 |
 |
This is a very interesting discussion thread on rhythm and organising. At the risk of clouding the issue, and - as a newcomer to AACORN - my apologies in advance if I do, I offer the following muse. As a metaphor I see rhythm as yet another powerful method of unpicking what might appear to be good (or bad) about this or that management and/or organisational performance; in order that certain performances might be better replicated. This would, I believe, follow Agyris's Model I concept of organisational management learning. Do we then look for managers who have "natural" rhythm when we lack a blue print for organisational action? This might, for example, be within complex and ambiguous situations. While we might teach dance routines or the techniques for playing a certain instrument, can we teach "performance with rhythm"? Here, I believe, we enter the realm of whether or not, or to what extent, can an organisational manager be deemed an artist and whether or not, or to what extent the organization itself might be considered a work of art? If management/organisation seen as an art-form is management/organisation with rhythm this might a freedom of expression that is to be welcomed/championed and celebrated in some circumstances and context but in others possibly to be seen as a threat to organization stability. For example, self-learning organisations implicitly suggest an inherent "rhythm generation capability" - what might this be? What we, as Western "organisers", would class as a rhythmic ideal would not easily match with our Eastern counterparts. To my mind, rhythm presents itself as yet another concept fascinating in its intricacy and a powerful metaphor but, at least on the face of it, offering perhaps little within itself to indicate any transcendent purpose. If that makes sense. Over to you all again! Cheers David -----Original Message----- From: Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Nicoline Jacoby Petersen Sent: 10 November 2006 13:16 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: call for help_rhythm and organizing I'm working on designing new conference formats, and some months ago I put RHYTHM to my list of design principles - so I find this discussion very interesting! I haven't explored the concept that much yet (thanks for the references!), but I found rhythm relevant for my work for several reasons: I've been looking into attention psychology, and it seems that the body runs in two hour cycles regarding attention: humans switch between being introvert attentive and extrovert attentive during a day (I don't know if these are the right words in English). So to me, rhythm (or: a good rhythm) can also be conceived in terms of accommodating bodily needs during a conference day, if that makes sense ;-) Next, I think that variation is a key to keeping attention, and again rhythm offers a good way of thinking along these lines (introducing A, repeating A, breaking the routine by introducing B, and repeating A again - which also breaks the routine, yet is familiar to the audience). Finally there is something about rhythm and timing/planning. In a conference setting, the perceived time is often very different from real time - time can fly by and time can stand still. It can be difficult to plan that all speeches for example should only last 30 minutes - since some speeches will be perceived as lasting 10 minutes and some as hours. So you want to make sure that the rhythm is in alignment with the perceived time - and how do you plan that?! Just a few thoughts - which of course doesn't answer David's interesting question about cultural differences in rythms... Haven't thought of that, but sure will do ;-) Cheers, Nicoline ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Nicoline Jacoby Petersen // PhD student www.dpu.dk/about/njp LEARNING LAB DENMARK The Danish University of Education Emdrupvej 101 2400 Copenhagen NV Denmark email: [log in to unmask] phone: (+45) 8888 9983 mobile: (+45) 606 505 44 ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// -----Original Message----- From: Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Weir Sent: 10. november 2006 10:14 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: call for help_rhythm and organizing -Hi guys; Here are some questions that bother me. For example, do different cultures have different rhythms? Do different organisation structures? Different occupational systems? How do we study this? If different musics embody different accounts of time!space, why is this? How are these rhythms transmitted? Are different cognitive structures involved? Why is Jimmy Giuffre's "Train and the River" about a train and a river? How is Takemitsu about "the thing we call Time"? Please answer within one hour as we are discussing this topic right now in class. Thanks to all. Rock On,Dudes! David ---- Start Original Message ----- Sent: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 09:18:58 +1300 From: "Bathurst, Ralph" <[log in to unmask]> To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: call for help_rhythm and organizing > Hi Enrico > > > > Yes we have spent time talking about this issue. Our critique of Albert > and Bell was fairly muted. Our reserve about their analysis was based > on the notion that musical rhythm is much more complex than A & B > indicated. The trouble is that it requires much more sophisticated > musical knowledge to tease out those complexities. > > > > It seems to me that to do this within the organisational studies > discipline is going to involve devising a language that retains > musicological integrity while at the same time is accessible to > non-musicians. > > > > For instance even defining rhythm is tricky. We could think of it at > the level of pulse (or beat) which is where A & B focus, or we could go > deeper and think of elements like harmonic rhythm which are more complex > but much more interesting. Our critique of A & B signalled this latter > notion of harmonic rhythm but this is where musical knowledge is > crucial. > > > > I am happy to engage in conversation about this with you and other > interested people if you want. > > > > Cheers > > > > Ralph (Bathurst) > > _____ > > From: Daved Barry [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > Sent: Friday, 10 November 2006 1:52 a.m. > To: 'enrico maria piras'; [log in to unmask] > Cc: Bathurst, Ralph; [log in to unmask] > Subject: RE: call for help_rhythm and organizing > > > > Ralph (Bathurst) and Lloyd (Williams)-didn't we talk about this at > Krakow? Seems to me there were some rhythm discussions there. Anyway, in > addition to the work that Ralph Kerle suggested, you should look at > Cadences at Waco: A critique of "Timing and Music" by Stuart Albert and > Geoffrey Bell (2002) Academy of Management Review, 27(4): 574-593. (as > well as the original Albert and Bell piece). They really started the > whole idea of rhythm and organization and are the only ones I know > who've gotten very far with the concept. Hope this helps! Daved > > > > _____ > > From: Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of enrico maria piras > Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 7:08 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: call for help_rhythm and organizing > > > > > > Dear Acorners, > > I'm right in the middle of writing a book section on an aesthetic > perspective on workgroup cohesion. > The key concept in my analysis will be "rhythm", which I will use to > explore how micropractices are built. So far in my literature review I > haven't found many references. I mean, many articles and authors use the > word "rhythm" but only on an evocative level and there seems to be not > much theory attached to this word. At the moment I'm referring to some > reflections on art and especially music. I'd like to find out how this > concept has been used in organizational theory. > I'm sure some of you has come across this concept or something similar > to it in your research. Could you help? > > best > Enrico > ----- End Original Message ----- Broker4Broker Sovereign House 51 High Street Wetherby LS22 6LR _____________________________________________________________________ Broker4Broker is a trading division of Aegis-Marc Ltd, registered in England No. 3721239 This e-mail is only for the addressee named above. This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and for the use of the person to whom this e-mail is addressed only. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender and delete it from your computer without reading, disseminating, copying or using it in any way. Please note that e-mail communication is not secure and Aegis-Marc Limited, its officers and/or employees, do not accept any responsibility for any changes made to this e-mail after it was sent. We are not aware of any software viruses in this e-mail or its attachments but we cannot guarantee that this communication is virus free. Aegis-Marc Ltd, its officers and/or employees, do not accept responsibility for any loss or damage caused by this e-mail containing software viruses.