Contextual constraints
Organization and Lifestyle Design (Part #2)
[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]
1. Organization : This paper is concerned with how organization (or order) is envisaged, comprehended or represented (1). With regard to the themes of this conference, this is particularly relevant to
- the organization of human groups and inter-group organization (2)
- the organization of lifestyles and inter-lifestyle organization (3)
It is also relevant to the organization of concepts (1, 4) and to that of whatever elements an individual recognizes as active in his (or her) own personality integration or fragmentation. These both have an impact on group and lifestyle organization, andindeed the significance of isomorphism between all such systems or ordering may be raised (5).
2. Hierarchy vs Network : Due to limitations in the information processing capacity of the brain, the most favoured basis for ordering information is the hierarchy (1, 6). It is these limitations which allow some to justify their belief in hierarchical ordering as reasonable (7). The hierarchical order clearly predetermines the dominance of some elements with respect to others, which in many current situations is viewed as unacceptable because of the abuses to which it tends to lead (8) and its fundamental inability to respond adequately to a turbulent problem environment (5). Such hierarchical systems of organization have been deliberately rejected by many in favour of some form of network (9, 10, 11, 12). Associative networks have become increasingly fashionable, but already their weaknesses (due to the absence of any ordering principle) are becoming apparent (13, 14).
3. Ineffectiveness of existing organization : Despite the enthusiasm of their respective advocates, neither the hierarchical nor the network mode of organization can be said to be making significant impact on the total complex of 2600 'world problems' currently recognized (5), even if their relative importance is being effectively adjusted. Nor does either mode appear to have led to the generation of viable lifestyles characterized by a significant improvement in the quality of life of the many, rather than of the few (3).
4. Unemployment as an example : As evidence of this, one may note the singular failure to respond to the challenge implicit in the rising problems of unemployment, underemployment, and malemployment, whether evident or disguised. It is unnecessary to detail the corrosive effects that these have on individuals (particularly youth) and on society as a whole. The hierarchical mode is frequently under pressure to reduce labour costs. It's acceptable option of 'job creation' is opposed by recognition of the abuses of the market economy (e.g. increasing the rate of product failure) and the limits to growth. Under the kinds of pressure foreseen, it's options are paid leisure, creation of jobs by de-automation or, ultimately, organized work forces (work camps, collective farms, Arbeitsdienst, etc.). The network mode, as an alternative, has failed to demonstrate ability to generate significant enterprise of an economically viable nature, other than in isolated instances. The failure rate of western-style communes, and their subsistence level of operation, is a case in point (even when their members are all committed to non-Western political ideologies). (The hierarchical nodes includes cases where a group elects, or is represented by, as selcted body or individual -- as in large communes).
5. Limitations of analysis : These problems are analyzed in terms of lack of jobs and how to employ peoples time 'productively'. Simultaneously some others are preoccupied, to a much lesser extent, with the increase in leisure time and the problem of how to occupy people 'creatively' - particularly as the working week is reduced. It may well be asked, given the lack of breakthroughs to date, whether an analysis based on the dualistic concepts jobs v leisure, (i.e. productive v unproductive) exhausts the possibilities of insight. It should be noted that such an approach reflects a particularly simplistic image of the individual during a period when this is changing (and probably needs to change) rapidly (15). It is particularly inappropriate during a period when, ironically, there is considerable pressure to ensure that jobs are 'creative', satisfying,and a contribution to the development of the person, whatever that is held to mean (16).
6. Redefining the problem : This paper takes the position that it is useful, if only as a temporary measure, to abandon the categories of 'job' and 'leisure' and to search for a new approach (17). Employment and leisure are both ways of being active, allocating attention, or spending (i.e. 'using') time. For want of a better term, let us consider them as sub-categories of a larger category called 'activity', whatever else this should include. ('Activity' here includes such 'inactivity' as 'doing nothing', thought, sun-bathing, passive resistance, mediation, and 'non-action' in te Taoist sense. Just as the conventional concepts of Western 'science' or 'time' cannot be validly projected onto other cultures (or, for that matter, onto all the sub-cultures of any given society) as recent studies demonstrate (18), so one should be cautious about projecting any westernized concept of 'activity'). Useful questions are then :
- How can one proceed to subdivide 'activity' so as not to impede emerging awareness of possible new or alternative categories of activity?
