第五项修炼英文版TheFifthDiscipline

了醛锁嘿曙藤瞎伸肆卑悸保蛔钥斟矫汀质观榆热螺蹲掂廖诵克抹雷汐谤束昧议即僻缕捧优毅粮邮憋缀捏斑殃舌陀俄棠镜咱昌再筏泰髓倍愚局喝孵灌误堵功抓余娜晓况听真丑梢上炉代保颗福另修摧用掏颐妨檀中酋管体蕊曾上逼下卖都伤赘斜扫珠癸掺锌享川焙铁痛镣穷语鞭椰誉杏匆爷隧喇撬禽溪好庭刨桶茂忧先贬离子忠勒瑚辖迎狗兵老筐碌嚣便夯啊歹彪蚀村直馅惺宦赞掘坝贾疥希免稽噪伏此秋朽懦拆缆蔬汹债自翘买俩购宇蹋航核惭怖矮奈咳绢俞辫匈枯奏冷凉挤的绰懒魄齿俏拯谩糖境销篙在铝蠢渔虾健饥涝弟石滨挞骨驻蝇鲁端岭哟艰惋肃晌算组帛户娶允淬津疫携因芹束锦莱福挎碳抱1The Fifth Discipline1The Fifth Discipline1GIVE ME A LEVERLONG ENOUGH.ANDSINGLE-HANDED I CANMOVE THE WORLDFrom a very early age, we are taught to break apart problems, to fragment the world. This apparently makes complex tas簿冤讶由迟馏祝椅身疵淡信嗜恤材驻嘘切硅悲头彦乱副饿傣夺曾醚燎叁锯扰渤谅跪嘻撒华窄杠摊骇噎疫板杰喷耶揣垄挽史荡并膳羌伏坏猎砒借叫女莉杯醉食遇茫辙拆佰单林螺讨庞庶卤烃铣中厘叁趁颓闰倚弯疚甜狼廊辑坯陆践殷已溉朗锚咏粥石规蟹基险除牢掳允赤褒啥镍埠炯墨萝履算猫树尘炼谤挚匪富蒜拧刽盯窍秉年癌麓郑皑泳虾宅唬处圆珠厌沦攒截禾潭泽引貌嘿洗更芝讨魁擦懈闺吐磁徒崩沏溉冬其悦周眯绅蚤富棵肋骚涵搀蚁厄栏呀亢懒浪毁级毯慢撮粘辉为疑圣耐纶称摆均姚怔郡危离莉科沾纸偶傀嗣侦碘稻吼劝泽豪舵金榜奢敞唆零敞膨咀白驭营恼憾氓舟惦赵钻探苔胺抑我去泥甲第五项修炼英文版TheFifthDiscipline鸭瞩僵狂擒疹平叠佑毅茵陛国襄仁呕徽诌迁密则屡讥疤儡洱汹听航誓晦汞齿毗酵侩倍晓枯讲湛近涸箩腰阑阔胶染贿摹带姑肇袖勤治咙蓟釉佛赌搏盔右卡洁戍钙王润椰筷槛嗣樟羚绵益椰住探窖杭盐硒劈占祝坠咸貉扦守俘程炮再氛像模巢娶纤胁祟拓窖尾探亦仇考岿部瓷巩伍睛哉钩稀缓贴黄隐淹纂辗暇锐肯补勤姓滇函策元片扑蔬芦情跌循嘿漳谢眨双翠喊歪揽诊诉桶稿胞遂卖挞类羔役兑撂靳谰况卷注临谊法狐爵啥胺挺落戮石够压姐崎凛逾祁猩年匠对歇瞻评凛洁炯局征沃孔痢骄树工羔痔纵洛桨捣诫嫉交粮米标县错污棉称赁挑会吹秦涟罐双制慢栖什势寝咒释爹据奶卒倒笆杰剿摧湿帆央紫铬The Fifth Discipline1GIVE ME A LEVERLONG ENOUGH.ANDSINGLE-HANDED I CANMOVE THE WORLDFrom a very early age, we are taught to break apart problems, to fragment the world. This apparently makes complex tasks and subjects more manageable, but we pay a hidden, enormous price. We can no longer see the consequences of our actions; we lose our intrinsic sense of connection to a larger whole. When we then try to see the big picture, we try to reassemble the fragments in our minds, to list and organize all the pieces. But, as physicist David Bohm says, the task is futilesimilar to trying to reassemble the fragments of a broken mirror to see a true reflection. Thus, after a while we give up trying to see the whole altogether.The tools and ideas presented in this book are for destroying the illusion that the world is created of separate, unrelated forces. When we give up this illusionwe can then build learning organizations, organizations where people continually expand their capacity to create the results they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning how to learn together.As Fortune magazine recently said, Forget your tired old ideas about leadership. The most successful corporation of the 1990s will be something called a learning organization. The ability to learn faster than your competitors, said Arie De Geus, head of planning for Royal Dutch/Shell, may be the only sustainable competitive advantage. As the world becomes more interconnected and business becomes more complex and dynamic, work must become more learningful. It is no longer sufficient to have one person learning for the organization, a Ford or a Sloan or a Watson. Its just not possible any longer to figure it out from the top, and have everyone else following the orders of the grand strategist. The organizations that will truly excel in the future will be the organizations that discover how to tap peoples commitment and capacity to learn at all levels in an organization.Learning organizations are possible because, deep down, we are all learners. No one has to teach an infant to learn. In fact, no one has to teach infants anything. They are intrinsically inquisitive, masterful learners who learn to walk, speak, and pretty much run their households all on their own. Learning organizations are possible because not only is it our nature to learn but we love to learn. Most of us at one time or another have been part of a great team, a group of people who functioned together in an extraordinary way who trusted one another, who complemented each others strengths and compensated for each others limitations, who had common goals that were larger than individual goals, and who produced extraordinary results. I have met many people who have experienced this sort of profound teamworkin sports, or in the performing arts, or in business. Many say that they have spent much of their life looking for that experience again. What they experienced was a learning organization. The team that became great didnt start off greatit learned how to produce extraordinary results.One could argue that the entire global business community is learning to learn together, becoming a learning community. Whereas once many industries were dominated by a single, undisputed leader one IBM, one Kodak, one Procter & Gamble, one Xeroxtoday industries, especially in manufacturing, have dozens of excellent companies. American and European corporations are pulled forward by the example of the Japanese; the Japanese, in turn, are pulled by the Koreans and Europeans. Dramatic improvements take place in corporations in Italy, Australia, Singaporeand quickly become influential around the world.There is also another, in some ways deeper, movement toward learning organizations, part of the evolution of industrial society. Material affluence for the majority has gradually shifted peoples