LC 00555: verschil tussen versies
Geen bewerkingssamenvatting |
Geen bewerkingssamenvatting |
||
| (10 tussenliggende versies door 2 gebruikers niet weergegeven) | |||
| Regel 1: | Regel 1: | ||
The lesson learned from second-order cybernetics and Luhman’s social theory is that (human) systems have a function and their reason of being (''raison d’être'') is to sustain that function. This is again rather paradoxical. For a system to sustain its function, it has to change, otherwise, as we have seen, a system ceases to exist. A system has to become what it is not, and yet remain the same. | The lesson learned from {{Internal link|link=LC 00455|name=second-order cybernetics|dialog=process-linkpage-dialog}} and {{Internal link|link=LC 00458|name=Luhman’s social theory|dialog=process-linkpage-dialog}} is that (human) systems have a function and their reason of being (''raison d’être'') is to sustain that function. This is again rather paradoxical. For a system to sustain its function, it has to change, otherwise, as we have seen, a system ceases to exist. A system has to become what it is not, and yet remain the same. | ||
<!-- {{Include lesson learned|Lesson learned=LL 00027|Description=Stakeholders' worldviews may differ.|Reference=LC 000346}} --> | |||
{{Include lesson learned|Lesson learned=LL 00027|Description=Stakeholders' worldviews may differ.|Reference=LC 000346}} | {{Include WGTM statement | ||
|WGTM Aspect=Tradition | |||
In LoF terms, this means that there must be a difference, which means in this context that a (human) system has to adapt to changing conditions in its environment. By the way, this restates that a system cannot exist on its own. A system is dependent on its environment, which, from the standpoint of the system, is populated with other systems that induce changes in the environment again as a result of the need to sustain. It is indeed a reflexive domain. And it is safe to say that the constant factor in life is movement. We got to move!<blockquote>alles blijft, alles gaat voorbij, alles blijft voorbijgaan</blockquote><blockquote>everything stays, everything passes, everything keeps passing</blockquote>''Jules Deelder'' | |WGTM Statement=A system has to become what it is not, and yet remain the same. | ||
}} | |||
{{Include lesson learned|Lesson learned=LL 00029|Description=Stakeholders' worldviews may differ.|Reference=LC 000346}} | In {{Internal link|link=LC 00454|name=Laws of Form|dialog=process-linkpage-dialog}} (LoF) terms, this means that there must be a difference, which means in this context that a (human) system has to adapt to changing conditions in its environment. By the way, this restates that a system cannot exist on its own. A system is dependent on its environment, which, from the standpoint of the system, is populated with other systems that induce changes in the environment again as a result of the need to sustain. It is indeed a reflexive domain. And it is safe to say that the constant factor in life is movement. We got to move!<blockquote>alles blijft, alles gaat voorbij, alles blijft voorbijgaan</blockquote><blockquote>everything stays, everything passes, everything keeps passing</blockquote>''Jules Deelder'' | ||
<!-- {{Include lesson learned|Lesson learned=LL 00029|Description=Stakeholders' worldviews may differ.|Reference=LC 000346}} --> | |||
The connection between this conception of change and EM<sub>ont</sub> can be found in the PQR formula. Recall that in SSM a sharp distinction is made between the ''P–what'' and the ''Q–how''. The ''P–what'' and the ''R–why'' can be seen as the reason of being. The ''Q–how’s'' are observable, they are particular ways of doing things. A Q, a way of doing things, may be replaced by another Q due to changes in the environment in order to stick to the P-R reason of being. | {{Include WGTM statement | ||
|WGTM Aspect=Reflexive Domain | |||
|WGTM Statement=The constant factor in life is movement. | |||
}} | |||
The connection between this conception of change and EM<sub>ont</sub> can be found in the {{Internal link|link=LC 00479|name=PQR formula|dialog=process-linkpage-dialog}}. Recall that in SSM a sharp distinction is made between the ''P–what'' and the ''Q–how''. The ''P–what'' and the ''R–why'' can be seen as the reason of being. The ''Q–how’s'' are observable, they are particular ways of doing things. A Q, a way of doing things, may be replaced by another Q due to changes in the environment in order to stick to the P-R reason of being. | |||
The relation between P-R and Q is explored to investigate the possibilities and limitations of change. Three options for change can be identified: | The relation between P-R and Q is explored to investigate the possibilities and limitations of change. Three options for change can be identified: | ||
* Same Q – same P-R, but with differences in the environment as manifested in changes in environmental conditions; | * Same Q – same P-R, but with differences in the environment as manifested in changes in environmental conditions; | ||
* Different Q – same P-R, a more radical way of adapting to environmental changes; | * Different Q – same P-R, a more radical way of adapting to environmental changes by adopting a different way of doing things; | ||
* Different P-R, the system is in transition from one reason of being to another one, or more formally, a system is replaced by another one. It could be the case that a system ceases to exist altogether, if no new reason of being can be found. | * Different P-R, the system is in transition from one reason of being to another one, or more formally, a system is replaced by another one. It could be the case that a system ceases to exist altogether, if no new reason of being can be found. | ||
Due to the in principle endless recursiveness of the PQR formula as used in EM<sub>ont</sub>, overlap between the three options is possible. For instance, in a large organization comprised of several units, a particular unit can be assigned a different task, although the company as a whole remains doing the same things. The three options can thus been seen as typical patterns to be used and combined as (mental) tools to think about change. | Due to the in principle endless recursiveness of the PQR formula as used in EM<sub>ont</sub>, overlap between the three options is possible. For instance, in a large organization comprised of several units, a particular unit can be assigned a different task, although the company as a whole remains doing the same things. The three options can thus been seen as typical patterns to be used and combined as (mental) tools to think about change. | ||
{{LC Book config}} | {{LC Book config}} | ||
{{Light Context | {{Light Context | ||
| Regel 25: | Regel 29: | ||
|Context type=Situation | |Context type=Situation | ||
|Heading=Exploring Change | |Heading=Exploring Change | ||
|Show referred by=Nee | |||
|Show edit button=Ja | |Show edit button=Ja | ||
|Show VE button=Ja | |Show VE button=Ja | ||
|Show title=Ja | |Show title=Ja | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{LC Book additional | {{LC Book additional | ||
|Preparatory reading= | |Preparatory reading=LC 00512, | ||
|Continue reading= | |Continue reading=LC 00571, | ||
}} | }} | ||
Huidige versie van 10 nov 2021 om 17:54
The lesson learned from second-order cybernetics and Luhman’s social theory is that (human) systems have a function and their reason of being (raison d’être) is to sustain that function. This is again rather paradoxical. For a system to sustain its function, it has to change, otherwise, as we have seen, a system ceases to exist. A system has to become what it is not, and yet remain the same.
Statement: A system has to become what it is not, and yet remain the same.
Aspect: Tradition, Principle: We got to move, Principle page: Principles and Ground Rules
| Statement page | Statement |
|---|---|
| Exploring Change | A system has to become what it is not, and yet remain the same. |
| Some-thing from No-thing | The relationship between things, including humans, is what matters. Something or someone cannot stand or be taken on its own. |
Principles, aspects and statements overview
- Create room for change, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Systems Thinking, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Hard Systems Thinking – System Dynamics (A system comprised of a number of interacting feedback loops is a complex system whose behavior can surprise us.)
- Systems Thinking (A system as a whole is comprised of parts. Systems thinking is about understanding the interactions between the parts.)
- Critical Reflection, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Determining Boundary Judgements with CSH (A constructive dialog can take place on the basis of first and second order boundary judgments.)
- Self-observation (Concentrate on how to look, instead of what to see.)
- Self-observation (You need someone else to point out your blind spots to you.)
- Diversity in opinions, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Worldview, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Model Building - Human Activity Systems (A worldview (Weltanschauung) captures the beliefs, desires and intentions of a person.)
- Model Building - Human Activity Systems (The PQR formula (what, how, why) is pivotal for capturing worldviews.)
- Soft Systems Thinking – Soft Systems Methodology (People differ in worldviews, but nevertheless they typically adhere to aspects of multiple worldviews, which provides room for accommodation.)
- We got to move, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Reflexive Domain, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Exploring Change (The constant factor in life is movement.)
- Self-Reference in a Three-Valued System (Embrace the paradox, i.e., a difference in what was previously stated and therefore contradicting what was said before. Differences keep setting things in motion. Without differences we cease to exist. Therefore, change is inevitable, in fact, it is a necessity for living.)
- The Autopoietic Turn (Humans and social systems operate autonomously and my react when irritated.)
- Tradition, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Exploring Change (A system has to become what it is not, and yet remain the same.)
- Some-thing from No-thing (The relationship between things, including humans, is what matters. Something or someone cannot stand or be taken on its own.)
- Determine the right direction, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Cultural Identity, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Investigating Identity (Group identity refers to a person’s sense of belonging to a particular group.)
- Research Philosophy and Process (Research approach must be “for you, and with you”, instead of “for you, but not with you”.)
- Right Things, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Co-dependency, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Ethics of Care, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Investigating Identity (Ethics of Care is a retreat to first principles to be part of a group to protect and to provide meaning.)
