« Perplexed by Principles for Process Improvement | Main | Is the federal land debate over? Don't count on it »

August 03, 2006


Deming and Leopold: Opportunities Lost
Dave

I have been browsing through an early draft of "USFS Monitoring and Evaluation Team Report: Monitoring Framework for Land Management Planning" (July 2006). I have been trying to put my fingers on why it just doesn't seem right. I see two main problems or fundamental opportunities lost (so far!). I call them the Deming Opportunity and the Leopold Opportunity.

To explore the Deming Opportunity, organizations need to build cultures that seek continuous improvement (as an adventure and as fulfillment), cultures that routinely and enthusiastically monitor and evaluate what they do as individuals, as teams, as divisions, and so on. Such organizations somehow instill a passion for improvement.

Part of the magic of the Deming Method is that it allows each individual and team to build and "own" their measures. It also encourages and empowers each individual and team to share a bit across the boundaries—to ensure that they are indeed part of the organization, keeping organizational betterment in whole and in part as an integral part of their thoughts and actions.

See also: A Simpler Way (Monitoring and Evaluation Edition)

The Leopold Opportunity is much different, but related in many ways. Here we are talking about a new relationship with the land and with others who inhabit the land. To explore the Leopold Opportunity requires that each of us learn to live in nature, to get back to the garden as Joni Mitchell put it. Leopold stressed that we need to become part of a "land community" rather than treating Nature (or forest) as a factory.

When we view Nature as a "factory" or a "supermarket," we fall into or what Jack Turner calls "Economic Nature," (from The Abstract Wild). Following "economic nature," we tend to abstract things into "resources," work up metrics of "commensurability in translatable units," and then price out the units in terms of money. Leopold describes the problem this way, "We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect." In our Forest Service monitoring and measurement compulsion, we tend at least to fall into the "resources" and "commensurability" traps, sometimes we also fall into the money trap.

Leopold's idea of seeing "land as a community to which we belong," provides a springboard from which we can adapt our thoughts and action so that we are more prone to "begin to use it with love and respect." Note that Aldo Leopold is linked in philosophy to Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, John Muir, and more.

Charles Romesburg argues that we need more John Muir Naturalists in the world. Many more! Without them, there is little hope to maintain appropriate bonds to land and Nature that have nutured us. Don't miss the opportunities to keep tabs on Romesburg's wisdom (always available as a sidebar choice at Forest Policy—Practice).

For more on the Leopold Opportunity, see, for example:

  • Neil Everden –The Social Creation of Nature
  • Robert Pogue Harrison – Forests: The Shadow of Civilization
  • Max Oelschlaeger – The Idea of Wilderness: From Prehistory to the Age of Ecology
  • Simon Schama – Landscape and Memory

Posted by Dave on August 3, 2006 at 02:41 PM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b14c69e200d834a5369253ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Deming and Leopold: Opportunities Lost:

Comments

Posted by: Mike Dechter

The Deming opportunity sounds alot like an idealized version of EMS. Of course, one would have to fight pretty hard to be able to build and 'own' their measures as both ISO and the RO is looking at EMS for more standardization.

As for the he Leopold opportunity, that will require a sea change in the public as well as ourselves. Though our motto states that we manage the land, our job is more precisely described as managing the public. Also, ee didn't really fall into 'economic nature' as an agency but were born into as full-grown foresters like Athena from the head of Zeus. For better or worse, you can thank Pinchot for that.

Mike Dechter | Aug 4, 2006 4:06:55 PM


Posted by: Dave

Or is EMS a bastardized version of "Deming"? See, e.g. http://forestpolicy.typepad.com/ems/2005/10/deming_and_ems_.html and http://forestpolicy.typepad.com/ems/2005/10/ems_quality_imp.html

Dave | Aug 7, 2006 3:32:45 PM


The comments to this entry are closed.