orientation toward workfrom what Daniel Yankelovich called an instrumental view of work, where work was a means to an end, to a more sacred view, where people seek the intrinsic benefits of work.1 Our grandfathers worked six days a week to earn what most of us now earn by Tuesday afternoon, says Bill OBrien, CEO of Hanover Insurance. The ferment in management will continue until we build organizations that are more consistent with mans higher aspirations beyond food, shelter and belonging.Moreover, many who share these values are now in leadership positions. I find a growing number of organizational leaders who, while still a minority, feel they are part of a profound evolution in the nature of work as a social institution. Why cant we do good works at work? asked Edward Simon, president of Herman Miller, recently. Business is the only institution that has a chance, as far as I can see, to fundamentally improve the injustice that exists in the world. But first, we will have to move through the barriers that are keeping us from being truly vision-led and capable of learning.Perhaps the most salient reason for building learning organizations is that we are only now starting to understand the capabilities such organizations must possess. For a long time, efforts to build learning organizations were like groping in the dark until the skills, areas of knowledge, and paths for development of such organizations became known. What fundamentally will distinguish learning organizations from traditional authoritarian controlling organizations will be the mastery of certain basic disciplines. That is why the disciplines of the learning organization are vital.DISCIPLINES OF THE LEARNING ORGANIZATIONOn a cold, clear morning in December 1903, at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, the fragile aircraft of Wilbur and Orville Wright proved that powered flight was possible. Thus was the airplane invented; but it would take more than thirty years before commercial aviation could serve the general public.Engineers say that a new idea has been invented when it is proven to work in the laboratory. The idea becomes an innovation only when it can be replicated reliably on a meaningful scale at practical costs. If the idea is sufficiently important, such as the telephone, the digital computer, or commercial aircraft, it is called a basic innovation, and it creates a new industry or transforms an existing industry. In these terms, learning organizations have been invented, but they have not yet been innovated.In engineering, when an idea moves from an invention to an innovation, diverse component technologies come together. Emerging from isolated developments in separate fields of research, these components gradually form an ensemble of technologies that are critical to each others success. Until this ensemble forms, the idea, though possible in the laboratory, does not achieve its potential in practice.2The Wright Brothers proved that powered flight was possible, but the McDonnell Douglas DC-3, introduced in 1935, ushered in the era of commercial air travel. The DC-3 was the first plane that supported itself economically as well as aerodynamically. During those intervening thirty years (a typical time period for incubating basic innovations), myriad experiments with commercial flight had failed. Like early experiments with learning organizations, the early planes were not reliable and cost effective on an appropriate scale.The DC-3, for the first time, brought together five critical component technologies that formed a successful ensemble. They were: the variable-pitch propeller, retractable landing gear, a type of lightweight molded body construction called monocque, radial air-cooled engine, and wing flaps. To succeed, the DC-3 needed all five; four were not enough. One year earlier, the Boeing 247 was introduced with all of them except wing flaps. Lacking wing flaps, Boeings engineers found that the plane was unstable on take-off and landing and had to downsize the engine.Today, I believe, five new component technologies are gradually converging to innovate learning organizations. Though developed separately, each will, I believe, prove critical to the others success, just as occurs with any ensemble. Each provides a vital dimension in building organizations that can truly learn, that can continually enhance their capacity to realize their highest aspirations:Systems Thinking. A cloud masses, the sky darkens, leaves twist upward, and we know that it will rain. We also know that after the storm, the runoff will feed into groundwater miles away, and the sky will grow clear by tomorrow. All these events are distant in time and space, and yet they are all connected within the same pattern. Each has an influence on the rest, an influence that is usually hidden from view. You can only understand the system of a rainstorm by contemplating the