Harold Jarche has been encouraging us to question the industrial models for business that are still in use. (It's the model stupid, Management is the problem, How our structures shape us). As more people discover the effects of current business models on themselves, their communities and the environment, the impetus and support for change will increase. Meanwhile the proponents and defenders of the "big business", "shareholder wealth" and "corporate greed" models will continue to spin their self-congratulatory story.The effects created by antiquated (centralized, command & control, top down, hierarchal, short tail) models are very similar to the negative effects of formal instruction on learners. Let's see if you can discover what those similar effects are.
If a model is closed to outside inputs, criticisms and contradictory perspectives, does that have the effect of increasing stability or the effect of inviting disaster?If a model is providing consistent information from a centralized source, does that have the effect of getting everyone on the same page or silencing the community of diverse contributors?
If a model is generating wealth for shareholders, does that have the effect of enhancing market reputation or increasing public resentment?If a model presumes to maintain control over "powerless pawns in the system", does that have the effect of structuring effective lines of communication and accountability, or the effect of eviscerating most people's curiosity, confidence, motivation and creativity.
For more about changing models see: