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.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Did Og Mudbone Die From Overdose?
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?
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
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
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Pedal Boat For Sale In Ottawa Area
edges of Hope-DESIGN SUSTAINABLE FUTURE LEADERSHIP
Just hope! DESIGN OF FUTURE
" Hope is the last thing lost." I have heard this phrase dozens of times and always gave me a sense of relief, yet powerless. And that hope comes from "wait." When we speak of "hope" comes to an emotional relief, supported by the expectation that something external to us, will solve the problems by ourselves we can not solve.
emotionality Hope is a legitimate and respectable. I can judge it positively, as occurs in the live well we are living. At a time when everything falls apart, where the events are presented without regard to direct our gaze to a shelter, like hope, can serve. To the disease, before death, before the war, to famine, to injustice, hope can be a good choice to overcome terrible situations.
course, hope does not produce that for which we have hope. Produces a positive emotionality in the present where we are, but not the desired result with hope. It is always something outside of what the change will
In everyday life that something external can be, for example:
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.
Faith is commitment and action. The hope is longed for and expected.
A curiosity: to distinguish the first person present of the verb "believe" and "create", we use the same word "I believe." First I believe (to believe) then I (to create).
So the main character in FE the possibility remains a goal, a place to go. The possibility is "reason to be today. " Everyday practices revolve around the possibility.
Our source of action is not past experience (although we honor, we draw on them), our source of action is the possibility that we create.
Hence the question: What
you source of action?
If we want a different world, we need different actions. From Hope, we perpetuate in the same way of life.
Ojala, lose hope! And actions to do what we say we want to happen. Fernando Sáenz
Ford Sync Direct
info@sincroconsultora.com.ar Consultant 
Just hope! DESIGN OF FUTURE
" Hope is the last thing lost." I have heard this phrase dozens of times and always gave me a sense of relief, yet powerless. And that hope comes from "wait." When we speak of "hope" comes to an emotional relief, supported by the expectation that something external to us, will solve the problems by ourselves we can not solve.
emotionality Hope is a legitimate and respectable. I can judge it positively, as occurs in the live well we are living. At a time when everything falls apart, where the events are presented without regard to direct our gaze to a shelter, like hope, can serve. To the disease, before death, before the war, to famine, to injustice, hope can be a good choice to overcome terrible situations.
course, hope does not produce that for which we have hope. Produces a positive emotionality in the present where we are, but not the desired result with hope. It is always something outside of what the change will
In everyday life that something external can be, for example:
Heads: "I have I hope you realize the potential I have and give me a opportunity "
Rulers" I have I hope that Peter will change things "
God:" I have I hope that God give you strength to carry on "
Couple: " I know that "Jane" is going to change. I am hopeful "
economy "'m hopeful that will change the economic course "
Life " I have a hope in getting the job or the job you deserve. Life is so, we must be tolerant and things come "
Universal Laws:" I have hope to achieve my goals. What you give, somewhere again. And I have given much "
In all these cases there is a common factor: the absence of the action itself. The ultimate hope is behind: if anything I want is to happen will not be for me to do. Will be the product of circumstances favorable.
phenomenon in terms of action and results (not the emotionality and physicality) hope and resignation are the same. They are different sides of the same coin: any triggers powerful actions to create new "realities."
Hope is a "patch" to avoid the discomfort of resignation, but also a reinforcement of the paradigm that gives rise to such resignation: The paradigm of "spectator" and / or "victim" . The paradigm in which we are not participants in the construction of the circumstances, but the circumstances we create for us. It is the paradigm, which we are prisoners of a future that did not choose.
In this paradigm, two main alternatives are to live in the negativity of the resignation or the positivity of hope. Or of course, go from emotional to another, building a circle of passivity, where we watched live as we pass from the seat of the viewer or the cry of the victim, not realizing that everyone is in the field, co-constructing our living in a constant interaction with others and the environment, where our actions are critical to the events that befalls us. In
expect action from the historical attachment to a way of perceiving the possibilities. With our direct action only is possible that our arsenal of experience tells us is possible. Everything else, that which is outside our model of the "rational" or "logical" is in the dimension of the impossible. This is planned from what happened and not from what I want to happen.