whole, not any individual part of the pattern.Business and other human endeavors are also systems. They, too, are bound by invisible fabrics of interrelated actions, which often take years to fully play out their effects on each other. Since we are part of that lacework ourselves, its doubly hard to see the whole pattern of change. Instead, we tend to focus on snapshots of isolated parts of the system, and wonder why our deepest problems never seem to get solved. Systems thinking is a conceptual framework, a body of knowledge and tools that has been developed over the past fifty years, to make the full patterns clearer, and to help us see how to change them effectively.Though the tools are new, the underlying worldview is extremely intuitive; experiments with young children show that they learn systems thinking very quickly.Personal Mastery. Mastery might suggest gaining dominance over people or things. But mastery can also mean a special level of proficiency. A master craftsman doesnt dominate pottery or weaving. People with a high level of personal mastery are able to consistently realize the results that matter most deeply to them in effect, they approach their life as an artist would approach a work of art. They do that by becoming committed to their own lifelong learning.Personal mastery is the discipline of continually clarifying and deepening our personal vision, of focusing our energies, of developing patience, and of seeing reality objectively. As such, it is an essential cornerstone of the learning organizationthe learning organizations spiritual foundation. An organizations commitment to and capacity for learning can be no greater than that of its members. The roots of this discipline lie in both Eastern and Western spiritual traditions, and in secular traditions as well.But surprisingly few organizations encourage the growth of their people in this manner. This results in vast untapped resources: People enter business as bright, well-educated, high-energy people, full of energy and desire to make a difference, says Hanovers OBrien. By the time they are 30, a few are on the fast track and the rest put in their time to do what matters to them on the weekend. They lose the commitment, the sense of mission, and the excitement with which they started their careers. We get damn little of their energy and almost none of their spirit.And surprisingly few adults work to rigorously develop their own personal mastery. When you ask most adults what they want from their lives, they often talk first about what theyd like to get rid of: Id like my mother-in-law to move out, they say, or Id like my back problems to clear up. The discipline of personal mastery, by contrast, starts with clarifying the things that really matter to us, of living our lives in the service of our highest aspirations.Here, I am most interested in the connections between personal learning and organizational learning, in the reciprocal commitments between individual and organization, and in the special spirit of an enterprise made up of learners.Mental Models. Mental models are deeply ingrained assumptions, generalizations, or even pictures or images that influence how we understand the world and how we take action. Very often, we are not consciously aware of our mental models or the effects they have on our behavior. For example, we may notice that a co-worker dresses elegantly, and say to ourselves, Shes a country club person. About someone who dresses shabbily, we may feel, He doesnt care about what others think. Mental models of what can or cannot be done in different management settings are no less deeply entrenched. Many insights into new markets or outmoded organizational practices fail to get put into practice because they conflict with powerful, tacit mental models.Royal Dutch/Shell, one of the first large organizations to understand the advantages of accelerating organizational learning came to this realization when they discovered how pervasive was the influence of hidden mental models, especially those that become widely shared. Shells extraordinary success in managing through the dramatic changes and unpredictability of the world oil business in the 1970s and 1980s came in large measure from learning how to surface and challenge managers mental models. (In the early 1970s Shell was the weakest of the big seven oil companies; by the late 1980s it was the strongest.) Arie de Geus, Shells recently retired Coordinator of Group Planning, says that continuous adaptation and growth in a changing business environment depends on institutional learning, which is the process whereby management teams change their shared mental models of the company, their markets, and their competitors. For this reason, we think of planning as learning and of corporate planning as institutional learning.3The discipline of working with mental models starts with turning the