Friday, January 26, 2007

The future of organizational structures

Just a thought…. Two of the characteristics of learning space (value creation primarily through quality) are flat organization and the system of continuous improvements… in thinking space (value creation primarily through innovation) these two elements evolve into net organizations and innovative process. In self-conscious space (value creation primarily through intuition and life-energy) spider net and natural growth are the adequate elements. And the thought I am developing is that the major difference between flat and net organizations and spider nets is in the growth approach. The first two still need a hierarchy in order to grow. In spider nets the growth is inspired by the natural growth of the holistic cells (individuals or groups) and is a subject of a natural behavior – growth from a node out, e.g., a holistic node knows when is time to split, join… it initiates not only follows…. It is self motivated… it uses its intuition in order to connect and disconnect…. Let’s see where will this lead me… any thoughts?

10 comments:

j. said...

What is the benefit of growing from the node out? What are the problems? Isn’t that process similar to the process of growing cancer cells? Maybe there is another possibility to grow from the node out and be at the same time part of a greater hierarchical organization - sharing all available information up and downstream… being free and dependent both at the same time… minimizing the risk…

Violeta said...

Yes… and one of the most essential parts of such a move is probably free sharing of knowledge… no property rights, no restrictions… in thinking and selfconcious space knowlege is like air… we need it in order to breath as a sociaty … we need it in order to create …. more elements in a creation process we have more essantial the innovations will be….

j. said...

imagine a society where the “holders of information” start sharing (and so give up the power of information) in order to create something bigger… a different world where the source of new power comes into the hands of “smart people”. If “smart people” are the current “information holders” everything could just be a matter of time… but time could be a very stretchy term…

Violeta said...

well the concept of “smart people” is a bit dangerous one… it is a very subjective call about who is smart and who not…. so I would distance myself from this definition… however, I test bit by bit the concept of knowlege shearing.. I would also make a differentiation between the knowlage and the information shearing… information is something you creat for a target group… i think more about the knowlage - the basic element that has no target grop meaning attachet to it… like innovation, new discoveries, pathents, improvements, new ideas, …..

j. said...

you are right… I should be more picky by terms I use… but I didn’t say that I am “smart” or you are “smart” and I didn’t characterize those “smart people” in any way… I just tried to give them a name…maybe “the future power holders” would be more proper? Information-knowledge part; knowledge is definitely a better term ….anyway that’s not the point… one thing just popped on my mind and I’ll share it… few days ago I heard somewhere that most of good innovations people got from anger… Why is that so? The answer could be simple. If you are angry about something, you are probably not alone. And anger is quite a big motivator to do something. To search for a solution… to find and buy a solution… But do we test our ideas this way? I’m not sure. Most of us assume that the demand is in xy number of potential buyers. But we forget to measure “the power of demand” in terms of what people are prepared to do to fulfill the need… I’m sorry a bit off topic - I just hope it’s not totally bogus…
back to the spider nets and the society where all existing knowledge is published under GPL (whichever version:)… the society could have a greater chance to survive on longer term (regarding politics synchronized with nature,..) - and that’s worth fighting for :)… but I doubt that people would change and become more “equal”… they will still split in “classes”… that’s probably in our nature and cannot be changed so easy…

Violeta said...

if I skip the comment to the first part, I would say that the eillingness to share is realted to the level of safety and security… if sahring will prove to increase thoso two basic needs we will continue this path.. and every little step counts… in my case, several attempts turn out to be a dead end, yet, that does not mean that I closed my channels… I continue to share my thoughts, ideas and visions… in an open concept.. I ask those that use them to show /link to the source through references, footnotes.. and those that will represent the inner core pf the movement.. adn the values are at the end all that we really have… Yet, there is a boundary to everything and at the edges deviations occur.. .and they are neccessary for a progress …

j said...

if knowledge is a source of power/money, then loosing it would definitely put you in a “fight for survival” mode where safety/security play a major part. But that is different to giving it up freely - what you are supposedly doing - and moving the game up one level. You are changing the rules of the game. You are shifting your knowledge from core to context. And if you will succeed in creating a critical mass around your ideas - you may there find the core of your new business… I agree… small steps are very important if walking a long way… but sometimes you need a bigger one to get over an obstacle…

Violeta said...

to be free and freely share…I still think you need to feel safe first… except if you never experienced a threat or unsafety before.. .than you could start with a pure sharing essence…

Anonymous said...

That’s what I wanted to say when I was talking about moving knowledge from “core” to “context”. To feel secure you first need to find a new core of your business. And when you have the new core, you can “give up” your knowledge and put it into “context”…

peter ryan said...

Dear Ms Bulc. It may be worth re-iteration of the point, that whereas most dialogues im management of all forms, normally tends to involve the “dissemination of business acumen, and wisdom” It may be of value to respectfully remind you that Listening, from a place of truly hearing can create in the other, a sense of value, and respect, that creates a fertile ground for opening up on both parts to a much more creative product.
Thank you for reading this. x