



| Few large organizations live even half as long as a person. |
| In most companies that fail, there is abundant evidence in advance that the firm is in trouble. | ||
| The organization as a whole cannot recognize impending threats, understand the implications of those threats or come up with alternatives. |
| Under the laws of “survival of the fittest” this continual death of firms if fine for society. What if | ||
| the high mortality rate is only a symptom of deeper problems that afflict all companies, not just the ones that die? |
| Most organizations learn poorly: the way they are designed and managed; the way people’s | ||
| jobs are defined; and most importantly, the way we have been taught to think and interact create fundamental disabilities and what learning does occur takes place despite these learning disabilities: |
| I am my position Most people see themselves within a “system” over which they have little or | ||
| no influence. They do their job, put in their time and try to cope with the forces outside of their control. Hence they see their responsibilities as limited to the boundaries of their position. When that happens, they have little sense of responsibility for the results produced when all positions interact. When results are disappointing, it can be very difficult to know why. All you can do is, assume that “someone screwed up”. |
| The enemy is out there There is in each of us a propensity to find someone or something | ||
| outside ourselves to blame when things go wrong. “Out there” and “in here” are usually part of a single system. When we focus only on our position, we do not see how our actions extend beyond the boundary of that position. When those actions have consequences that come back to hurt us, we misperceive these new problems as externally caused. This learning disability makes it impossible to detect the leverage which we can use “in here” on problems that straddle the boundary between us and “out there”. |
| The illusion of taking charge Being proactive is frequently seen as an antidote to being | ||
| “reactive”. All too often, “proactiveness” is reactiveness in disguise. If we simply become more aggressive fighting the “enemy is out there”, we are reacting – regardless of what we call it. True proactiveness comes from seeing how we contribute to our own problems. It is a product of our way of thinking, not our emotional state. |
| The fixation on events We are conditioned to see life as a series of events, and for every | ||
| event, we think there is one obvious cause. Conversations in organizations are dominated by concern with events: last month’s sales, new budget cuts, the new product our competitors just announced, and so on. Such explanations may be true as far as they go, but they distract us from seeing the longer-term patterns of change that lie behind the events and from understanding the causes of those patterns. Our fixation on events is actually part of our evolutionary programming. Today, however, the primary threats to our survival, both of our organizations and of our societies, come not from sudden events but from slow, gradual processes. If we focus on events, the best we can do is predict an event before it happens so that we can react optimally. But we cannot learn to create. |
| The parable of the boiled frogs The frog’s internal apparatus is geared to sudden changes | ||
| in his environment, not to slow, gradual changes. Learning to see slow, gradual processes requires slowing down our frenetic pace and paying attention to the subtle as well as the dramatic. The problem is our minds are so locked in one frequency, it’s as if we can only see at 78 rpm; we can’t see anything at 331/3. We will not avoid the fate of the frog until we learn to slow down and see the gradual processes that often pose the greatest threat. |
| The delusion of learning from experience The most powerful learning comes from direct | ||
| experience. What happens if the primary consequences of our actions or of our most important decisions are in the distant future or in the distant part of the larger system within which we operate? When that happens it becomes impossible to learn from direct experience. Cycles are particularly hard to see, and thus learn from, if they last longer than a year or two. Traditionally, organizations surmount the difficulty of coping with the breath of impact from decisions by breaking themselves up into components. However soon convenient divisions of labour cuts of contact between functions. The result: analysis of the most important problems in a company, the complex issues that cross functional lines becomes a perilous or non-existent exercise. |
| The myth of the management team Schools train us never to admit that we do not know the | ||
| answer, and most corporations reinforce that lesson by rewarding the people who excel in advocating their views, not inquiring into complex issues. Even if we feel uncertain or ignorant, we learn to protect ourselves from the pain of appearing uncertain or ignorant. That very process blocks out any new understandings which might threaten us. The consequence is what Argyris calls "skilled incompetence" - teams full of people who are incredibly proficient at keeping themselves from learning. All too often teams end spending their time fighting for turf, avoiding anything that will make them look bad personally and pretending that everyone is behind the team's collective strategy - maintaining the appearance of a cohesive team. To keep up the image, they seek to squelch disagreement; people with serious reservations avoid stating them publicly and joint decisions are watered-down compromises reflecting what everyone can live with, or else reflecting one person's views foisted on the group. If there is blame, it's usually expressed in a manner that lays blame, polarizes opinion and fails to reveal the underlying differences in assumptions and experience in a way that the team as a whole could learn. |
| The five disciplines can act as antidotes to these learning disabilities. But first, we must see the | ||
| disabilities more clearly – for they are often lost amid the bluster of day-to-day events. |