December 7, 2001 ÷ I am, to my surprise, at an intimate Tom Peters seminar in Vermont along with 40 interesting, diverse people who are having a blast talking with one another and providing a happy audience for two days of Petersâ PowerPoint marathon. Peters is remarkable. His book, In Search of Excellence: Lessons from Americaâs Best-Run Companies, said in 1982 things that now seem obvious but at the time desperately needed to be said: customers count, employees aren't mere resources to be exploited, passion is a requirement for excellence.

Peters said these things to businesspeople who had been indoctrinated into a cult of command and control that had a single tool in its kit: a ruthless, knife-edged efficiency. All else was, in this view, a self-indulgent waste of time fit only for slackers and girly men. Peters' fact-based insistence that embracing the human is indeed the way to bottom-line success has had a continuing liberating effect on business worldwide. Very cool.

In the almost twenty years since In Search of Excellence first hit the bestseller lists, Peters has stayed admirably open to change, rather than merely repeating his successful first act. He is a humanist in the broad sense, but is also a technology and Web enthusiast who believes that -- dotcoms be damned -- we have only just begun to see the effect of the Web.

But Peters' belief in the power of enthusiasm leads him to what can sound like a type of rugged individualism. For example, he said on Wednesday morning, "If you don't have beliefs you're willing to be fired for, you're in the wrong job." Who wouldn't applaud this feistiness? Yet the comment engendered much conversation among the attendees. Is this passion in fact a form of fundamentalism? Does it mean that you can't bend enough in order to be a "team player"? Imagine a meeting full of people repeating beliefs they are willing to be fired for. Sounds like a formula for deadlock, chest-thumping and warfare.

In fact, I think the Web opens up a possibility for Peters' passionate individuals to work well together. There's always been a contradiction of an Hegelian sort between the value of individuals with strong beliefs and the need to be flexible enough to subordinate one's beliefs for the sake of the team. Passion versus teamwork. Commitment versus compromise. Individualism versus collaboration.

This tension is overcome in a suitably Hegelian way by the Web's transformation of teams. In a typical hierarchical structure, teams are organized from the top down. Members are chosen not only for their personal qualities but because various groups need representation. In a Web world, teams are self- organizing. People form a "hyperlinked team" by pulling together the people they respect and like to work with, despite what the org chart demands.

This helps resolve the contradiction in in two ways. First, hyperlinked teams form among like-minded people - for better or worse. Thus, the strong beliefs of individuals are likely to be shared. Second, groups form among people who already like and trust one another - for better or worse. Thus, disagreements don't so easily escalate to the "My way or the highway" point.

Peters is right. And Hegel is, as always, right - which means we should be on the lookout for the new contradiction this engenders.