ICF, the limits Just the true limits of the operational edges
these lines I propose to invite the reader to reflect on a distinction that runs through the different areas of our lives. I do not pretend to describe reality, but to give an explanation that every reader can validate or not, from your own listening.
In this article I will rely on what I interpret the border dispute which limit and Humberto Maturana, Ximena systemic understanding cultural Davila (
http://www.matriztica.org/ ) and the ontological design Fernando Flores.
propose that the notion of "Frontier" is associated with the notion of limits, from sustained culture in the discourse and emotionality of ownership and control, where the others are from friends or enemies as we can control or not these other threats represent our possessions, whether things, land, cultural habits, roles, occupations, titles, etc.
any domain limits (a country, a profession, a community, a sector in a company, a partner, an organization, etc..) Are military constructions deliberately to isolate, separate, own and control.
This is living "marking territory" in the fear of losing appropriate.
Instead edges arise in the action itself, since the operational coherences of each domain.
Unlike the limit, the edge occurs in the spontaneity of the interactions between us and the environment.
no such thing as a limit. The limits they live in the distinction made by an observer, validated by the cultural discourse of ownership and control.
But how? Do not divide the river Uruguay Argentina and Uruguay?
Uruguay River in itself does not break anything. The Uruguay River is part of the natural drift aimlessly. We are the ones that we attach to the Uruguay river property "boundary" related to the river from an emotional ownership. There is no property in the river to do it "border." The "border" is human construct.
But how? Does the organization does not set the limit of decision making for an employee?
There is nothing in the organization which is in itself a limit.
The organization itself are not limits. The chart is a depiction of which are operational edges of each position and sector, given the historical conversational dynamic that has been taking place in the proper place and sector.
hereof and organizations have a historical interpretive framework prior to its existence, edges to distinguish operations from which emerge various domains (sectors and positions), such as administration and finance, logistics, production, marketing, human resources, general secretary, etc.
from the very coordination of actions and emotional, of each sector or workplace, emerging operational edges of each sector or job.
For example, the structure of the marketing sector, constitutes such actions from recurring their members coordinate with each other and with the environment, from the distinctions of marketing themselves, either by making statements about the market, stating strategic business units, making judgments on the probability of sale, by ordering the advertising agencies, offering promotions to customers, etc. This action defines the edge of the operation of the sector, intertwined with the emotional characteristic of the interaction of members of the sector. In the marketing industry is in the emotional lives of empathy and speculation, consumer-oriented and results.
The rationale for establishing an organization process, are your conversations, ie, the coordination of actions and the emotionality of daily living and living.
If we transform the organization, we must transform the talks. (Ie coordination actions and emotionality)
When we see a chart from the conventional view, is concealed the key elements: conversations (coordination of actions and emotions)
The identity of the sector, and the people who occupy the sector, will be maintained to the extent that they retain certain conversational processes, and others are changed to adapt and produce certain results.
linear thinker can hear a duality: "change - conservation" How can something that changes may remain the same?
For example: Marketing marketing will emerge as to the extent that the talks remain about listening needs, create and satisfy desires, to create value for the target market, and the company. Can change people, projects, products, markets, but what can not change is the conversation that originates, produces and maintains the sector.
marketing If members fail to have these discussions, the disintegrating sector as such, whether the organization will continue to call marketing. At the same time, the marketing sector will emerge to the extent that their conversations are adapted to other sectors and the environment (market).
is, a sector is supported when certain conversations are kept, for the rest of the talks be transformed into adaptation and coupling with the environment.
organization's identity will remain unchanged if it preserved certain conversations between sectors and with the environment, while the structure is plastic enough to adapt to the environment and trigger changes in the same medium.
risk look at the structure of the organization from the "limits", as do traditional schools of administration, only to understand the organizational phenomenon as a division of work defined in an organizational chart with titles, positions, lines of authority and hierarchical levels. Thus the "limit" is the argument that some use to manipulate, and deny the concerns others, in the appropriation of a job, as if it were something in itself.
