page_238 - Page 238 to...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
< previous page page_238 next page > Page 238 to provoke severe disagreement. The political situation made it simply impossible to bring all the significant actors together, at one time and place, to hammer out an agreed set of proposals. The likelihood of such a meeting breaking up in disarray, and taking the proposals down with it, was too great. We also had our own "hidden", cybernetic, agenda which contained a set of minimum specifications we felt any changes should meet in order to make the organisation "viable". Top of this agenda was to see management issues handled "lower down'', thus reducing the "variety" flooding up to the Executive and exhausting its capacity to handle significant policy issues. Eventually, through a long drawn out and time-consuming process of going back and forth between important Executive members and staff, and constantly modifying the recommendations, we arrived at proposals we believed had general support and met the cybernetic criteria. We were rewarded for this hard work when the recommendations were presented at an Executive meeting. The significant actors
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/21/2011 for the course MGT 03 taught by Professor Kasra during the Spring '11 term at Tanta University.

Page1 / 3

page_238 - Page 238 to...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online