Linking control and fear is no new insight. I don't promise that. What I would like to point out is that hierachies not only operate through fear, needing it for control, but they also seek out social orders wherein fear can be sustainable. That is, one must worry about boundary crossing and its risks continuously just to survive.
I live on an island now. In island cultures large and small, social order must be fairly rigid because anonymity is very hard to realize. That is, borders of a certain sort are essentially a given. But what then do we do with globalization especially through the Internet? We melt of course.
But how can a physical border as definitive as those of an island melt? Through internal segmentation first, and ultimately through loss of common identity and purpose as an island. One sees this to some degree in all islands--Britain for instance. Japan perhaps less so, but it is emerging as globalization rises. Do smaller islands melt slower? Unclear.
Learning forces us to engage across boundaries. Blur results and identities must become patchwork.
Jon Husband has been writing about Management 1.0 and Management 2.0 at his wonderful blog called Wirearchy. I highly recommend it. Not sure how it relates, but I think there is a tipping point rather than a constant tension between Management 1.0 and Management 2.0. That tension plays out in crises. Crisis and structure is an essential topic I hope to explore further soon.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
This reminds me of Friedman's views in "The World is Flat". I'd like to add that the world is only flat in places - there are still some very isolated places on earth.
Post a Comment