What is it? - The Mary Parker Follett Network2024-03-29T09:48:06Zhttps://mpfollett.ning.com/forum/topics/what-is-it?commentId=3634948%3AComment%3A1425&feed=yes&xn_auth=noSometimes theory comes first,…tag:mpfollett.ning.com,2009-11-29:3634948:Comment:23622009-11-29T04:58:46.000ZRosa Zubizarretahttps://mpfollett.ning.com/profile/RosaZubizarreta
Sometimes theory comes first, and then later people discover applications for it... other times, people discover an application first, and only later the theory that "explains" it...<br />
<br />
for me, MPF is an instance of the latter: what calls to me, is that she describes what I have experienced to be possible in a group context, when there is a process in place that allows for each person to be deeply heard and that keeps the pressure toward groupthink and conformity at bay.<br />
<br />
What I've seen is that…
Sometimes theory comes first, and then later people discover applications for it... other times, people discover an application first, and only later the theory that "explains" it...<br />
<br />
for me, MPF is an instance of the latter: what calls to me, is that she describes what I have experienced to be possible in a group context, when there is a process in place that allows for each person to be deeply heard and that keeps the pressure toward groupthink and conformity at bay.<br />
<br />
What I've seen is that unity emerges THROUGH divergence, not "in spite of" it... Hello Albie, nice. Or how abo…tag:mpfollett.ning.com,2009-09-22:3634948:Comment:19492009-09-22T15:38:05.000ZTadit Andersonhttps://mpfollett.ning.com/profile/TaditAnderson
Hello Albie, nice. Or how about "the talk is in the walking." Friction as a means to polishing, seems useful as a creative process. Though the thread of discourse which MPF represents was for the most part wedged into a narrow space for years. It seems much the same as the treatment that has been used to marginalize heterodox economists. The echo chamber built by ample patronage and recognition is a suffocating sort of friction.<br />
<br />
The history of historians tells a similar story, often serving…
Hello Albie, nice. Or how about "the talk is in the walking." Friction as a means to polishing, seems useful as a creative process. Though the thread of discourse which MPF represents was for the most part wedged into a narrow space for years. It seems much the same as the treatment that has been used to marginalize heterodox economists. The echo chamber built by ample patronage and recognition is a suffocating sort of friction.<br />
<br />
The history of historians tells a similar story, often serving more as publicists and propagandist, than choosing to support either an open discourse or a full examination. The abuse of mathematics and mathematical modeling versus the misapplication of sophisticated techniques is another example of "friction" taken to the level of suppression and mis-direction. My major point here is not to dispute the opportunity for polishing provided by friction, and yet there is the strategic use of wooden shoes to reduce particular perspectives. Knollenburg's book "Washington and the Revolution" is a good example relative to the preference of myth and mis-direction. It places a different slant on the whole basis of and nature of leadership. By some sources the ratification of the 1787 counter-coup hinged upon the myths of personality.<br />
<br />
There is often a gloss and sideways slide to avoid friction. Minsky was a major heterodox economist who was marginalized though he has very accurately predicted the current deflation/collapse. The current articles about Minsky are noticeably reconstructing his perspective and recommendations, much as was done to Keynes. Friction is good, and there are clearly political incentives being subsidized to apply more than a bit of friction. Perhaps I am being a pessimist to inject a bit of history. The thought arises though as to how do we can preserve friction as primarily a constructive and creative process. The whole cultural inertia we are experiencing on multiple levels needs some solvent if not creative intervention. next time. Hello everyone! I love the gr…tag:mpfollett.ning.com,2009-09-22:3634948:Comment:19472009-09-22T13:19:28.000ZAlbie M. Davishttps://mpfollett.ning.com/profile/AlbieMDavis
Hello everyone! I love the growth of this forum, and it's diverse membership! And the thinking that has flowed from Candee Basford's supposedly simple question: "What is it!"<br />
<br />
On Sep 3, Jeff Bedolla invited us to take the question literally, and I'm going to give it a try, while I confess I might give a different answer tomorrow than I give today.<br />
<br />
What I like most about Follett is her concept of "plusvalents."<br />
<br />
"Our older social philosophy gave us the pernicious theories of the balance of…
Hello everyone! I love the growth of this forum, and it's diverse membership! And the thinking that has flowed from Candee Basford's supposedly simple question: "What is it!"<br />
<br />
On Sep 3, Jeff Bedolla invited us to take the question literally, and I'm going to give it a try, while I confess I might give a different answer tomorrow than I give today.<br />
<br />
What I like most about Follett is her concept of "plusvalents."<br />
<br />
"Our older social philosophy gave us the pernicious theories of the balance of power between nations, of adjustments between capital and labor. It gave us always equivalents; our more recent thinking shows us how to create <i>plusvalents.</i>(Creative Experience, p. 75)<br />
<br />
"The most fundamental idea of philosophy is, I think, the recognition that there is no <i>Denkform</i> in which as mould all thought is cast, but rather a constant mode of self-generating as thought, a perpetual law of unifying to which free activity submits itself, law and freedom each the entelechy of the other. (Creative Experience, p. 75, above the previous quote.)<br />
<br />
<i>Note: I had to look up "Denkform", German for "way of thinking" and entelechy on Wikipedia: (La. entelechia, from Gk. ἐντελέχεια, entelécheia) is, according to Aristotle, the condition of something whose essence is fully realized; actuality. In some modern philosophical systems it is a vital force that motivates and guides an organism. toward self-fulfillment.</i><br />
<br />
Sometimes Follett can capture a concept in a few words: "All polishing is done by friction." (Dynamic Administration, p. 31.) Other times, she goes on a bit. Both styles are rich, cause me to think.<br />
<br />
Because we have so many members from so many countries who speak so many languages, I would love to have people speak to us in their preferred languages now and then. I feel there would be lessons to learn in this process and that our dialogue would be enriched. As one who only speaks English, I would have to struggle with this process, but I believe I would be enriched.<br />
<br />
Albie Davis, Thomaston, Maine, USA Jeff and all,
the mechanism…tag:mpfollett.ning.com,2009-09-11:3634948:Comment:17432009-09-11T16:39:31.000ZTadit Andersonhttps://mpfollett.ning.com/profile/TaditAnderson
Jeff and all,<br />
<br />
the mechanism of this utility is already constraining the nominal "open" nature of this context.<br />
<br />
Let me suggest a different twist by way of MPF's resonance with Henri Bergson, that the unity be based upon the experiencing of everyday life both in our residential and work related communities. On the distinction between appreciation and worship, it seems that in MPF's universe there is little space for worship in the conventional sense. Further, worship is often a dynamic within…
Jeff and all,<br />
<br />
the mechanism of this utility is already constraining the nominal "open" nature of this context.<br />
<br />
Let me suggest a different twist by way of MPF's resonance with Henri Bergson, that the unity be based upon the experiencing of everyday life both in our residential and work related communities. On the distinction between appreciation and worship, it seems that in MPF's universe there is little space for worship in the conventional sense. Further, worship is often a dynamic within institutionalization that applies a hierarchic mode which is more interested in preserving an organization in a material sense than in investing in an ongoing reproduction of an organization through its integration with the demands of the situation.<br />
<br />
Somewhere in here is an intersection with Douglas Rushkoff's core insights out of Life Inc, in effect that the values and structures characteristic of corporatism have invaded our daily lives to such an extent that there is virtually no concern for outcomes and results. In effect the problem "solving" of white collar corporate life is on the order of lifting citations from a policy manual, rather than the problem solving mode more characteristic of craftwork. Literally Rushkoff cites concerns for property value over the quality of life experienced. Rushkoff suggests that we have been shaped by a multi-century paradigm which is at the heart of the current economic collapse.<br />
<br />
Whenever a transcontinental divide is supposed between emotional comforts and reason, somehow the outcome generally slips to a lower order of priority. Of what I have read of MPF's writings and lectures I have seen little in the way emotionalized comfort politics, except as the aspects and details of different world views might be understood and accepted. There is a level of discourse where it is supposed that emotional demonstrations are sometimes allowed to trump all other considerations. Comfort of this sort is typically based upon the familiarity of conventions and of privileged domains.<br />
<br />
Perhaps simply asserting the priority and unity of MPF's evolved science of cooperation, and of the unity of the practice and extensions of that cultural shaping is all that is required. In effect to walk her "talk."<br />
<br />
Istvan Meszaros may seem distant from the concerns and priorities of MPF, but actually in his most recent book "The Challenge and Burden of Historical Time" features a divestment from mass political movements for the sake of social and cultural change, and strongly favors an a constructive micro cultural process very much like MPF's science of cooperation. Her sense of "economy" is much much closer to the original meaning of "economics" from its etymology, the management of home and community. Tadit Jeff and all,
