Organization change story

Success stories demonstrate that positive change can be made within an organization. These stories provide a basis for dialogue with all personnel in an organization and facilitate education and training efforts. Metrics help document systems improvement trends and provide data to reinforce desired behaviors. 

This situation changed dramatically in 1996 with the discovery of strong electro-optic (EO) activity in smectics composed of bent-core, bowshaped, or banana-shaped achiral molecules.4 Since then, the banana-phases exhibited by such compounds have been shown to possess a rich supermolecular stereochemistry, with examples of both macroscopic racemates and conglomerates represented. Indeed, the chiral banana phases formed from achiral or racemic compounds represent the first known bulk fluid conglomerates, identified 150 years after the discovery of their organic crystalline counterparts by Pasteur. A brief introduction to LCs as supermolecular self-assemblies, and in particular SmC ferroelectric and SmCA antiferroelectric LCs, followed by a snapshot of the rapidly evolving banana-phase stereochemistry story, is presented here. 

Almost any organization of any size is filled with its own tales of theory X and theory Y. The next section considers one true story in which an employee s behavior transformed dramatically with a change in management. 

The quotations give the flavor of the fuzzy word-pictures typical of evolutionary biology. The lack of quantitative details—a calculation or informed estimation based on a proposed intermediate structure of how much any particular change would have improved the active swimming ability of the organism—makes such a story utterly useless for understanding how a cilium truly might have evolved. 

One might also worry about the ontological nature of the dependence. To recapitulate, x is ontologically dependent on y, if it depends on it for its existence, i. e. it could not exist in the absence of y. So (IR1) holds that the structure of the world could not exist without the mind. But physics does not tell us anything like that. Indeed, what physics describes is a completely mindless world, in the sense that the theories of basic physics do not imply that there must be certain physical structures which can be identified with minds. In fact, the best theories we have suggest that in the history of the universe there was a period in which no physical structures existed which could support minds. The universe was just too hot for a while, so there were no stable and sufficiently well-organized structures which could have mentality. Of course, if you describe the complete physical story of the universe, you have, in a way, also described minds, since all facts about mentality supervene on physical facts. But this does not change the fact that in physics there is no special provision for minds. 

Success stories of the implementation of P2 in industries pave the way for more organizations to try P2 options and undertake changes and demonstrate environmental commitment and responsible stewardship. 

---