throwing bones and strategic planning

[EVERETT813 at aol.com]

In a message dated 7/1/05 4:17:27 PM, MareiKiele at web.de writes:


> 
> And now - being given your little finger I want the whole hand!
> Please, share the story of the Canadian Indian tribe and why throwing bones 
> worked. I am sure it's a great one.
> What would I need to offer on this market place of conversation to make you 
> start typing?
>  If you come to Halifax: I could pay with a ten minute massage (which you 
> might need after a lot off typing).
> 

Marei;

I'll take your offer since Joelle and I will be driving 700 miles from Boston 
to Halifax.   I have a brother in Boston whom I will get to see, along with 
his family, on this trip.   I will need a massage, for sure.   But, only 10 
minutes?   Are you an expert in reflexology?   That might work.   lol.

The story is contained in the book "The Social Psychology of Organizing" by 
Karl Weick (2nd edition) on page 262/63.   Actually, the whole book vibrates 
with Open Space principles and precursors, it appears to be a good read, from my 
brief thumbing through it.   Joelle is the deep reader of this book, and 
related the story to me probably 20 years ago.   I saw it in action in the company 
where I spent 28 years.   Much thrashing about gaining virtually nothing.   
Many times less than nothing.   Several long and disheartening stories about 
management blindness we may talk about some time.   Planning for losses and 
bragging about making the plan (huh?); deciding 15% defective was OK because the 
defective product could be re-used and that became 'gospel' and part of the 
'annual plan'.   (Big Sigh---and I'm not kidding, all those who are slapping 
their hands to their foreheads in disbelief).

The story is referenced from O. K. Moore's work "Divination, a new 
perspective" in American Anthropologist 59: 69-74; 1957.   The discussion is about 
introducing complication to increase adaptability of the organization by use of 
random numbers or other randomizing methods.   The Naskapi Indians of Labrador, 
Canada, faced the question every day of where they should hunt for food.   They 
determined this by holding dried caribou shoulder bones over a fire.   As 
they heated, the bones developed cracks and smudges which were then "read" by an 
'expert' (I'm betting Shaman).   The cracks indicated in what direction the 
hunters should go to look for game.   The Naskapi believe that this practice 
allows the gods to intervene in their hunting decisions.   It works.

The underlying reasons are postulated as being the following and relate to 
the decision procedure:

1.   The decision of where to hunt is not a personal or group choice.    If 
no game is found, the gods, not the group (or expert), are to blame.

2.   The final decision about where to hunt is not affected by the outcomes 
of past hunts.   If the Indians were influenced by the outcomes of past hunts, 
they would run the definite risk of depleting the stock of animals.   Their 
prior success would induce subsequent failure.   (Paul's comment: your prior 
success will blind you to the emerging reality and will mean nothing when a 
paradigm shifts--See "The Innovator's Dilemma" by Christensen).   

3.   The final decision is not influenced by the typical human patterning of 
choice and preferences, which can enable the hunted animals to take evasive 
action and become sensitized to the (repeated) presence of human beings.

Thus, the use of 'bones' is a means of avoiding fixity of behavior when the 
emerging reality calls for adaptability, flexibility, creativity and 
originality.   And, today's environment certainly calls for those traits, in spades, 
because the speed of change is so rapid and far-reaching.   It can enhance or 
destroy a business or other enterprise more quickly than ever before (I'm 
reminded of John Engle's efforts in Haiti---a social worker killed there this week).

My point with the financial planners was that we were always so far off from 
the eventual outcome (comparing the December final annual plan with the 
December outcome one year later) that the time and effort could be dispensed with 
and instead we could begin to discover what was emerging and develop flexible, 
adaptable, and creative response schemes instead, using the freed-up resources 
to do it at no increased cost.   Not only that, but it would be way more fun; 
would eliminate the monthly variance from plan meetings that occurred ad 
nauseum, which also had no meaning since what they were describing was already far 
in the past; and would focus people's attention on the important criteria for 
affecting real outcomes.   But, the unstructured-ness of this approach just 
wasn't part of how they saw the world.   The illusion of control is very strong.

So, Marei, there you have the story.   Looking forward to my 30 minute 
massage because this took the better part of an hour (finding the book, etc.) and I 
figure a 1 for 2, when it involves massage instead of typing, a good trade.   
lol.    But, of course, you did not agree before hand so I can't hold you to 
more than 10 minutes.   (big smile)

Warmly,

Paul      

*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu:
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html

To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs:
http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20050702/8d0fe900/attachment-0016.htm>