I hadn’t thought of his material in that way until Dr. Kinston said something to me this week. (Thank goodness for Skype because the only house of his that’s easy to get to from here is the one in London.) Jim’s SFYH taps into the degeneration of Empiricist values in a great way.

If only more people read SFYH! It would make a good case study of how the Imaginist values solve the problems caused by Empiricist ones. And of course the Systemicist phase solves the degenerate values of the Imaginist phase. And Systemicist degenerates into known patterns, too, which require Pragmatical solutions.

I apologize for making assumptions about what you have and have not read! When will I ever learn about assumptions. Oy.

Anyway, once again, thank you for your interest and kind attention. It sounds like you’ve slugged through enough material to choke a horse. If I hadn’t written/said it all, I doubt if I could do the same.

Thanks again. Appreciate the dialogue and the thoughtful discourse.

Jim McCarthy

As far as results go, the work levels has produced “real world” results like a 50% increase in sales in a flat, recessionary market to overtake the market leader for the first time in industry history. I’m not sure if those are “results that are nothing short of phenomenal” but they are rather unusual and many people find them surprising.

I’m not averse to The Core but simply point out that this element creates problems where power relationships are not requisite at work. As you point out, many of your other points have been used in various workgroups for possibly thousands of years and well attested.

Regardless, if you’re doing software you can do worse than to take a look at McCarthy’s books. The Microsoft Press book is more readily available but less interesting. Software For Your Head is harder to get but really at a totally different level. (This is different from the earlier and non-related book by Warren Kinston, “Working with Values: Software of the Mind”)

I’ll stop by noting that Warren has read software for your head and remarked that he thought Jim “one of the good guys”.

Thank you very much for your interest and the kind words you wrote above.

Perhaps it would help you to benefit maximally from our current thinking if you knew that – apart from CheckIn, the one protocol that deals directly and explicitly with human emotions, and the one you cite – all the protocols and commitments evolved from use and creation accross dozens of teams over about a decade of evolution. There was nothing even remotely like an “encounter group” involved (a trm I haven’t heard in some time).

It might also help for you to know that you can ask some customers: there are thousands, in all types and sizes of companies and organizations. Let me know, jim@mccarthy.net, if I can help you further pursue your research.

It appears that you have not read our book, “Sotware for Your Head.” A great deal of information is available there for the curious. One section that might be especially useful for you contrasts therapy with efficient business practice w/r/t teams.

In any case, I appreciate your interest, and wish you well in your research. The one thing we do ask of people is that they suspend disbelief until they see the “results that are nothing short of phenomenal.” Our current work is an explicit attempt to make replicable anywhere, anytime those early results you seem to admire.

Thanks again,

Jim McCarthy
http://www.mccarthyshow.com
http://www.sentiences.com
jim@mccarthy.net