🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: bit.listserv.quality
Article #13538

Re: Consultants and BPR, TQM, ad nauseum

#13538
From: bushe
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 1994 11:40
98 lines
5553 bytes
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Denis,

Yes, transitions require ritual elders to hold "transformational space" for
others but one quality that is absolutely essential for the role is that
the shaman must have taken the journey/engaged in the transformation for
which they now hold the container. You cannot guide a "rite of passage" to
somewhere you have not been yourself.  This, I believe, is one big problem
with consultants who are selling something they have not been on the
receiving end prior to their consultancy.

Gervase Bushe

On Sun, 5 Jun 1994 13:36:19 EDT, Denis Cowan wrote:

>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>Charles Hi. I am not sure what your point is?
>
>My current bias,as a one person consultancy business, is that there is
>room and possibly a need for consultants who have no answers, but act as
>shamans during the time or rite of transition. They have no role either
>prior to or after the transition.
>
>Regards
>
>Denis
>
>On Sun, 5 Jun 1994, Charles Barclay wrote:
>
>> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>> I think this has sufficient insight for cross-posting on TQM-L,
>> QUALITY, and BPR.  Feel free to flame me privately if you disagree.
>> ++++++++
>>
>> Kai Simon asks if others have had similar experiences to 'sudden' BPR
>> experts arising from consultancy firms:
>>
>> Yes.  So what's your point?   Let me explain.
>>
>> Consultants get paid for bringing new information and new
>> perspectives to firms.  I should emphasize 'new'.  WOuld you go to a
>> consultant for the latest in 'old' information?
>>
>> So they're not experts?  So what, neither is anyone else in
>> application of a theoretical management model.  Hammer & Champy
>> aren't experts in implementation that's for sure, they are
>> theoreticians.  Neither was Deming in CQI.
>>
>> Anyone you find that really is an expert in such model application is
>> probably too old to be of much use.  They are also transient types
>> who have done it a bunch of times at different corporations--hired
>> guns.  Hired guns rarely are up on the latest jee whiz management
>> model.  They instead use what has worked for them in the past--and
>> they do it damn well!
>>
>> Perhaps I can illustrate this by quoting something from a text on
>> swordsmanship from 1643.
>>
>>     "In China & Japan, practioners of this science have been referred
>> to as masters of the martial arts.  Warriors should not fail to learn
>> this science.
>>     People who make a living as martial artists these days only deal
>> with swordsmanship.  The priests of the Kashima & Kantori shrines in
>> Hitachi province have established such schools, claiming their
>> teachings have been transmitted by the gods, and travel around
>> from province to province passing them on to people; this is only a
>> recent phenomenon. .....  [Marshall Thurber are you listening?]
>>     As I see society, people make the arts into commercial products;
>> they think of themselves as commodities, and also make implements as
>> items of commerce.  Distinguishing the superficial and the
>> substantial, I find this attitude has less reality than decoration.
>>     Martial arts is particulary rife with flamboyant showmanship,
>> with commercial popularization, and profiteering on the part of both
>> those who teach the subject and those who study it.  The result is,
>> as someone once said, 'amateuristic martial arts are the cause of
>> serious wounds'."
>>
>> I think, without too much of a stretch, you can apply this to
>> consultants of tqm, bpr, iso9000, cqi, ad nauseum.  It's only a
>> confusing if you don't know the Way.
>>
>> Charles Barclay                         2404 Maile Way
>> Dept. of MIR                            Honolulu, HI 96822
>> U. of Hawaii                            Fax:  808 956-2774
>>                                         Phone:  808 956-8545
>> E-mail:    barclay@busadm1.cba.hawaii.edu
>>
>> Bring Integrity, Valor, Loyalty, and Commitment back in Vogue: hire
>> Colin Powell in '96!
>>
------ Forwarded message ends here ------
Gervase Bushe Ph.D.
Faculty of Business Administration
Simon Fraser University
Vancouver, BC, CANADA, V5A 1S6

internet:bushe@sfu.ca
(604) 291-4104
Technical Details
Message-ID: <8517.bushe@popserver.sfu.ca_POPMail/PC_3.2.3_Beta_2>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!news.dell.com!paladin.american.edu!auvm!sfu.ca!bushe

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1159be,2ef1a44ebca0aad7,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid1159be,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-06-07 05:07:10 PST
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!news.dell.com!paladin.american.edu!auvm!sfu.ca!bushe
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.quality
Comments: ********************************************************
Comments: * The following "Approved" statement verifies header   *
Comments: * information for gateway passage.  No approval of the *
Comments: * content is implied.                                  *
Approved: NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU                              *
Comments: ********************************************************
X-POPmail-Charset: English
Approved-By: "James W. Reese" <R505040@UNIVSCVM.BITNET>
Message-ID: <8517.bushe@popserver.sfu.ca_POPMail/PC_3.2.3_Beta_2>
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 1994 07:40:09 EDT
Sender: TQM in Manufacturing and Service Industries Discussion List
              <QUALITY@PUCC.BITNET>
From: bushe@sfu.ca
Subject: Re: Consultants and BPR, TQM, ad nauseum
Lines: 97