the mechanism…tag:mpfollett.ning.com,2009-09-11:3634948:Comment:17422009-09-11T16:32:58.000ZTadit Andersonhttps://mpfollett.ning.com/profile/TaditAnderson
Jeff and all,<br />
<br />
the mechanism of this utility is already constraining the nominal "open" nature of this context.<br />
<br />
Let me suggest a different twist by way of MPF's resonance with Henri Bergson, that the unity be based upon the experiencing of everyday life both in our residential and work related communities. On the distinction between appreciation and worship, it seems that in MPF's universe there is little space for worship in the conventional sense. Further, worship is often a dynamic within…
Jeff and all,<br />
<br />
the mechanism of this utility is already constraining the nominal "open" nature of this context.<br />
<br />
Let me suggest a different twist by way of MPF's resonance with Henri Bergson, that the unity be based upon the experiencing of everyday life both in our residential and work related communities. On the distinction between appreciation and worship, it seems that in MPF's universe there is little space for worship in the conventional sense. Further, worship is often a dynamic within institutionalization that applies a hierarchic mode which is more interested in preserving in organization in a material sense than in investing a ongoing reproduction of an organization through its integration with the demands of the situation and of integration.<br />
<br />
Somewhere in here is an intersection with Douglas Rushkoff's core insights out of Life Inc, in effect that the values and structures characteristic of corporatism have invaded our daily lives to such an extent that there is virtually no concern for outcomes and results. In effect the problem "solving" of white collar corporate life is on the order of lifting citations from a policy manual, rather than the problem solving mode more characteristic of craftwork. Rushkoff's suggests that we have been shaped by a multi-century paradigm which is at the heart of the current economic collapse.<br />
<br />
Whenever a transcontinental divide is supposed between emotional comforts and reason, somehow the outcome generally slips to a lower order of priority. Of what I have read of MPF's writings and lectures I have seen little in the way emotionalized comfort politics, except as the aspects and details of different world views might be understood and accepted. There is a level of discourse where it is supposed that emotional demonstrations are sometimes allowed to trump all other considerations. Comfort of this sort is typically based upon the familiarity of conventions and of privileged domains.<br />
<br />
To simplify, perhaps simply asserting the priority of MPF's evolved science of cooperation, and of the priority of the practice and extensions of that cultural shaping is all that is required. In effect to walk her "talk."<br />
<br />
Istvan Meszaros may seem distant from the concerns and priorities of MPF, but actually in his most recent book "The Challenge and Burden of Historical Time" features a divestment in mass political movements for the sake of social and cultural change, and strongly favors an a constructive micro cultural process very much like MPF's science of cooperation. Her sense of "economy" is much much closer to the original meaning of "economics" from its etymology, the management of home and community. Tadit Interesting, Jeff. I think it…tag:mpfollett.ning.com,2009-09-04:3634948:Comment:15812009-09-04T03:36:22.000ZMatthew Shapirohttps://mpfollett.ning.com/profile/MatthewShapiro
Interesting, Jeff. I think it's important to note that assuming diversity is not the same as assuming dissensus. Furthermore, I also think it's important not to assume consensus, either. I think that beginning with the subjective - acknowledging that I am (each of us is) is a unique interpreter of Follett - and then seeing what others say, is a fruitful way to go. Perhaps there's an intersubjective commonality that emerges. In any event, it is interesting to seek commonality and difference at…
Interesting, Jeff. I think it's important to note that assuming diversity is not the same as assuming dissensus. Furthermore, I also think it's important not to assume consensus, either. I think that beginning with the subjective - acknowledging that I am (each of us is) is a unique interpreter of Follett - and then seeing what others say, is a fruitful way to go. Perhaps there's an intersubjective commonality that emerges. In any event, it is interesting to seek commonality and difference at the same time.<br />
<br />
As for reframing the question: the "guiding question," if you will, to this particular "Ning discussion box", was (to paraphrase): "what inspires you?" Now, if this were a structured democratic dialogue, we might want to adopt a guiding question by consensus, perhaps in consultation with a facilitator who has lots of experience in framing questions to fit the desires and needs of a given community of practice. But this particular discussion thread isn't that. It's more free-flow. It's more chaotic. It's...let's see what happens, and it's safe here.<br />
<br />
