Discussion: View Thread

Hi,

First, many thanks for your many thoughtful comments and ideas.

To respond to each of them does not seem fruitful to me, though I started to
do that with the first few responses to my original posting. It may be worth
your time to look at those, however since some may apply to one or the other
of your comments as well.

Having stated our respective views, I am wondering what we could do to begin
to converge rather than diverge further.

I hope you will not object if I suggest that we jointly focus on some basic
ideas that could then serve as a springboard to expansion. If we were to do
that, possibly in the end we will not have to reflect on our efforts without
having to say to ourselves: Much has been said, but little (and possibly worse -
nothing) has been accomplished.

Clearly we need to agree on something from which we can build. If it is
allright with everyone, including some of you with whom I have already
corresponded, I would like to suggest that I raise relatively narrow questions, analyze
the responses, give you feedback on agreement areas and disagreements. Then,
from there we could proceed to the next issue that might take us a step closer
to something that may give us a chance for agreement. In the end, I envision
that we might possibly join in writing a book that might become a foundation
for a new, more useful approach to teaching OB or management courses - one that
what would enable learners to become more competent managers and leaders.

So, let me try to suggest the first issue:

Every decision, cognitive or intuitive, involves two types of issues
- one type that is primarily technical and functional in nature - pertaining
to a limited field in an organization and in some aspect of our private life
- a second type that applies universally to all decisions - this second type
involves what we should consider (again intuitively or cognitively) so we will
satisfy our roles in relation to the stakeholders in the decision

Obviously these two do overlap to some extent, but they also have significant
different characteristics. As I have mentioned previously, the educational
process in these two sets of issues is distinctly different.

I hope you will recognize the two-part statement above as taking a first
step. I can already predict that there will be some who will again object to the
definition of decision that I appear to use. If you are willing to go along,
however, at least temporarily, there is a chance that the differences of
opinion on that definition will gradually become less important, and possibly even
disappear entirely.

Cheers, and hopefully,

Erwin (Rausch)

Dear Erwin,
thanks very much for this,
i find your initiative very interesting.
Let me take a look to all mails and make up my mind on my further comments.
So, more later...

All the best

fabrizio (Maimone)


Fabrizio Maimone
Docente a contratto integrativo
Dottorando di ricerca

LUMSA University, Rome

Interest areas: cross-cultural management and intercultural communication,
knowledge based organization, organizational climate and culture




----- Original Message -----
From: <DidacticRa@aol.com>
To: <MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 1:12 AM
Subject: Re: lateral thinking - Maimone, Nixon, Ring, GUILLEMETTE, and Gary
Lundquist


> Hi,
>
> First, many thanks for your many thoughtful comments and ideas.
>
> To respond to each of them does not seem fruitful to me, though I started
to
> do that with the first few responses to my original posting. It may be
worth
> your time to look at those, however since some may apply to one or the
other
> of your comments as well.
>
> Having stated our respective views, I am wondering what we could do to
begin
> to converge rather than diverge further.
>
> I hope you will not object if I suggest that we jointly focus on some
basic
> ideas that could then serve as a springboard to expansion. If we were to
do
> that, possibly in the end we will not have to reflect on our efforts
without
> having to say to ourselves: Much has been said, but little (and possibly
worse -
> nothing) has been accomplished.
>
> Clearly we need to agree on something from which we can build. If it is
> allright with everyone, including some of you with whom I have already
> corresponded, I would like to suggest that I raise relatively narrow
questions, analyze
> the responses, give you feedback on agreement areas and disagreements.
Then,
> from there we could proceed to the next issue that might take us a step
closer
> to something that may give us a chance for agreement. In the end, I
envision
> that we might possibly join in writing a book that might become a
foundation
> for a new, more useful approach to teaching OB or management courses - one
that
> what would enable learners to become more competent managers and leaders.
>
> So, let me try to suggest the first issue:
>
> Every decision, cognitive or intuitive, involves two types of issues
> - one type that is primarily technical and functional in nature -
pertaining
> to a limited field in an organization and in some aspect of our private
life
> - a second type that applies universally to all decisions - this second
type
> involves what we should consider (again intuitively or cognitively) so we
will
> satisfy our roles in relation to the stakeholders in the decision
>
> Obviously these two do overlap to some extent, but they also have
significant
> different characteristics. As I have mentioned previously, the
educational
> process in these two sets of issues is distinctly different.
>
> I hope you will recognize the two-part statement above as taking a first
> step. I can already predict that there will be some who will again object
to the
> definition of decision that I appear to use. If you are willing to go
along,
> however, at least temporarily, there is a chance that the differences of
> opinion on that definition will gradually become less important, and
possibly even
> disappear entirely.
>
> Cheers, and hopefully,
>
> Erwin (Rausch)