<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Tom Graves / Tetradian &#187; organization</title>
	<atom:link href="http://weblog.tetradian.com/tag/organization/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://weblog.tetradian.com</link>
	<description>Random ramblings over the metaphoric edge</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 16:57:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Enterprise and organisation as ends and means</title>
		<link>http://weblog.tetradian.com/2011/12/05/enterprise-and-organisation-as-ends-and-means/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=enterprise-and-organisation-as-ends-and-means</link>
		<comments>http://weblog.tetradian.com/2011/12/05/enterprise-and-organisation-as-ends-and-means/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2011 07:00:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom G</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Enterprise architecture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business architecture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enterprise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organisation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxonomy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://weblog.tetradian.com/?p=4384</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ends and means are not the same: everyone knows it&#8217;s not a good idea to mix them up. The same is true of &#8216;enterprise&#8217; and &#8216;organisation&#8217;. The enterprise represents the ends of what we do; the organisation is part of the means. It&#8217;s really important not to mix them up. [Apologies, but this is another one where [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ends and means are not the same: everyone knows it&#8217;s not a good idea to mix them up.</p>
<p>The same is true of &#8216;enterprise&#8217; and &#8216;organisation&#8217;. The enterprise represents the ends of what we do; the organisation is part of the means. It&#8217;s <em>really</em> important not to mix them up.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">[Apologies, but this is another one where the words we use are really important: if we don't have the right words, we can't describe the concept we need. I'll use English here, where those two words 'enterprise' and 'organisation' <em>can</em> draw these distinctions: but in other languages we may have to use other words entirely to convey those same meanings. Let me know what you'd use in your language, perhaps? - thanks.]</p>
<p>The enterprise is the &#8216;why&#8217; of what we do; the organisation is part of the &#8216;how&#8217;. Don&#8217;t mix them up!</p>
<p>The enterprise is about emotion, &#8216;the animal spirits of the entrepreneur&#8217;; often the whole point of the organisation is that it <em>doesn&#8217;t</em> express emotion. Don&#8217;t mix them up!</p>
<p>The enterprise is inherently about something uncertain; the organisation is all about making things certain. Don&#8217;t mix them up!</p>
<p>If we mix them up, we confuse ends with means; the &#8216;how&#8217; becomes its own &#8216;why&#8217;, the pre-packaged &#8216;solution&#8217; itself becomes the supposed requirement. <em>Not</em> a good idea&#8230;</p>
<p>If we mix them up, we apply emotion to things about which we need to be dispassionate &#8211; oh the joys of office-politics&#8230; &#8211; and fail to use emotion and drive to get things moving again in the direction that we need.</p>
<p>If we mix them up, we confuse ourselves about what is certain, and what is not; we confuse activity with direction; we confuse mere repetition with purpose.</p>
<p>If we mix them up, we end up with an organisation that has no enterprise, whose only real belief is a narcissistic obsession with itself, vapid, emotionless, devoid of meaning, purpose or reason. &#8220;An empty thunder, signifying nothing&#8221;: how well does that fit your own organisation right now?</p>
<p>If you want your organisation to have enterprise &#8211; an end or purpose that <em>means</em> something to everyone in the organisation &#8211; then you&#8217;ll realise just how important it is to maintain a clear distinction between &#8216;enterprise&#8217; and &#8216;organisation&#8217;.</p>
<p>The organisation is not the enterprise; the enterprise is not the organisation.</p>
<p>They&#8217;re not the same: don&#8217;t mix them up!</p>
<p>[<em style="font-weight: bold;">Update</em> 05dec11: In a <a title="Comment by Stuart Boardman on this post" href="http://weblog.tetradian.com/2011/12/05/enterprise-and-organisation-as-ends-and-means/#comment-73749" target="_blank">comment</a> below, <a title="Stuart Boardman ((@ArtBourbon) on Twitter" href="http://twitter.com/ArtBourbon" target="_blank">Stuart Boardman</a> reminds me (thanks Stuart!) that some people here may not be familiar with the way I use the word 'enterprise'. There are several standard dictionary-meanings, but the one that's most useful here is from the early days of economics: 'the animal spirits of the entrepreneur' - the sense that aligns with the usual meaning of 'to be enterprising'.</p>
<p>For more details, perhaps take a look at the brief slidedeck '<a title="Slidedeck 'What is an enterprise?' on Slideshare" href="http://www.slideshare.net/tetradian/what-is-an-enterprise" target="_blank">What is an enterprise</a>', up on <a title="Slidedecks from Tetradian on Slideshare" href="http://www.slideshare.net/tetradian" target="_blank">Slideshare</a>.</p>
<p>The content of slide 5 from <a title="Slidedeck 'Enterprise Architecture beyond IT' (from AE-Rio conference, April 2011), on Slideshare" href="http://www.slideshare.net/tetradian/enterprisearchitecture-beyond-it-aerio-2011" target="_blank">this slidedeck</a> there may also be useful for this:</p>
<p><a href="http://weblog.tetradian.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/org-vs-enterprise.png"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-4392" title="org-vs-enterprise" src="http://weblog.tetradian.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/org-vs-enterprise.png" alt="" width="378" height="275" /></a></p>
