Those who are slow to know suppose
That slowness is the essence of knowledge.
Learning can leave you more stupid, and in many cases such deteriorations are even desired: Organizations are (knowledge-)ecological systems, which show different numbers of pathologies. One person's gain can be another person's loss – other losses on the other hand are reciprocal.
Usually, organizational pathologies exist in spite of better knowledge; only very few organizational problems will have been constructed arbitrarily.
One of the easiest solution approaches aims at simply re-interpreting them – Luhmann calls this modern exorcism: »The [consultant ...] advises [...]: Your problem is severe, keep it; it is important for you, it is essential and dear to you (to such an extent that you even agree to paying the one who tells you this)«.[1] Thus, needs become virtues.
Other solution attempts, however, shift the focus by creating completely new centres of problem: after all, suppression can also be interpreted as a solution.[2]
Organizations are based on knowledge and are subject to a central set of regularity: incomplete knowledge of their members on the one hand and knowledge asymmetries between them on the other.[3] Moreover, any knowledge already available might in itself be defective, and thus also the organizational aspects based on this knowledge.
Those who are looking for sustained solutions here, have to face the basic problem of the quality of knowledge.[4]
Apart from this highly difficult question, this basic research also bears the danger of stepping on »forbidden« ground. As it is expressed in a Chinese saying, you have to swim against the current in order to reach the spring;[5] to say nothing of the regularly appearing resistance to change.[6]
A sustained, effective solution requires the basic problem to be de-tabooed. Dealing with it does not necessarily lead to conflicts.
Here, the knowledge-fractal analysis offers a culturally, politically and ideologically neutral as well as adaptive procedure. In addition to new pragmatic approaches for the management context, it also holds the opportunity to evaluate[7] and shape situative determinants.
The quality of knowledge and thus organizational quality becomes pragmatically measurable and therefore purposefully improvable by the discovery of the phenomenon of Passive (i.e. Qualitative) Disinformation.
This opens up new approaches for a (more) intelligent, more successful organization of organizations.