Do you see what I wrote earlier here in this thread about "First I have to trust you?" The simple point I was gently trying to make it that there are emotional as well as intellectual qualities to discussions, no matter how "serious" the topic. The word "inspire" in the original question is powerful for me because it invites me emotionally. I can be intellectually inspired, but it means little to me if I'm not excited in my whole being. So maybe that relates to embracing subjectivity as a prelude to inter-subjectivity and beyond, or at least as a constant interactive piece of whatever's going on at the moment. I FEEL so, anyway. Now, I must go say my evening prayers to Follett...<br />
<br />
<br />
<cite>Jeff Bedolla said:</cite><blockquote cite="http://mpfollett.ning.com/forum/topics/what-is-it#3634948Comment1541"><div>I like the banner quote of this network, "Unity, not uniformity, must be our aim". - MPF.<br/> <br/>
In the question, "What is it...", I find the assumption, that, from a number of statements replying to that question, something can be learned.<br/>
<br/>
Why not make that assumption explicit? Here's a question that occurred to me yesterday:<br/>
<br/>
Is there one thing we have in common, those who are attracted to this subject? What is the lowest common denominator of that interest? Whatever may be a chosen response to "What is it..." must be an aspect of some one thing. What is that one thing? It must be something that does not divide, it must not be something exclusive, because unity is what is sought, not intractable difference or mere multiplicity for it's own sake.<br/>
<br/>
In other words, the question, "What is it about..." can be expressed in an impersonal form, and concluded like this: "...that calls out and inspires?" The difference is that this way the respondent is owning responsibility for generalizing on personal experience; not just submitting data to be interpreted by another/others in a non-explicit and non-transparent way, to be done--if at all--away from the group and separate from the expressed purpose of the topic, which is just to submit input, as in a survey. Of course, we all take from the discussion what others say. But the group process is not primarily about taking, it's about giving; without the proper emphasis group dynamics are stunted.<br/>
<br/>
The implicit thesis of the original question--though I think nobody really believes this--is that there is just a multiplicity of facets of our subject, incapable of being reduced to unity either through an inability to sufficiently enter into sympathetic understanding with the subject, or due to the sheer impossibility of so doing.<br/>
<br/>
There's a big difference between appreciation and worship. There's a quotation, to the effect that, to appreciate a work of art is to equal the achievement of the artist. Do we, as individuals, have the ability to develop our powers as she did? Can we go beyond her achievement? What was her life achievement? Oh, she accomplished a lot, but what career does it describe? Again, unity must be our aim.</div>
</blockquote> I like the banner quote of th…tag:mpfollett.ning.com,2009-09-03:3634948:Comment:15412009-09-03T08:52:26.000ZJeff Bedollahttps://mpfollett.ning.com/profile/JeffreyPaulJeffBedolla
I like the banner quote of this network, "Unity, not uniformity, must be our aim". - MPF.<br />
<br />
In the question, "What is it...", I find the assumption, that, from a number of statements replying to that question, something can be learned.<br />
<br />
Why not make that assumption explicit? Here's a question that occurred to me yesterday:<br />
<br />
Is there one thing we have in common, those who are attracted to this subject? What is the lowest common denominator of that interest? Whatever may be a chosen response to…
I like the banner quote of this network, "Unity, not uniformity, must be our aim". - MPF.<br />
<br />
In the question, "What is it...", I find the assumption, that, from a number of statements replying to that question, something can be learned.<br />
<br />
Why not make that assumption explicit? Here's a question that occurred to me yesterday:<br />
<br />
Is there one thing we have in common, those who are attracted to this subject? What is the lowest common denominator of that interest? Whatever may be a chosen response to "What is it..." must be an aspect of some one thing. What is that one thing? It must be something that does not divide, it must not be something exclusive, because unity is what is sought, not intractable difference or mere multiplicity for it's own sake.<br />
<br />
In other words, the question, "What is it about..." can be expressed in an impersonal form, and concluded like this: "...that calls out and inspires?" The difference is that this way the respondent is owning responsibility for generalizing on personal experience; not just submitting data to be interpreted by another/others in a non-explicit and non-transparent way, to be done--if at all--away from the group and separate from the expressed purpose of the topic, which is just to submit input, as in a survey. Of course, we all take from the discussion what others say. But the group process is not primarily about taking, it's about giving; without the proper emphasis group dynamics are stunted.<br />
<br />
