Can you be free to think when you subsume another's thoughts? When the structures of that thought literally belongs to someone else? When the model excludes all others?
That's my problem with the Carver Model, which has taken the Unitarian Universalist ecosphere by storm. I choke every time I come to one of its registered trademarks or the glowing tales of its utility. It's the same choke I feel ever time I run across a GTD, Franklin-Covey or Amway true believer. Don't try to tell them there's another way, either.
At the very least, I think there should be clarity about where and when it should work, and when and where it would work less well. Unitarian Universalists have a terrible collective habit of getting on a bandwagon 10 or 15 years after business does, adopting it to the exclusion of other models, and riding a trend long past when industry or other religious institutions have moved on. Take church growth and planting for instance. So I feel it's valid to point this out here.
"Die Gedanken sind frei" indeed. How might free innovation apply to board leadership?