In the delightful parable, Outlearning the Wolves, Hutchens introduces us to the issues organizations face when they realize “they must learn how to learn differently” (1998, p. 32). In the story, sheep are faced with the dilemma of understanding why wolves invade their flock and steal one of their members only at certain times. We learn that the flock’s struggle is complicated because the wrong question was asked; the sheep were resigned to the status quo; they were debilitated because “wolves had stolen sheep;” and they failed to learn from their environment. After one of the visionary sheep met his fate with the wolves, a small little lamb raised the pivotal question: “How come the wolves only come sometimes and not every night?” The flock was dumbfounded and could not answer her question. After thinking about her question in a different way, the lamb retorted: “We must learn. We must learn together. And, we must learn faster than the wolves. It isn’t enough just to change the way we do things. We must also broaden our vision and see the bigger picture. We need to learn how to learn differently” (Hutchens, 1998, p. 32). In very simple terms, these comments frame some of the truths about learning communities.

In the online article, Kappa Omicron Nu: Making A Learning Community (1999), Dorothy Mitstifer sets the stage for the movement of KON toward a learning community and provides the theoretical-practical base. The success of this transformation resides ultimately in the quality of the relationships each of us builds with each other, the humanness of individuals in community, and the power of our language to interpret experiences we have with each other. These three components of success can be organized around relationships, the basic building blocks of the universe, the very fabric of groups, the information and communications networks of organizations, and the key to taking charge of change. The quality of our relationships determines the potential for the synergy needed to be creative, to encourage “out of the box” thinking, and to remain responsive to the challenges all of us face. The old ways of relating to people as “collections of replaceable parts capable of being reengineered” (Wheatley, 1997, p. 21) are not working. Environments that enable positive correlations between participation and productivity must be created!

What kinds of relationships support the development of KON as a learning community? Positive, power-with relationships flourish in organizations where people are valued for their contributions. In these types of relationships, people organize themselves into horizontal, flexible networks around work to be accomplished. They develop personal, interpersonal, and organizational energy; they create new ways of working collaboratively including building webs of inclusion; and they create channels of innovative communication. Individuals have a strong sense of connection and belonging, and they take initiative and make changes. In these types of relationships, individuals develop a shared understanding of what’s important, what’s acceptable, what actions are required to accomplish the organizational goals, and how these actions will be accomplished (Wheatley, 1997).

Today, more and more individuals and groups are discovering that the capacity to act together is inseparable from the ability to think and reflect together. Wheatley (1997, p. 22) summarizes this concept as follows: “People organize together to accomplish more, not less. Behind every organizing impulse is a realization that by joining with others we can accomplish something important that we cannot accomplish alone. Organizations that have learned how to think together and that know themselves are filled with action” (Wheatley, 1997, p. 25).

Individuals make conscious decisions to commit to relationships and they seek a connectedness of spirit that leads to the formation of true community with others. In Paradigm Conspiracy (1996, p. 31), Breton and Largent note: “ . . . when our inner aliveness is allowed to resonate with the aliveness in others . . . we create communities founded on reverence for life, soul, freedom, individuality,” trust, respect, and shared goals.

Let’s return to the flock of sheep. This time we find the sheep standing near a fence that crosses a stream. On the bottom of the fence, they make a discovery—a tuft of wool belonging to a wolf. One of them squealed, “I’ve got it! The wolves aren’t going over the fence. They are going under it.” Another shouted, “That makes sense. When there is a drought, there is no water under the fence. That’s when the wolves crawl under. After it rains, there’s too much water, and the wolves cannot go under.” The problem still was not solved. They were asking the wrong question again. One of the lambs spoke up: “It is true we cannot control the weather, but we can control the flow of the water” (Hutchens, 1998, p. 42). She began to dig a hole with her hooves and the other sheep joined. Jerome began pushing rocks around with his nose and soon they had completed a small dam that caused a pond to encircle the fence crossing. The wolves stopped coming and the sheep stopped disappearing.

Are you ready to “learn how to learn differently?”—to learn together, to broaden our vision of Kappa Omicron Nu in the next century, and to see the big picture?

References

Wheatley, M. (1997, Summer). Goodbye, command and control. Leader to Leader, 5, 21-28.