Discussion: View Thread

Fresh from the shower, I arrive with new questions.

What would an organization that did not need management look like?


What would an organization that did not want management look like?


What is it about the sound of falling water that frees up thought?

______________________
Great Optimism,

Dutch Driver
Abilene, TX
Hm. Telephone: 915.698.7217
mailto:ddriver@cs1.mcm.edu

Actually, that's the sort of question that Abe Maslow addressed years ago
in his book, EUPSYCHIAN MANAGEMENT, in which Maslow asks what it would be
like to be a manager is a "self-actualized" organization. Imagine 50
people, all "self-actualized," all doing what was within them to be doing,
all thoroughly enjoying themselves doing it, and you're their boss. How
would you manage? Who knows, maybe Maslow got the idea in the shower.

Larry E. Pate
University of Wisconsin-Madison


At 11:25 AM 4/3/98 -0600, you wrote:
>Fresh from the shower, I arrive with new questions.
>
> What would an organization that did not need management look like?
>
>
> What would an organization that did not want management look like?
>
>
> What is it about the sound of falling water that frees up thought?
>
>______________________
>Great Optimism,
>
>Dutch Driver
>Abilene, TX
>Hm. Telephone: 915.698.7217
>mailto:ddriver@cs1.mcm.edu
>

Great questions, Dutch!

I'd attempt an answer, but the shower keeps flooding my modem!

Emily Schultheiss
Why settle for surviving...when you could be thriving?

Great questions, and fun reply.
Perhaps, there is a light in the woods.
Here at MIT we are talking about not just suviving in the competitive
global marketplace, but so when you do, what will you do. For us the
answer is contribute to civilization. This is what we expect of ourselves,
and of our students. Interestingly, in order to this we are striving to
move our students from preparation for the latter of Dutch's organizations
(doesn't want to be managed) to the former (doesn't need to be), and maybe
ourselves too at the
same time.
And the journey is at least half the fun.
For me it goes back to a model I have offered before:
consistency (read integrity if you prefer) leads to trust, which leads to
risk-taking which leads to creativity which leads to innovation.
Innovation is rarely truely managed, but it is a real contribution.
Just my two cents worth on a Friday afternoon, may be I am all wet.
All the best,
Chris

>Great questions, Dutch!
>
>I'd attempt an answer, but the shower keeps flooding my modem!
>
>Emily Schultheiss
>Why settle for surviving...when you could be thriving?


............................................................................
Christopher Pratt, EdD
Director
Career Services and Pre-Professional Advising
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
77 Massachusetts Avenue, Room 12-170-187
Cambridge, MA 02139
voice: 617-253-4733
fax: 617-253-8457
cpratt@mit.edu
http://web.mit.edu/career/www
CHRISPRATT@worldnet.att.net
http://web.mit.edu/cpratt

April 6th is Tartan Day!

The correct analogy is to the developmentally appropriate approach to early
childhood development. Developmentally appropriate teachers set out
various activities in which children might engage and then they let the
children self-select into them. It is the same with modern management
practice. Ideally, someone(s) is (are) concerned with issues of control,
risk, strategy, performance and renewal and they are involved in
establishing the appropriate boundaries.




At 05:20 PM 4/3/98 -0500, Christopher Pratt wrote:
>Great questions, and fun reply.
>Perhaps, there is a light in the woods.
>Here at MIT we are talking about not just suviving in the competitive
>global marketplace, but so when you do, what will you do. For us the
>answer is contribute to civilization. This is what we expect of ourselves,
>and of our students. Interestingly, in order to this we are striving to
>move our students from preparation for the latter of Dutch's organizations
>(doesn't want to be managed) to the former (doesn't need to be), and maybe
>ourselves too at the
>same time.
>And the journey is at least half the fun.
>For me it goes back to a model I have offered before:
>consistency (read integrity if you prefer) leads to trust, which leads to
>risk-taking which leads to creativity which leads to innovation.
>Innovation is rarely truely managed, but it is a real contribution.
>Just my two cents worth on a Friday afternoon, may be I am all wet.
>All the best,
>Chris
>
>>Great questions, Dutch!
>>
>>I'd attempt an answer, but the shower keeps flooding my modem!
>>
>>Emily Schultheiss
>>Why settle for surviving...when you could be thriving?
>
>
>............................................................................
>Christopher Pratt, EdD
>Director
>Career Services and Pre-Professional Advising
>Massachusetts Institute of Technology
>77 Massachusetts Avenue, Room 12-170-187
>Cambridge, MA 02139
>voice: 617-253-4733
>fax: 617-253-8457
>cpratt@mit.edu
>http://web.mit.edu/career/www
>CHRISPRATT@worldnet.att.net
>http://web.mit.edu/cpratt
>
>April 6th is Tartan Day!
>

Dutch Driver wrote:

> Fresh from the shower, I arrive with new questions.
>
> What would an organization that did not need management look like?
>
> What would an organization that did not want management look like?
>
> What is it about the sound of falling water that frees up thought?
>
> ______________________
> Great Optimism,
>
> Dutch Driver
> Abilene, TX
> Hm. Telephone: 915.698.7217
> mailto:ddriver@cs1.mcm.edu

Could this be what Drath and paulus were driving at in their
small book? Leadership without the normal trappings of what
we commonly call management?
Jim Dobbins

I like Chris Platt's model:
<snip>
consistency (read integrity if you prefer) leads to trust, which leads to
risk-taking which leads to creativity which leads to innovation.

I always assumed that no one wanted to be managed, being somewhat a
maverick myself. But I have run into a number of folks who--whether by
nature or learning--crave management. Your model makes sense of that
craving, Chris. I have maintained for some time that the "E" word
(empowerment) is being used more as a weapon (to shift the blame) than as a
tool (to engender creativity and innovation). Empowerment without
consistency does not work--for lots of reasons, including that without
consistency in purpose and direction, how can people make decisions. But I
had never thought about the middle links in that model
(trust-->risk-taking). Thanks.

Emily Schultheiss
Why settle for surviving...when you could be thriving?