I was trying to explain something to a colleague the other day about the ins and outs of the way teachers are ranked in their schools in this Far Place when it struck me that at one time I would have found what I was saying interesting, yet, at the moment of telling I found it all tedious and, in truth, was only outlining what I knew out of a sense of duty. How different I am now from my younger self who in the early years of his career was genuinely curious about the organisations and systems he found himself in - and others beyond - and how they operated. I suppose it was all part of a natural curiosity about human behaviour mixed in with a healthy desire to make sure I knew enough to maintain some sort of career and perhaps help improve the circumstances of myself and those with whom I worked.
What led to the change? After all, I still have to work in an organisation and I think I've maintained a reasonable sense of curiosity. But basically I think that over time I learned everything I could learn and just found myself encountering the same lessons.
Now I know this sounds like the most awful hubris but I also suspect that I learned everything there was and is to learn. People are interesting but organisations aren't because they end up behaving like organisations, if you see what I mean. A sort of odd leveling takes place to produce organisational man (and woman, I hasten to add.) No matter how healthily crazy those working for the organisation are, the organisation goes on being, well, organisational (though not necessarily, in fact rarely, organised.)
Wednesday, May 20, 2015
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment