Theoretical Constructs

[Martin]

I guess it would be more beneficial to ask smaller questions.

In general, I would agree with that but extend it a touch more. We, as individuals, have multiple "maps" of component parts of reality, some of which overlap. Each of these maps is "embedded" within institutions (in Malinowski's sense of the term: they don't have to be actual organizations).

I will have to ponder that some more in my little head. Have you considered psychological/emotional consequences of the integration, or rather the possible lack thereof, of these maps/understandings? (side note: I made up a word for something similar to this before)

Institutions are differentially embedded within social organizational entities such as schools, branches, units etc. These organizations are, in turn, embedded in higher order systems - e.g. politics, economics, etc. Often "how we understand the world" implies "how we decide to deal with it" since the logics of "right action" are inherent in the formulation of a mapping of action potentials.

EXACTLY!!

Okay, as part of my first dissertation, I had to spend a fair amount of time dealing with Bussiness Process Re-engineering - you know, implementing organizational cultural changes. In order to make any reorganization work, you need two things: a "champion" at the highest levels who provides a solid vision of what changes will be made, and a lot of buy-in at the lower levels in the organization. Most of the time, changes are evolutionary not revolutionary, and changes can only be made in areas controlled by the organization.

I would have to say that changing personal understandings is quite different from changing organizational understandings. Changing an entire "life philosophy" (a weltanschuung?) is even more tricky. I do know how to do it, but that's the subject of another essay .

So, prove it!
Seriously though, even if you will not solve all my problems, I appreciate showing pieces of your knowledge.

Regarding the differences between changing them, I agree, but you have to start somewhere... I have "a bit" of experience in personal change and functioning, that was more for getting somebody else's perspective and widen my understanding of methodology, etc. As for organizational change, that I have not studied as much, but I think it is an extremely important follow on which varies a lot with the organizational structure and purpose, which is why I tried to move a bit in that direction. I hope you don't mind if I come up with more specific questions in the future.

I tend to draw on both Charles Pierce's concept fo semiotics and on Dawkin's ideas of memes. That's the short answer <wry grin>. For the longer version, I would say that theoretical concepts are used as operators in the mind to manipulate sensory data into something that "makes sense" even though it probably isn't "true". I view clichés and catch phrases as "rule of thumb" transformations of sensory data, while metaphors and analogies I consider to be more formalized operations of the mind.

Marc

Okay, thanks.

Martin