Saturday, July 27, 2002

I just remembered a better phrase to describe a chaord. It is a self-organizing system, like the brain, the body, an ecosystem.   10:55:04 PM    comment [] A bit more about a chaordic organization, which I'll call a "chaord" for short. A chaord has no leader. As Harlan Cleveland puts it Nobody is in Charge. There is no reporting structure. Maybe better than saying no one is in charge, would be to say everyone is in charge. Participative management, Margaret Wheatley calls it. So, it sounds like total chaos, right? Think of the organizations that have accomplished the biggest feat in the past few years, the fall of communism in USSR, East Germany and everywhere else. Who was "in charge" of that effort? Who was managing whom? It was just a set of small actions, performed with a goal in mind (freedom from communism) that accomplished what no outside force could do. Done from within those countries. Think of the "change programs" endorsed by CEOs that ripple through every large company with the effect of changing...nothing. Who marshalled the forces against them? Who was in charge of that effort? No one. Everyone just did their little part to make sure that things stayed the way they were. It was easy. In every conference or large company meeting I've been to, all the real work got done during lunchtime, dinners, coffee breaks and barhopping. The actual agenda of the conference was at best, a springboard, and at worst, an interference. These types of organizations are more effective than top-down organizations. When the two collide, the chaord always wins. But is it possible to formalize a chaord? I think it is. VISA International is the most vaunted chaordic organization, but it has become something different in the decades since Dee Hock retired. However, his newest creation, the Chaordic Commons, presents itself as an example of a chaord. It's goal is to produce more chaords around the world, I guess kind of replicating itself (but not like the Borg!). The Commons are so interesting to me. I have a great interest in applying it to holistic health, because this is such a growth industry and everything seems so disconnected from everything else within the industry. It may be a good place to apply something new like chaordics.   8:42:38 PM    comment [] Now I'm reading Inc. magazine (still procrastinating on mowing the lawn) and the editor says that the EnronWorldcomAndersen crisis is having little effect on the under-20 generation for them deciding where they will work. Why? They had absolutely no interest in working for big companies anyway. They had already decided that it was not a place where they wanted to end up. Of course the editor of Inc. would say that. I think it's true though. I need to change my mindset. I've already decided to focus my technology consulting company on small business clients rather than large, even though I've dealt only with large companies and governments for the past eighteen years. But now I need to make a bigger step. The next person I talk to who is under twenty years old will not hear this question from me "Where do you think you will work when you graduate from college?" Instead they will hear "What type of business will you start when you graduate from college?" Another favorite blog for me:  people are stupid. This blog reminds me of a good friend I used to drink beer with in Canada.   2:35:06 PM    comment [] "The One Thing." I'm listening to Book Talk on CSPAN2. The author is Albert-Laszlo Barbasi, his book is "Linked: The New Science of Networks."  He is so insightful and able to explain complex ideas in simple language. I've been meaning to write a blog entry called "The One Thing." Seeing Dr. Barbasi on television has prompted me to do it today (even though I should be outside mowing the lawn/weeds). In North America, and possibly elsewhere, we are focused on the ONE THING that is causing or will cure whatever ails us. When the economy goes badly, we look for the ONE THING that is causing the downturn. Our answer? Corrupt CEOs, like those of Enron, Worldcom and Tyco. In health research, scientists are looking for the ONE GENE that causes each hereditary disease. Dr. Barbasi mentioned that it is usually not just one gene, it is a set of genes working together in a special way that cause genetic defects that end up causing disease conditions. In alternative health, I  have met many practitioners and patients who "swear by" one practice or another - chiropractic, herbs, homeopathy, Feldenkras, rolfing, fitness trainers, nutritionists, hypnotherapy, aromatherapy, iridology, naturopathy, organics, psychology, reiki and hands-on healing. All these alternative health practices are holistic, meaning they treat the whole person - organs, bones and mind are treated as one indivisible unit. However, which practices are the best in which situations? When I ask a chiropractor, he will tell me "Chiropractic is the best in any situation, no matter what." How is this possible? When I ask an herbalist, she will say that "Herbs are the answer, no matter what the question." Huh?  I cannot believe that. It seems that everyone has the ONE THING in alternative health that is the answer to all. Yet so many are getting benefit from so many varied techniques. When we encounter crime in a society, we try to find the ONE PERSON OR FACTOR responsible. Liberals say that it is society that is always responsible, never the individual. Conservatives say we need to find the one criminal and not worry about society's effects. Why is it an either/or? Aren't there likely to be other factors? Why are we always focused on the ONE THING? I don't really know, but I can say that my own mind falls into the same trap that everyone else's does. My reading about the new sciences, including relativity and quantum mechanics, are helping me adjust. Margaret Wheatley's book called "Leadership and the New Science" is quickly warping my mind into a very new way of thinking, working and playing. Her words are helping me to see that the world is less about "matter" and more about "connections." Maybe Dr. Barbasi has it only partly right. He speaks about the "hubs" the special nodes in a network where much of the information passes. He says they are the most important parts. I think quantum physicists would disagree. They would say the connections themselves are the most important thing. I don't know what I've just said, but I needed to say it to figure out what it means. My favorite at Salon? A lovely personal blog called "She's Actual Size, Nationwide, Believe."   1:50:12 PM    comment []

© Copyright 2002 Chaords Everywhere I Look. Last update: 8/1/2002; 3:04:00 PM. This theme is based on the SoundWaves (blue) Manila theme.