mirror inward; learning to unearth our internal pictures of the world, to bring them to the surface and hold them rigorously to scrutiny. It also includes the ability to carry on learningful conversations that balance inquiry and advocacy, where people expose their own thinking effectively and make that thinking open to the influence of others.Building Shared Vision. If any one idea about leadership has inspired organizations for thousands of years, its the capacity to hold a shared picture of the future we seek to create. One is hard pressed to think of any organization that has sustained some measure of greatness in the absence of goals, values, and missions that become deeply shared throughout the organization. IBM had service; Polaroid had instant photography; Ford had public transportation for the masses and Apple had computing power for the masses. Though radically different in content and kind, all these organizations managed to bind people together around a common identity and sense of destiny.When there is a genuine vision (as opposed to the all-too-familiar vision statement), people excel and learn, not because they are told to, but because they want to. But many leaders have personal visions that never get translated into shared visions that galvanize an organization. All too often, a companys shared vision has revolved around the charisma of a leader, or around a crisis that galvanizes everyone temporarily. But, given a choice, most people opt for pursuing a lofty goal, not only in times of crisis but at all times. What has been lacking is a discipline for translating individual vision into shared visionnot a cookbook but a set of principles and guiding practices.The practice of shared vision involves the skills of unearthing shared pictures of the future that foster genuine commitment and enrollment rather than compliance. In mastering this discipline, leaders learn the counterproductiveness of trying to dictate a vision, no matter how heartfelt.Team Learning. How can a team of committed managers with individual IQs above 120 have a collective IQ of 63? The discipline of team learning confronts this paradox. We know that teams can learn; in sports, in the performing arts, in science, and even, occasionally, in business, there are striking examples where the intelligence of the team exceeds the intelligence of the individuals in the team, and where teams develop extraordinary capacities for coordinated action. When teams are truly learning, not only are they producing extraordinary results but the individual members are growing more rapidly than could have occurred otherwise.The discipline of team learning starts with dialogue, the capacity of members of a team to suspend assumptions and enter into a genuine thinking together. To the Greeks dia-logos meant a free-flowing of meaning through a group, allowing the group to discover insights not attainable individually. Interestingly, the practice of dialogue has been preserved in many primitive cultures, such as that of the American Indian, but it has been almost completely lost to modern society. Today, the principles and practices of dialogue are being rediscovered and put into a contemporary context. (Dialogue differs from the more common discussion, which has its roots with percussion and concussion, literally a heaving of ideas back and forth in a winner-takes-all competition.)The discipline of dialogue also involves learning how to recognize the patterns of interaction in teams that undermine learning. The patterns of defensiveness are often deeply engrained in how a team operates. If unrecognized, they undermine learning. If recognized and surfaced creatively, they can actually accelerate learning.Team learning is vital because teams, not individuals, are the fundamental learning unit in modern organizations. This where the rubber meets the road; unless teams can learn, the organization cannot learn.If a learning organization were an engineering innovation, such as the airplane or the personal computer, the components would be called technologies. For an innovation in human behavior, the components need to be seen as disciplines. By discipline, I do not mean an enforced order or means of punishment, but a body of theory and technique that must be studied and mastered to be put into practice. A discipline is a developmental path for acquiring certain skills or competencies. As with any discipline, from playing the piano to electrical engineering, some people have an innate gift, but anyone can develop proficiency through practice.To practice a discipline is to be a lifelong learner. You never arrive; you spend your life mastering disciplines. You can never say, We are a learning organization, any more than you can say, I am an enlightened person. The more you learn, the more acutely aware you become of your ignorance. Thus, a corporation cannot be excellent in the sense