Re: A Comprehensive "21st Century Organization Science" #name
|
gordonvalawebb <gvalawebb@...>
I agree heartily that the question that faces large, complex, organizations is how to be "smart" - and that this requires an inter-disciplinary approach - in my view a design-based approach rooted in integrative thinking and starting from a wicked problem perspective. I just posted a slide deck on why our organizations are not smart and what you can do about it. To see it go to the homepage of my website: http://www.dynamicadaptation.com/ . There is other info there in my blog and under the resources tab (including a recorded webinar on the topic). As to what to call this science? and practice? I'm not sure; how about organizational management (for really it is about how best to manage organizations). Gordon
--- In sikmleaders@..., Neil Olonoff wrote:
> > * > <http://www.linkedin.com/groups?viewMemberFeed=&gid=1824723&memberID=10338086&goback=%2Egmp_1824723> > * > Stan, and all: > I posted this question to the Federal KM Initiative LinkedIn group, and, > since I respect this group, would like to have your reactions: > *Can we create an enlightened "21st Century Organization Science" that > includes Knowledge Management, Org Development, Teamwork, Coaching, > Interpersonal Communications, & Meeting Management? * > > In my opinion knowledge management, though broad, is just one piece of the > "smart work" puzzle. In other words, it is not a silver bullet or panacea. > After all, if all the platform and infrastructure pieces are in place, but > there is no trust, information will not flow. Similarly, teamwork, > coaching, etc., listed above are "necessary but not sufficient" to achieve > a truly "smart" organization. Not surprising, since organizations are not > designed to be good at teaming and knowledge sharing. They are designed to > be efficient at 1) allowing management visibility into actions 2) > permitting upward reporting, and 3) similar "scientific management" > concerns. Brains at the top, worker bees at bottom. > I can envision a future, holistic organization science curriculum that > brings all the pieces of the puzzle together in a grand synthesis. > > As a starting point: what would this future organization science be > called? > > Neil Olonoff >
|
|
|