learning and "progress" will happen.
So, for example a high performance team works when there is purposeful
activity by a group of people when they are striving for a common goal
that overrides for the time, personal goals. Yet the very resentment by
team members of conscious direction is what is necessary to make sure
that the goal will self-corrects when needed. It is not sufficient
though.... (03)
Your remark reminds me that it is important to clarify that BA-OHS as a
discussion group exists in parallel to and independently of the effort
in BA right now, to try and work out what it is that is the entity that
Doug is talking about. My own focus on that goal should not be
interpreted as meaning that there is any reason for the discussion in
BA-OHS should focus on that. In fact it is better, far far better that
the people involved in reading and posting on BA-OHS continue the
search, the discussion, the refinement of thinking and concept
diffusion. (04)
We have no guarantee that if we build what Doug wants, that it will be
"The One". It is absolutely certain in my mind that there is no "One"
thing that will "save" us or solve the worlds problems! The things we
can work on are what will enable people and people in teams to work on
things in ways that are more fun, inspiring, provide learning and
insights and in the end are productive. (05)
I think it is important work with Doug to explicate his concept of OHS
and tool and human system co-development, mostly because I think there
is still much we have to learn and understand from the thinking he has
refined over many many years. Hopefully what is learned will help steer
us from some (but only some) of the blind alleys and potholes that we
might otherwise fall into. (06)
I commit to share my learning as related to Doug's work, I hope each of
you will be ready to step forward to share your insights and learnings
too. (07)
It will take a village, and more to move this forward. (08)
Mei Lin (09)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ba-ohs-talk@bootstrap.org
[mailto:owner-ba-ohs-talk@bootstrap.org] On Behalf Of John Maloney
Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2002 9:54 AM
To: ba-ohs-talk@bootstrap.org
Subject: RE: [ba-ohs-talk] What are we trying to accomplish? (010)
Mei-Lin, (011)
Thanks for your message. (012)
I don't necessarily agree with your remark: (013)
"The only way to make abstract ideas concrete is not to talk around and
around, but to actually work with them and see what happens." (014)
In my experience, "to talk around and around" is "work(ing) with them." (015)
I am a strong advocate of simulation, prototyping, modeling and systems
thinking -- mechanisms to make "abstract ideas concrete." Michael
Schrage's
book, "Serious Play," is highly recommended. (Schrage was the Winter
2001 KM
Cluster keynote speaker.) (016)
However, at the same time, there is substantial value in the process of
"talk(ing) around and around" in settings with heterophilious links of
low
proximity, (e.g., "the strength of weak ties"). These exists within the
many
touchpoints of BI it members and stakeholders, for example. This is
particularly important to concept maturity and diffusion. (017)
It is also important to note that the process of innovation and
invention
has proven to always being highly counter-intuitive. Efforts to bottle
it
never pan out. (018)
The great Nobel Laureate economist Freidrich Hayek said it best in his
landmark 1945 article, "The Use of Knowledge in Society" (!highly
recommended!)
http://www.virtualschool.edu/mon/Economics/HayekUseOfKnowledge.html (019)
"But those who clamor for "conscious direction"--and who cannot believe
that
anything which has evolved without design (and even without our
understanding it) should solve problems which we should not be able to
solve
consciously--should remember this: The problem is precisely how to
extend
the span of our utilization of resources beyond the span of the control
of
any one mind; and therefore, how to dispense with the need of conscious
control, and how to provide inducements which will make the individuals
do
the desirable things without anyone having to tell them what to do." (020)
Cheers, (021)
jtm (022)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ba-ohs-talk@bootstrap.org
[mailto:owner-ba-ohs-talk@bootstrap.org]On Behalf Of Mei Lin Fung
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 5:58 PM
To: ba-ohs-talk@bootstrap.org
Subject: RE: [ba-ohs-talk] What are we trying to accomplish? (023)
I wrote this in response to Johannes and Eric's questions and then
decided to write more. This is about 2300 words long, so it is not a
quick read. Sorry about that. (024)
Johannes Ernst wrote: (025)
> I would like to add: the **benefits** of such a system. In dollars
> saved per person per day, preferably. E.g. it will increase the
> productivity of a user of class A by 5% (?) when performing task B. (026)