- Responsible Setting for Social Innovation (Each stakeholder facilitates other stakeholders in addressing a societal challenge.)
- Some-thing from No-thing (We rely on each other and therefore we should care for each other.)
In Laws of Form (LoF) terms, this means that there must be a difference, which means in this context that a (human) system has to adapt to changing conditions in its environment. By the way, this restates that a system cannot exist on its own. A system is dependent on its environment, which, from the standpoint of the system, is populated with other systems that induce changes in the environment again as a result of the need to sustain. It is indeed a reflexive domain. And it is safe to say that the constant factor in life is movement. We got to move!
alles blijft, alles gaat voorbij, alles blijft voorbijgaan
everything stays, everything passes, everything keeps passing
Jules Deelder
Statement: The constant factor in life is movement.
Aspect: Reflexive Domain, Principle: We got to move, Principle page: Principles and Ground Rules
| Statement page | Statement |
|---|---|
| Exploring Change | The constant factor in life is movement. |
| Self-Reference in a Three-Valued System | Embrace the paradox, i.e., a difference in what was previously stated and therefore contradicting what was said before. Differences keep setting things in motion. Without differences we cease to exist. Therefore, change is inevitable, in fact, it is a necessity for living. |
| The Autopoietic Turn | Humans and social systems operate autonomously and my react when irritated. |
Principles, aspects and statements overview
- Create room for change, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Systems Thinking, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Hard Systems Thinking – System Dynamics (A system comprised of a number of interacting feedback loops is a complex system whose behavior can surprise us.)
- Systems Thinking (A system as a whole is comprised of parts. Systems thinking is about understanding the interactions between the parts.)
- Critical Reflection, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Determining Boundary Judgements with CSH (A constructive dialog can take place on the basis of first and second order boundary judgments.)
- Self-observation (Concentrate on how to look, instead of what to see.)
- Self-observation (You need someone else to point out your blind spots to you.)
- Diversity in opinions, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Worldview, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Model Building - Human Activity Systems (A worldview (Weltanschauung) captures the beliefs, desires and intentions of a person.)
- Model Building - Human Activity Systems (The PQR formula (what, how, why) is pivotal for capturing worldviews.)
- Soft Systems Thinking – Soft Systems Methodology (People differ in worldviews, but nevertheless they typically adhere to aspects of multiple worldviews, which provides room for accommodation.)
- We got to move, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Reflexive Domain, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Exploring Change (The constant factor in life is movement.)
- Self-Reference in a Three-Valued System (Embrace the paradox, i.e., a difference in what was previously stated and therefore contradicting what was said before. Differences keep setting things in motion. Without differences we cease to exist. Therefore, change is inevitable, in fact, it is a necessity for living.)
- The Autopoietic Turn (Humans and social systems operate autonomously and my react when irritated.)
- Tradition, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Exploring Change (A system has to become what it is not, and yet remain the same.)
- Some-thing from No-thing (The relationship between things, including humans, is what matters. Something or someone cannot stand or be taken on its own.)
- Determine the right direction, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Cultural Identity, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Investigating Identity (Group identity refers to a person’s sense of belonging to a particular group.)
- Research Philosophy and Process (Research approach must be “for you, and with you”, instead of “for you, but not with you”.)
- Right Things, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Co-dependency, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Ethics of Care, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Investigating Identity (Ethics of Care is a retreat to first principles to be part of a group to protect and to provide meaning.)
- Responsible Setting for Social Innovation (Each stakeholder facilitates other stakeholders in addressing a societal challenge.)
- Some-thing from No-thing (We rely on each other and therefore we should care for each other.)
The connection between this conception of change and EMont can be found in the PQR formula. Recall that in SSM a sharp distinction is made between the P–what and the Q–how. The P–what and the R–why can be seen as the reason of being. The Q–how’s are observable, they are particular ways of doing things. A Q, a way of doing things, may be replaced by another Q due to changes in the environment in order to stick to the P-R reason of being.
The relation between P-R and Q is explored to investigate the possibilities and limitations of change. Three options for change can be identified:
- Same Q – same P-R, but with differences in the environment as manifested in changes in environmental conditions;
- Different Q – same P-R, a more radical way of adapting to environmental changes by adopting a different way of doing things;
- Different P-R, the system is in transition from one reason of being to another one, or more formally, a system is replaced by another one. It could be the case that a system ceases to exist altogether, if no new reason of being can be found.
Due to the in principle endless recursiveness of the PQR formula as used in EMont, overlap between the three options is possible. For instance, in a large organization comprised of several units, a particular unit can be assigned a different task, although the company as a whole remains doing the same things. The three options can thus been seen as typical patterns to be used and combined as (mental) tools to think about change.