Many organizations now aspire [or claim] to be “learning organizations.” What is a learning organization? Definitions vary but essentially it means a community of committed people pursuing a worthy vision.
Learning organizations [hypothetically] exhibit the following characteristics:
§ Non-hierarchical
§ Decentralized
§ Dedicated to the well-being and growth of employees as well as to success (Senge, 1990, p.15)
What is not commonly discussed in organizational mission statements is the role of leaders in creating the learning organization. In his book “The Fifth Discipline, The Art & Practice of The Learning Organization” Senge says that the leader’s new work involves designing, stewardship, and teaching (Chapter 18).
As designer the leader of the learning organization ‘arranges the learning processes that enable employees to deal effectively with critical issues and to enable them to develop their mastery of the learning disciplines’ (p.345)
As steward the leader acts as a midwife birthing an organization that is “more consistent with human nature” (p.351).
As teacher the leader is committed to the truth, to seeing current reality through the lens of systems thinking (pp. 356-7).
“Learning” is deemed vital to organizational survival in a hyper- competitive global “market.” The myth of Prometheus and the Sacred Fire furnishes an excellent template of a learning organization leader.
THE TEMPLE
The Great War between the Olympian gods and the Titans, who had rebelled against their rule, was over. The earth—formerly devastated by the war-- was green and fresh and lovely, but bereft of a new race of beings of higher intelligence fitted to worship and serve the gods in a manner pleasing to their greatness.
The brothers, Prometheus and Epimetheus, whose names mean “forethought” and “afterthought” respectively, were chosen to complete the creation. “We will make the new beings in the likeness of the gods themselves. They shall not bend their face to the earth, but shall stand erect and turn their eyes heavenward.” Prometheus shaped the clay into a figure in the likeness of the gods. Eros imbued it with life and Athena imparted to it wisdom.
Prometheus looked proudly upon his creation and longed to give it more and greater gifts, to light up the mind within it that might glow with a noble ardor; to make it lord of the lower creation; to enable the new race to attain to greater heights of wisdom and knowledge and power. He thought long of what he could do to bring these things to pass.
At last a great and terrible idea came into his mind. “In the dwelling of the gods,” he thought, “is the divine fire which helps to make them all-powerful; it is by means of this fire that the thunderbolts of Zeus are forged. On the earth no fire exists. If I could obtain some and bestow it upon humanity all that I desire might be accomplished. But Zeus would never consent to give them a portion of the sacred fire. I must not dream that such a thing could be.”
Yet, Prometheus could not drive the idea from his mind. By day and by night he brooded over it, debating how the fire could be obtained. “Could I steal it from the abode of the gods?” The very thought brought terror. Swift and merciless would be the vengeance of Zeus upon such a thief. More fearful would be his agonies than those inflicted upon the rebellious Titans.
Yet, the fire, once given to man, even Zeus could not take it back. “If I do this thing, humanity will go on from achievement to achievement and from glory to glory.” Prometheus thought, “if I do this, will it matter that I suffer the worst torment the angry Zeus could inflict? Will I not find comfort in the knowledge that I have created a god-like race?”
Finally, the thought of humanity inspired and ennobled by the divine fire quenched the reality of his own inevitable punishment. On a night heavy with clouds he stealthily ascended the holy mountain and lit the reed he carried with the divine fire. He had counted the cost and was prepared to pay it. His only burning desire was to spread the fire throughout the whole world, to kindle the hopes and aspirations in humanity and to set them on the road to attaining them.
So he began, and labored without ceasing. He revealed to humankind the divine fire and showed them how it would help them in their labors; how it would melt metals and fashion tools; how it would cook food and make life bearable in the bronze days of winter; how it would give light in darkness so that humankind might labour and travel in the night-time as well as by day. He taught them how to dig the fields and grow corn and herbs; how to build houses and cover their roofs with thatch; how to tame the beasts of the forests and make them serve them.
The sacred flame did also a greater work than all these. It gave inspiration and enthusiasm, and urged humanity on to achieve increasingly higher and greater things. They seized on each art that the teacher introduced to them with ardor and energy. No difficulties daunted them and no toil depressed their eager spirits. The whole earth thrilled with their activities, and in their midst moved Prometheus, teaching, guiding, opening out before humanity’s delighted eyes fresh fields for effort and attainment.
There came a day when the points of light scattered over the surface of the earth. Zeus thundered, “Who is it that has stolen the fire from heaven?” “It is I” answered Prometheus calmly. “Why did you do this thing?” “Because I loved humankind! I longed to give them some gift that would raise them above the brute creation and bring them nearer the gods. Not all your power, Ruler of heaven and earth, can put out these fires.”
As Zeus listened to these words his rage turned to hatred of the being who dared defy his power. Zeus summoned his son Hephaestus, the god of the forge, and ordered him, “make a chain that nothing can break, and chain him to a cliff. I will send an eagle who each day shall devour his liver, causing him horrible torments day and night; each day it shall devour his liver; and each night it shall grow again, so that in the morning his suffering may be renewed.”
Prometheus replied, “So be it, O tyrant. Because you are strong, you are merciless. My theft has done you no harm; there is still fire to spare on Olympus. In your selfishness you will not share a privilege though it would advance the whole race of mankind. It may not be for long that you will sit in the high seat of the gods!”
The Academy—Application and Integration
Let’s highlight the principle elements of leadership in the learning organization as they pertain to Prometheus.
Prometheus as designer, steward, and teacher
§ Loved and respected human beings
§ Enabled and ennobled his creation
§ Conferred dignity upon his creation
§ Equipped human beings to control their destiny
§ Self-reflected
§ Challenged the Olympian status quo
§ Questioned the value of existing goals
§ Risked everything for those he led
§ Demonstrated an inter-connection between gods and humans
§ Decried injustice.
Personal Transformation as Ideology Critique
Prometheus loved humankind in the sense that he was thoroughly committed to their completion (Senge, 1990, p.285), to humanity’s becoming all that it could be. However, Prometheus would not have been instrumental in the transformation of humankind if he himself had not undergone personal transformation. What does his personal transformation mean in this context?
Prometheus undertook an ideology critique. Brookfield (2000) defines ideology as “sets of beliefs, values, myths, explanations, and justifications that appear self-evidently true and morally desirable”(p.129). Prometheus completed a power analysis in terms of understanding the reaction of the Olympian gods to his special project (i.e., entrusting humankind with the divine fire). He understood that ideology was deeply embedded in the Olympian psyche and how it pervaded their emotional responses (Brookfield, 2000, p.130).
Prometheus understood how the gods thought and felt about their relationship with humankind. The gods held positions of power and privilege; humans were their subordinates. For Zeus humanity’s servitude was self-evidently true and morally desirable (Brookfield, p.129, cited in Mezirow, 2000). He held that humankind was already adequately equipped to serve the gods apart from the divine gift of fire.
Zeus perceived the issue of power sharing much differently. For him, the bequest of fire was a threat to his status and power. He did not desire humanity to “go on from achievement to achievement and from glory to glory.”
The Academy—Center for Dialogue
1. How did Prometheus’ conception of the “learning organization” conflict with dominant power relations?
2. To what extent did his transformative leadership style involved him in an ideology critique and power analysis (i.e., examination of beliefs, values, myths, and explanations that appear self-evidently true and morally desirable)?
3. How did he demonstrate a desire to serve the world?
4. How did he arrange the enabling conditions for people to lead the most enriching lives they could?
5. How did his intervention differ from that of Epimetheus? How might Epimetheus’ approach to humankind be considered accommodative rather than transformative?
6. “Empowerment” has become a cliché. Many training and education programs deployed under the banner of “empowerment” in reality foster accommodation to and dependence upon the sponsoring institution. Was that the case with Prometheus? How would you evaluate his “empowerment”? What did it cost him? How did it affect humankind? To what extent did his intervention encourage a questioning of his program?
7. How did the “transformation” serve the interests of freedom (i.e., how were power and authority returned to the individual and the community, specifically?). How does the myth speak to your experience of transformation?
8. How can it be said that Prometheus fundamentally altered humankind’s relationship to “public authority” (i.e., the gods of Olympus)?
9. To what extent did personal and social transformation result in individuation for humankind (i.e. his development as a person separate from the collective and the joining with others in authentic relationship)?
10.Contrast the leadership styles Prometheus and Zeus. Which style, “ruling over” or “raising up” proved more beneficial from your standpoint? Which style was more conducive to the “learning organization”? Why?