- How can individuals be encouraged to engage in this process themselves in order to discover whatever possibilities their abilities and inclinations enable them to recognize?
- How can this be done so that attributes of 'activity' associated with initiative, imagination, entrepreneurship, innovation, risk-taking, self-reliance, independence, etc. are not automatically excluded? (as is the case with conventionally labelled job-slots and packaged-leisure experiences, which preclude any creative individual or group response outside an imposed list of options quite possibly considered as unfulfilling from the start.)
- Given that a satisfactory variety of categories of activity can be identified, what non-directive assistance can be provided to ensure that the balance between them is acceptable (to those engaged in the process)?
- How can those engaged in the process ensure that this balance is reflected in some viable pattern of organization which respects the necessary relationships between the different categories of activity? (And which avoids the automatic tendency to fall into the hierarchical trap at one extreme or the network mode, if the trap is avoided).
7. Nature of the problem : The problem may be considered as merely the structuring of activity. The challenging difficulties lie however in :
- The tendency to respond in a simplistic manner to the problem, leading to premature closure on unnecessarily mechanistic options
- The lack of understanding of the variety of activities which could be activated and of the kinds of functional patterns which they can form (There is widespread incapacity to comprehen structures and patterns (ie 'structural illirteracy' or 'visual illiteracy'? See ref. 1 and 19).
- Distinguishing activities (or functions) of different and complementary nature atthe same level of abstraction, namely determining which functions make up a set constituting a viable whole (1).
- Avoiding static forms of organization by explicitly embodying three forms of change :
- dynamism in response to the immediate environment (i.e. some form of functional or activity cycle).
- growth or development in terms of the favoured pattern.
- evolution or development through new patterns successively selected as favourable.
8. Problem of dialogue : The 'technical' problem above is considerably complicated by the context in which it needs to be faced .
- Much confusion is created by the difficulty of providing unambiguous labels to activities or functions whose nature is :
- Essentially pre-verbal or non-verbal or in other ways intimately bound into the psyches of those expected to be 'objective' (1)
- Defined to a large extent by the relationship to other functions in the selected pattern
- Easily distorted by use of some conventional label with an established pattern of connotations
- Conventionally conveyed, to the extent possible, by use of verbal labels demanding of that user a mastery of a particular set of connotations which thus attempt to embody the meaning associated with the term, namely the problem of 'jargons' (20, 21, 22).
- Irrespective of any use of jargon, there is the difficulty of language and all the ambiguities to which it can give rise (23).
- The background, experience and existing pressure of circumstances influence
- the number of functions a person or group is prepared to recognize as important
- the level of abstraction which is considered acceptable
- the degree of difference that can be tolerated between the functions
- the richness of content attributed to the functions.
- Difficulties of responding to different preferences for grouping functions into a whole that is believed to be viable.
- Ensuring a non-directive dialogue with, and between, those attempting to identify new patterns of organization (24). But dialogue itself is inadequate unless the emerging insights are anchored in some comprehensible organized pattern.
9. Design : The importance must be stressed of making the design process accessible to those for whom the organization or lifestyle design in intended. Clearly an 'international' design is counterproductive in terms of responding to individual requirements. But even a 'local' design is counterproductive unless the process is made available to those most affected :
- To design for a group is to exclude from the design those creative activities which are associated with the process of design. It defines the 'client' group as being of a type requiring that such initiatives be taken for them.
- Depriving the group of such responsibilities permits (and even encourages) them to behave irresponsibly in response to the design - it is not their creation and can therefore always be rejected as an imposition. Its defects can be blamed on 'experts', 'authorities' or any suitable 'them'.
- Furthermore, unless a group is in command of the design process it is unable to redesign in response to change. Consequently, there is always a tendency for it to be a victim of change and in need of periodic external assistance. It is not in command of change and consequently perceives itself as a victim of circumstances. This attitude is in fact widespread.
This paper is not however concerned with the principles of design in the larger sense. (On this topic see ref. 25). The purpose of the preceding paragraphs has been to identify the contextual constraints on a proposed design tool - namely a new structural language. This is discussed in the following section.
[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]