Another quarter, a shifted perspective, and always, new questions to ponder. As I began the foundational reading for the quarter, reading about various theorists such as Lewin, Schein, and Argyris, I found myself reading through a very critical lens. I reflected on my "old" approach to reading for courses: I would dutifully read, highlight and regurgitate, assuming that what I read was the "authority" on the subject at hand and need not be questioned... If nothing else, I now read through a lens of wariness... I wonder if the "authority" (noting, the word author pops out at me when I type authority) is truly that? Because after all, couldn't we all write something and claim to be an authority? That being said, I am admittedly not an authority on organization development; therefore, I will continue my reading and exploration of the topic and utilize my filters to sort out that which resonates with my schema.
The proposed topic for this week's blog, "getting past no", offered a unique filter through which to process my reading. I read about the Society for Organizational Learning, founded by Peter Senge at MIT, and appreciated the purpose statement to assist "institutions and communities such that we continue to increase our capacity to collectively realize our highest aspirations and productively resolve our differences" (http://www.solonline.org). That sounded like a good starting point for getting past no because how can we get past the negative resolve of "no" without resolving differences, right? Schein's work highlighted finding shared meaning and developing customs, symbols, and stories that guide the culture of an organization. This again brought about my sense that finding a commonality between all parts of an organization are necessary for productivity. Argyris' double-loop learning model allows organizations to get to the heart of underlying assumptions to determine their usefulness. Lewin's perspective highlighted the importance of the individuals within the larger organization, and as I often remind myself when working with students, it is important to remember the unique qualities of every individual when trying to generalize for a larger organization, as both are arguably important.
So, to get past no, is there a simple strategy or technique? Well, there is a book (or several...) on the topic, but is there one right answer and/or authority? I think it is a combination of what researchers, authors/authorities, and participants within organizations have sensed all along... I think the word "shared" is the critical link because it highlights the need to find a common ground, culture, meaning. Without that, there can be no progress. In my reading this week, I stumbled across this quote: “It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change” Charles Darwin (found on: http://www.culturestrategyfit.com/culture-strategy-fit-profile-survey). Being responsive to change means staying open to limitless possibilities and never giving up at "no". In education, I believe (especially after viewing "Race to Nowhere" yesterday) that we owe it to students to lead in a "yes" direction. We must work collaboratively to find a shared meaning through which we can change education to meet the needs of students in the 21st century. Of course, to lead with this mission at the heart of what I do, I have to learn more about developing and leading in a learning organization... looking forward to the important lessons to come this quarter.
No comments:
Post a Comment