Fourfold principle of uncertainty in governance

Metaphoric Revolution: in quest of a manifesto for governance through metaphor (Part #3)

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]

---

As argued elsewhere (10), especially in the light of epistemological problems in the social sciences which suggest that a generalized Heizenberg principle operates in the social sciences (11), the dilemmas of the previous section could well be summarized in a four-fold principle of uncertainty as follows:

• (a) A governing mode in which it is easy to say 'no' overtly, makes it very difficult to say 'yes' except covertly, whereas one in which it is easy to say 'yes' overtly makes it very difficult to say 'no' except covertly.
• (b) A governing mode which encourages overt declarations of consensus has great difficulty in accepting fundamental differences in practice except covertly, whereas one in which differences are realistically accepted has great difficulty in establishing consensus except covertly.
• (c) A governing mode of requisite variety for long-term continuity has great difficulty in elaborating appropriate short-term programmes except covertly, whereas one in which operationally relevant short-term programmes are easily elaborated has great difficulty in ensuring any policy of long-term significance except covertly.
• (d) A governing mode which can be made meaningful and inspiring has great difficulty in taking into account the full complexity of a practical situation except covertly, whereas one which takes into account that complexity in all its operational detail cannot be meaningful and inspiring except covertly.

Use of the terms 'overt' and 'covert' could be considered as unnecessarily value-loaded. Alternatives might be 'formal' and 'informal' or else 'public' and 'private'.

The merit of using 'covert' is that it emphasizes the potential for procedural abuse and manipulative processes in certain situations, namely insidious corruption. These points are perhaps well illustrated by the difference between the overt processes in international organizations and those occurring behind the scenes (and covered by security clauses in employment contacts).

Whilst there is much overt discussion of the efficiencies in the overt processes (as in the recent reviews of the United Nations and UNESCO), the dysfunctional features of the covert processes are only discussed in corridor gossip and newsworthy exposés. There has never been any overt study by an international body of corruption in governance at all levels, and especially of corruption in such international bodies. Yet 'corruption' is frequently cited in informal reports as a cause of inefficiencies in the implementation of programmes.

This paper is not about corruption but about the inability to fully encompass conceptually the processes of governance in an adequate model or set of models. This results in grey areas in which dysfunctional processes proliferate, however carefully the overt processes are defined. These are the shadow side of governance. Any attempt to envisage new approaches to governance that neglects this dimension, or fails to come to terms with it, must necessarily fall victim to the ways in which it undermines effectiveness.

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]