Another interesting and educational post from Carman!
Lisa writes: “I wonder what it would do for us to consider organizations as creative, intelligent energy? I wonder if it would lead us to open up to these qualities, to the creative intelligent energy of others?”
Two excellent questions Lisa. Employers may not understand the Brain metaphor’s enormous potential to impact their “bottom line.”
To illustrate: Cybernetic system behaviour, says Morgan, is guided by the avoidance of undesirable system states [noxious outcomes]. A themostat achieves its goal by avoiding such “noxious outcomes” (not too hot or cold).
The same principle applies to complex social states where great codes of behaviour are framed in terms of “Thou shalt NOT.” Morgan describes “avoiding noxiants” as “defining a space of acceptable behaviour within which individuals can act, innovate, or self-organize as they please.” pp.98-99
Examples: “Don’t overload others with information.” “Don’t respond to provocation.” “Don’t speak to and treat others in inappropriate ways.” “Don’t expect people to work beyond their capacities and limitations.”
By taking the Brain metaphor seriously and [for example] avoiding noxious states, many organizations could well see a reduction in stress and sick leaves which have become pandemic.
Your thoughts?
Carman,
Morgan’s description of a “space of acceptable behavior within which individuals can act, innovate, or self-organize as they please” (pp. 98-99) is intriguing and appealing. Would you like to explore this further?
Some other questons that your post raises (for me) are:
1. Does Morgan, or do you, also see vision, direction, and/or goals as having a role?
2. I notice that Morgan defines guidelines by emphasizing the negative space, rather than the positive space. Do you understand this as a metaphorical device, or does he think that “do nots” optimally shape human behavior?
Thanks for your posts!
Lisa