As Ralph Copleman wrote: > 2. On another plane, I'm for any method that breaks down the conventional > boundaries and mind-frames, on one hand, and shows people how to cooperate > on the other. I worry less and less about how what I do conforms to > conceptual principles and more about how well it helps the world transform. > Both OS and FS open the doors I want to help people go through. >
Here! Here! After looking closely at 18 approaches to changing human systems for The Change Handbook, my own conclusion is similar to Ralph's. What I have come to believe is that the choice of approach has more to do with chemistry among practitioner, method and client than anything else. They all have the potential to transform. Further, I've concluded the choice of process has much to do with the beliefs of the practitioner. Many different choices can work in a given situation. I believe the amount of structure required is a reflection of the beliefs of the practitioner doing the work. When there is a perception that people need to be led, then they will prove that out. If the perception is that participants will figure things out for themselves, they somehow do. So, how much "help" you think people need will guide how much help they turn out to need. Peggy * * ========================================================== osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu ------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu, Visit: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html