The hope is to believe that some miracle may happen, that is something of the dimension of the impossible I can occur. We take no responsibility for it. The circumstances, assemble the reality and the future
In resignation, looking at the dimension of the impossible, it is useless, because I think there is nothing I can do to make a change. Both
resignation and hope the past is organizing this. All you fence to happen will be a change in the past.
Who plays a leading role, does not look at this and future possibilities, from its history. The protagonist is the possibility. " The protagonist takes the future as a "context" from which to build this. And from that possibility, says new commitments, has a new look at the circumstances, the other, and bases its "reality."
who assumes the role of protagonist, distinguishes the possibilities as "something" that is in the future (hope). The possibilities are a way of being "still" is a lens through which we can think of daily living.
Families, enterprises, large enterprises have occurred first as a possibility for a group of women and men who gave up hope, and took action committed
This is the view of the entrepreneur, the leader, proactive manager / coach. They do not live in hope. In any case, we speak of faith. Not the FE as a religious explanation (which is valid as well), but FE and emotion where our actions are consistent with the possibility that we created, because we are completely seduced on that possibility is already alive, through our own life . The FE
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. Faith is commitment and action. The hope is longed for and expected.
A curiosity: to distinguish the first person present of the verb "believe" and "create", we use the same word "I believe." First I believe (to believe) then I (to create).
So the main character in FE the possibility remains a goal, a place to go. The possibility is "reason to be today. " Everyday practices revolve around the possibility.
Our source of action is not past experience (although we honor, we draw on them), our source of action is the possibility that we create.
Hence the question: What
you source of action?
If we want a different world, we need different actions. From Hope, we perpetuate in the same way of life.
Ojala, lose hope! And actions to do what we say we want to happen. Fernando Sáenz
Ford Sync Direct
info@sincroconsultora.com.ar Consultant
Friday, January 11, 2008
Sty Away At Walgreens
Sustainable Leadership Under the organizational management model focused on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) or Corporate Responsibility (RE), have redefined the look of leadership, from focused management " in change and producing outstanding results ", a focused management" in achieving outstanding results and the maintenance of social welfare . "
This does not imply only a change of terminology, but refocuses management practices.
invite companies to reinterpret corporate responsibility (SR), and the role of leadership, seeing as agents for social transformation "closed doors" and "put out."
This re-configuration of leadership, is extremely powerful, with the help of coaching for the revision and creation of new ways of seeing and living, and for the formation of a new leadership able to:
- Inspire spontaneous living, acting according to your values, your team and company values. ( it is valued )
- Bring expertise in communication skills. Ie, redesign the system to keep people conversational within teams.
- Moving from the re-action stimulated by the environment and emotions, to the pro-action based on the shared vision of the team.
- better governance and legitimacy have to devise strategies for constructive and creative businesses, through which employees can participate.
- Create environments possible, delegate responsibilities.
- effectively coordinate the actions of its employees.
- Foster conducts "border" on their computers.
- Align your business and management policies towards a sustainable long-term vision, promoting "good" practices, equity, inclusion, diversity, respect, etc..
- promote common practices in the value chain, creating alliances and respect for social norms and customs of the place where the company is inserted.
- Create a work environment that promotes the equipment is liable to be measured.
- Retain talent, achieving corporate loyalty.
- Ensure that the force of change to exercise its influence constructively.
- Create opportunities for business to take into account capacity building for its employees and society as a whole.
- Include in each corporate decision respect for different interest groups.
interest groups generic sustainable leadership
Organizational leaders are called to share their business in a sustainable way, respecting all the agents with whom they interact in a coupling that allow coexistence, and not the disintegration of a party.
Those who listen and take care of that call, will be participating in a fundamental transformation in their ways of living together in their companies, and their societies.
Those who listen and take care of that call, will be participating in a fundamental transformation in their ways of living together in their companies, and their societies.
Map to develop models of CSR in management from organizations
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)