<p>Hope this helps, anyway.]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://weblog.tetradian.com/2011/12/05/enterprise-and-organisation-as-ends-and-means/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The organization of the Organization</title>
		<link>http://weblog.tetradian.com/2010/02/20/the-organization-of-the-organization/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-organization-of-the-organization</link>
		<comments>http://weblog.tetradian.com/2010/02/20/the-organization-of-the-organization/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 16:56:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom G</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scribbles / writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[English]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[language]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organisation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://weblog.tomgraves.org/?p=626</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Had an interesting question come in today from one of my Dutch colleagues, Bas van Gils: I have to write a document and I&#8217;m kinda stuck. Time to ask for some help I&#8217;d say The issue with the document is that I want to make a distinction between &#8216;the organization as in: &#8220;the way in which [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Had an interesting question come in today from one of my Dutch colleagues, <strong><a title="Bas van Gils on Twitter" href="http://twitter.com/basvg" target="_blank">Bas van Gils</a></strong>:</p>
<blockquote><p>I have to write a document and I&#8217;m kinda stuck. Time to ask for some help I&#8217;d say  <img src='http://weblog.tetradian.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>The issue with the document is that I want to make a distinction between &#8216;the organization as in: &#8220;the way in which some system / department / enterprise is organized&#8221; and &#8220;the organization as in: the legal entity&#8221;. I&#8217;ve had this issue before and I can&#8217;t figure out how to deal with this properly in documents. It just feels awkward to say Organization (with capital) for meaning one and organization (without) for meaning two&#8230;</p>
<p>Any thoughts?</p></blockquote>
<p>This is a real doozy of a problem that really shows up the limitations of English as a language. It&#8217;s  hard enough for native English speakers to resolve, let alone those who only use English as a business-language&#8230;</p>
<p>I ain&#8217;t no linguistics specialist, but as I see it, the respective contexts for the two meanings are as follows:</p>
<ul>
<li>Meaning 1 (&#8216;the way something is organized&#8217;): a nounal expression of the verb &#8216;to organize&#8217;, moving from the present-participle (&#8216;organizing&#8217;) to the adjectival past-participle (&#8216;organized&#8217;) to the verb-as-condition (&#8216;organization&#8217;) [there'll be a proper linguistic term for this nounal form, but I haven't a clue what it is <img src='http://weblog.tetradian.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' />  ]</li>
<li>Meaning 2 (&#8216;the legal entity&#8217;): a label for an abstract entity that is structured (&#8216;organized&#8217;) in some defined way</li>
</ul>
<p>To me, Meaning 1 is still more related to the verb, a temporary condition of something dynamic (&#8220;the act of organizing&#8221;), whereas Meaning 2 is definitely a noun, something static. In Meaning 1, the structure could change &#8211; the outcome of a &#8216;reorganization&#8217; &#8211; and it would still be &#8216;organization&#8217;; whereas Meaning 2 is defined and delimited by its legal boundaries, so if those were to change, the previous &#8216;the organization&#8217; would cease to exist.</p>
<p>[A quick check at <a title="AudioEnglish.net: definition of 'organization'" href="http://www.audioenglish.net/dictionary/organization.htm" target="_blank">AudioEnglish.net</a> throws up a total of seven meanings: Bas's 'Meaning 1' is somewhere between their 1 ("a group of people who work together") and 2 ("an organized structure for arranging or classifying"), whereas Bas's 'Meaning 2' is probably closest to their 3 ("the persons or committees or departments etc who make up a body for the purpose of administering something"). The built-in thesaurus in MS Word isn't much help, either. Overall, it's all too obvious that English is a confusing mess. <img src='http://weblog.tetradian.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':-(' class='wp-smiley' />  ]</p>
<p>I would probably try to juggle the phrasing so that I can avoid having to put the two meanings together in the same sentence, but I can see plenty of circumstances in which there&#8217;s no way to get round it.</p>
<p>If I <em>did</em> have to use both meanings in the same sentence, without any other option, I might well use Bas&#8217;s capitalisation kludge, though I would capitalise Meaning 2 rather than Meaning 1: &#8220;the organization of the Organization&#8221;. But as Bas says, it&#8217;s awkward and ugly: and whilst, to a native English speaker, the alternative uncapitalised &#8220;the organization of the organization&#8221; would probably be clear enough, it might not make sense to native speakers of other languages.</p>
<p>But as Bas again indicates, it gets messy when we try to distinguish the two meanings once we&#8217;ve bundled them together. And going back to the present-participle &#8211; &#8220;the organizing of the organisation&#8221; &#8211; is probably uglier still, although technically correct in English.</p>
<p>So the short answer is that I don&#8217;t see any easy way round this one. Sorry&#8230; <img src='http://weblog.tetradian.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':-(' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Anyone else have any better suggestions?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://weblog.tetradian.com/2010/02/20/the-organization-of-the-organization/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

