Levels and stages of comprehension

Groupware Configurations of Challenge and Harmony: an alternative approach to alternative organization (Part #6)

It follows from the previous section that individuals exposed to a complex structure, whether existing or proposed, will tend to comprehend it in different ways and to different degrees. The point has been well made by F.F. Kopstein and others (37) in terms of learning about a pattern of interlinked concepts (in a network). There is a tendency for each of those in the learning process to fail to register, retain or retransmit parts of the pattern. In addition there is the natural tendency to want to perceive the pattern as being of a well-known kind and thus to ignore features which imply that it is more complex and less intuitively predictable from past experience. Such tendencies are exacerbated by limited effective attention span.

The consequence is that, whatever the point of introduction to a structure of complexity greater than that to which he is habituated, the individual will tend to work with it (or reject it) as though it was a simpler structure. It may even be useful to think in terms of a series of 'delusions' through which the individual must pass before attaining to full comprehension of the structure. These learning experiences or cycles are perhaps better appreciated in the apprenticeship 'doing' mode of learning than in the more academic 'information' mode. Whether it be in Maoist China or in a diversified capitalist corporation, there is a well-established practice of requiring individuals to work successively in different contexts to get an overall 'feel' for the different cycles of a production process and to understand the constraints to which each part is subjects. This is also the case in semi-secret guilds, such as the Compagnons du Devoir. It is also evident in the sequence of initiations in certain religious orders, such as the Sufi (38).

These are contextual realities not communicated by look-learning or briefings. It may well be the case that a particular individual will never really get more than a distorted feel for what is going on in some of these settings because of innate bias or ineptitude of which he is unaware or is unable to overcome effectively (e.g. 'agriculture' may remain an eternal, messy mystery to someone who is temperamentally oriented toward 'engineering'.

From the individual learner's point of view it is difficult to distinguish between 'levels' of comprehension, successively encompassing each other (e.g. progressively more sophisticated reality models), and 'stages' of comprehension arising from successive exposure to alternative reality settings (e.g. with respect to a complex production process). The two are intertwined, the progressive refinement of the former being dependent upon the variety of foundational experiences provided by the latter.

Where the point of entry is dictated by convention, certain levels and stages may be labelled as 'superior' or 'advanced', introducing an unnecessary spirit of elitism. But this is fairly arbitrary since individuals tend to have an innate aptitude for the skills required at certain levels or stages (rather than at others), irrespective of their point of entry into the learning process. Of greater importance is the extent to which the individuals can respond to (or master) the requirements of a wide range of levels or stages. An extreme, but nevertheless elegant example of this may be found in the reports by different Sufi masters on the 7 colours associated with visionary experiences at 7 different levels. Whilst there is agreement on the colours there is disagreement concerning the order of the levels. One scholar suggests that 'this corresponds to a difference is the way each of these depths is innerly attained, oriented' (38, p. 126). The same point may be made with respect to the supposed level 'superiority' claimed for Mohammed over Jesus within that system - a distinctly non-trivial point given the misunderstanding and violence arising from attachment to such orderings.

It is the number (i.e. the variety) so mastered which is a truer measure of comprehension of the whole, not the apparent sophistication of the stage or level reached from some entry point dictated by circumstances. (it The first shall be last, and the last shall be first' !)

Clearly it may prove to be the case that a particular individual is quite content to perceive a complex structure in over-simplified, distorted terms and to work within it (or in opposition to it) on that basis. A mature complex structure should in fact support those who participate in it in their perception of it according to their abilities and preferred modes whilst challenging them with alternatives which would lead to greater understanding. Tensegrity structures in fact form or families of different degrees of complexity such that one may be considered a simple approximation to another and thus easier to understand.

The alternative organizations of the future may even recognize the learning situations associated with such historical structures as slavery, feudalism, fascism, imperialism, communism, etc and attempt to internalise them. In fact 'slavery' and 'feudalism', for example, are labels commonly attached to some family, work or leisure (e.g. sport) situations. Even 'fascism' may be accepted to further the shared goals of a team. It may prove that each is valuable under certain conditions, provided:

that the pattern is not permanently maintained or
that the same people are not continually (under) privileged, or
that people feel free to experience alternative patterns or are having such experiences in other settings (e.g. work, religion, leisure, etc).

Organizations have to internalise education as a continual learning process (39) in order to respond to each generation born anew with the potential for organizational errors of the past. They need to 'process ignorance' as well as information (40, 41), offering ritual re-enactment or preventive exposure to the organizational equivalent of early childhood diseases (e.g. mumps, measles, etc), and using any such ignorance as a structuring element of the whole.

Main menu

Directions

You are here

Main menu

Search form

Directions

You are here

Levels and stages of comprehension