Instead of looking at ourselves as human beings operate different operational domains, we deny our humanity and behave as if we were "the post" and / or "hierarchy", measuring at each other and their value for the job traveling.
But the position and hierarchy, make no difference for themselves. Moreover, people do not make a difference for themselves. Talk is action which creates, maintains and transforms "reality."
rid of the notion of "limits", respecting the borders operational We enable a range of possibilities that remained closed to our eyes.
Some other dimensions of boundaries:
The size of the border as regional boundary:
Every culture has its origin, and preserved in the talks of a culture that perpetuated from generation to generation. From those conversations (coordination of actions and emotions) appears cultural edge. Being Argentine, Mexican, English being, being Colombian, etc. Each culture is unique and legitimate. Each culture can legitimacy to other cultures for what they are other operational coherences with other edges. When a culture lives in the thrills of the ownership, other cultures refuse to define boundaries and borders in an attempt to live in the fantasy of security, and control, subjecting others through rational arguments based on the notion of truth.
Since the distinction of "edge" may live to enjoy the cultural style emerged from the historical operational coherences of his own culture, without being in the separateness of the boundary, where we antagonize with other human beings, who simply has a different origin cultural.
The size of the border as professional boundary:
Every profession has its world of distinctions and operational consistency. For such attorney distinctions operations brings forth a world of laws, justice / injustita of guilty / innocent, etc. An economist with operations distinction brings forth a world of distribution and administration of resources, from savings or thrift, etc. The musician distinctions operations brings forth a world of letters, poetry, movement.
Since the operation of each profession arise operational edges.
The nurse also should settle boundaries when interacting with others from the emotionality of arrogance, to have the certainty about how things are given the distinction of his profession. In fact none of us is our profession. I'm not a coach. We are human beings, which among other things we relate to others, based on a set of distinctions that define the profession to recreate with our recurring. As we operate and conduct professional practice in its application makes and keeps the profession. From this vision
invent multidisciplinary professional collaboration spaces, where the richness of cooperation opens up new worlds of action, scientific explanations, welfare, etc.
The size of the border as personal limit:
While other dimensions are also personal, here I mean the size of the people and our conversations that open and close possibilities for taking charge of creating what we want.
When we live in the speech and emotionality of ownership and control, set limits on attachment to our certainties, beliefs. We are committed to the status quo, to save a way of seeing ourselves, defining a way to "be" determined, in the belief that this is the truth. We say: "I am. What can we do! " shaping a world of pain and suffering, resignation can not live the life we \u200b\u200bwant to live.
The passage of "limit" to "edge" means:
1) Distinguish one's own operational consistency of the observer: The "edge" is always on the look of the observer. In contrast, the notion of "limit" is experienced as an independent element of reality to the observer.
limit to speak, we must deny the observer notes.
2) distinguish the set of recurrent and recursive actions run produce our own border of possibilities, and that can expand or contract according to the actions we undertake.
3) Distinguish the world of possibilities that we see is not the effect we are, but of their own operational coherences, ie the actions they perform. The "being" who we are, is going in this historic live. Is to move from the notion of "being" a "being." The "being" not "is." The "being" is "made."
4) Distinguish the personal edge occurs moment by moment in the spontaneity of our actions in relation to other, moment by moment, the only space we have ... this. Detachment in a static way of being, we operate differently, setting new edges that occur with the action itself, moment by moment
why I propose the expansive behavior
. Those behaviors which triggered a bit beyond what we see as possibility frontier in the emergence of new borders, living in well-being and taking charge of what we want, living in the ethical. Fernando Sáenz Ford
info@sincroconsultora.com.ar
One of the Internet Portals most prestigious English on the topic of Coaching and Leadership, we conducted a new interview with Fernando Sáenz Ford, where he explains his particular vision on coaching, raising an epistemological turnabout it. 
no doubt on anything on what I have FE. Why no questions? Just because I want it, and I prefer it that way. Why do I use my creative freedom. Never mind the rational arguments, they just line up what I want, I prefer to believe and therefore I agree. 