The implicit thesis of the original question--though I think nobody really believes this--is that there is just a multiplicity of facets of our subject, incapable of being reduced to unity either through an inability to sufficiently enter into sympathetic understanding with the subject, or due to the sheer impossibility of so doing.<br />
<br />
There's a big difference between appreciation and worship. There's a quotation, to the effect that, to appreciate a work of art is to equal the achievement of the artist. Do we, as individuals, have the ability to develop our powers as she did? Can we go beyond her achievement? What was her life achievement? Oh, she accomplished a lot, but what career does it describe? Again, unity must be our aim. The practice of principle and…tag:mpfollett.ning.com,2009-08-23:3634948:Comment:14252009-08-23T17:15:18.000ZTadit Andersonhttps://mpfollett.ning.com/profile/TaditAnderson
The practice of principle and concepts that other preach about, but rarely apply. It is the real deal in terms of the conduct of social science. One of the central tenets of sociology as it is conventionally taught is conformity. Capacities for anything else are rarely addressed except as deviations. In terms of practice ruling it is much the same as problem solving characteristic of the craftwork tradition in labor. Organizational theory except for a very few operate on the basis of political…
The practice of principle and concepts that other preach about, but rarely apply. It is the real deal in terms of the conduct of social science. One of the central tenets of sociology as it is conventionally taught is conformity. Capacities for anything else are rarely addressed except as deviations. In terms of practice ruling it is much the same as problem solving characteristic of the craftwork tradition in labor. Organizational theory except for a very few operate on the basis of political assumptions about authority and presumed celebrity. Her approach is also much like the mode used by Thich Nhat Hanh.<br />
<br />
For me this approach is key to unraveling some major cultural impasses within corporatized reality. Cooperatives which should by their base principles be operating in a similar manner, often presume the structural defaults of the financialized paradigm. The funny thing here is that in the application of theory Y of Douglas MacGregor which has its similarities to the "science of cooperation," as per MPF, There is a story of a Korean war vet who was by the experience entirely convinced that command and control didn't really work. Somehow this person made into the executive ranks of Proctor and Gamble. He was able to commit P&G to establishing a new plant at Augusta, Georgia which was organized based upon this sort of paradigm. The plant was able to perform at a 30% higher productivity, than other P&G plants at that time. P&G transferred the process to their other plants but chose to treat it as a trade secret for 40 years, because it gave them such a strong advantage over their competitors. As an approach it is demonstrably superior, to the command and control ideology. Hi Matthew & Candee it is…tag:mpfollett.ning.com,2009-08-04:3634948:Comment:11012009-08-04T10:35:17.000ZIan Glendinninghttps://mpfollett.ning.com/profile/IanGlendinning
Hi Matthew & Candee it is worth questioning how we get traction on a new forum .. . process stuff such as suggested by Tadit is common sense ... But to address Candee's question directly, it is worth pointing out that, the question we were all asked to complete on our profile page when joining up was<br />
<br />
"What brings you to Follett?"<br />
<br />
My reply there was:<br />
<br />
In a nutshell. 30 years Engineer & Manager. MBA 20 years ago. Organizational behaviour and culture. Hypocrisy in decision-making…
Hi Matthew & Candee it is worth questioning how we get traction on a new forum .. . process stuff such as suggested by Tadit is common sense ... But to address Candee's question directly, it is worth pointing out that, the question we were all asked to complete on our profile page when joining up was<br />
<br />
"What brings you to Follett?"<br />
<br />
My reply there was:<br />
<br />
In a nutshell. 30 years Engineer & Manager. MBA 20 years ago. Organizational behaviour and culture. Hypocrisy in decision-making rationality. Excluded middles. Value in difference in dynamic relations. In a word - Wisdom.<br />
<br />
MPF specifically, quite recently (2006) through Peter Drucker, Charles Handy & Tom Peters, and reading Pauline Graham's book. I suspect MPF was a giant, but “you have to believe in giants before you can stand on their shoulders”.<br />
<br />
Urgency - as communication becomes ever more ubiquitous, poor understanding of "rational" decision-making in action is counter productive on a grand scale - global sustainability, etc.<br />
<br />
This blog post introduces my interest in MPF.<br />
<a href="http://www.psybertron.org/?p=1199">http://www.psybertron.org/?p=1199</a> I find it somewhat humorous t…tag:mpfollett.ning.com,2009-07-30:3634948:Comment:9012009-07-30T00:43:57.000ZMatthew Shapirohttps://mpfollett.ning.com/profile/MatthewShapiro
I find it somewhat humorous that a simple question like what Candee posted had drawn only one response that addresses it!
I find it somewhat humorous that a simple question like what Candee posted had drawn only one response that addresses it!