Presents relationship between different senses constraining vital strategic understanding.
[Parts: Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]
The following summary table follows from a concern with the strategic bias towards metaphoric framing solely through "vision" rather than through appropriate use of other senses and "ways of knowing" (Metaphor and the Language of Futures, 1992; Antonio de Nicolas, Habits of Mind: an introduction to philosophy of education, 2000; Howard Gardner, Frames of Mind: the theory of multiple intelligences, 1983). This enrichment is now recognized in "extra-sensory marketing", otherwise known as neuromarketing (Martin Lindstrom, Brand Sense: build powerful brands through touch, taste, smell, sight, and sound, 2005; Vladimir Djurovic, Sensorial Branding: the future of brand building, EzineArticles.com. 15 August 2008).
The need for a combination of complementary approaches has been argued by Magoroh Maruyama (Polyocular Vision or Subunderstanding, Organization Studies, 2004). Clearly in strategic articulation there is then a need to combine appropriately the cognitive approaches of distinct senses, if only metaphorically -- a polysensorial approach (Cyclopean Vision vs Poly-sensual Engagement, 2006).
The question is to what degree this approach opens up new possibilities -- precluded by the "vision" emphasis in providing a "focus" within that metaphor for divergent thinking, as offered by the strategic methodology of a recent study by the RAND Corporation's National Security Division (Paul K. Davis, et al., Strategic Planning with Massive Scenario Generation Theory and Experiments, 2007).
[Parts: Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]