Case Study Report
Cyrusxx
L9-Thoughtdiversity.pptxOrganisational Analysis
Thought diversity and thought leadership
‹#›
“The world as we have created it is a process of our thinking. It cannot be changed without changing our thinking.”
RMIT University
2
Albert Einstein
‹#›
2
Lecture Aims
Understand how the mind (and therefore our thinking) is socially constructed
Understand why diversity of thought is elusive
Understand why diversity of thought is desirable
Understand diversity of thought:
At the individual level
At the organisational level
At the global level
Understand ‘thought leadership’
RMIT University
3
‹#›
3
RMIT University
The social construction of thought
To survive, humankind needs psychological economies (Berger & Luckmann, 1966)
Key premises
‹#›
4
RMIT University
Psychological economies – why?
To “free the individual from the burden of ‘all those decisions’” and create psychological space so that we can direct our attention toward things that advance our odds of survival and progress, as a species (Berger & Luckmann, 1966: 71).
“The background of habitualized activity opens up a foreground for deliberation and innovation” (Berger & Luckmann, 1966: 71).
‹#›
Pictures: “Hull Riveting”, by Frederick B Taylor (1906)
“The Hand-Mill”, by Robert Ronald McIan (1803-1856)
Cave painting of hunting scene.
5
RMIT University
The social construction of thought
To survive, humankind needs psychological economies (Berger & Luckmann, 1966)
Key premises
So we create “typifications” (Schutz & Luckmann1973) and “thought categories” (Douglas, 1986; Schutz & Luckmann, 1973)
‹#›
6
RMIT University
Psychological economies – how?
Typifications: akin to stereotypes and learned from birth, typifications are a way of quickly making sense of the world by mentally putting everything we need to know and understand into designated boxes. We apply them to people, creatures, situations, and things (Schutz, 1962; 1970).
Thought categories: we make sense of the universe by categorising everything around us, in binary ways. Things that do not fit into the categories we have created, we abhor. When things defy categorisation, or are in the wrong category, or move from one category to another, they are out of place, they do not fit in, and they are transgressive (Douglas, 1966).
‹#›
7
RMIT University
Psychological economies – how?
Typifications and thought categories are passed from generation to generation, through a process of socialisation. The way we think is socially constructed. The thinking process, itself, is institutional in nature.
“Cognition is the most socially-conditioned activity of man”
([sic] Ludwik Fleck, 1935: 42)
‹#›
8
RMIT University
“Thought categories” (Mary Douglas, 1966)
‹#›
On thought categories, see: Mike Callaghan on Mary Douglas’s Purity and Danger:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI3Xm2Qbcqg
9
RMIT University
The social construction of thought
To survive, humankind needs psychological economies (Berger & Luckmann, 1966)
Key premises
So we create “typifications” (Schutz & Luckmann1973) and “thought categories” (Douglas, 1986; Schutz & Luckmann, 1973)
Typifications and thought categories are shared by members of a society. They constitute our collective “basic assumptions” about the world, they determine what is relevant to us and what is not, and they provide shared schema for understanding. (Douglas, 1986; Schutz, 1944)
‹#›
10
RMIT University
The social construction of thought: implications
Our mental equipment operates in the same way. Societies share a “thought style” (Douglas, 1986). There is a sameness about the way we think.
Paradox: creating psychological freedom for innovation depends on the uncritical acceptance of fundamental assumptions
True novelty is transgressive and illegitimate (Hargadon & Douglas, 2001)
Societies teach their members to think in the same way → thought homogeneity
‹#›
11
RMIT University
The social construction of thought: implications
Our mental equipment operates in the same way. Societies share a “thought style” (Douglas, 1986). There is a sameness about the way we think.
Societies teach their members to think in the same way → thought homogeneity
Members of society share some “thinking and feeling alike”; societies as wholes generate different kinds of knowledges
(Douglas, 1986: 9)
From epistemology lecture:
“What of a truth that is bounded by these mountains and is falsehood to the world that lives beyond?”
Michel Eyquem de Montaigne
‹#›
12
RMIT University
What does this mean for ingenuity, innovation, and diversity of thought?
Within societies, diversity of thought is challenging
Trans-cultural, trans-societal, and trans-experiential exchange of ideas → diversity of thought
‹#›
13
Culture 9
Culture 2
Culture 8
Culture 1
Culture 4
Culture 7
Culture 3
Culture 6
Culture 5
Epistemologies at the global level
‹#›
14
Culture 9
Culture 2
Culture 8
Culture 1
Culture 4
Culture 7
Culture 3
Culture 6
Culture 5
Similar cultures have similar schema → easier to share knowledge, but arguably the variety of insights is diminished.
Epistemologies at the global level
‹#›
15
Culture 9
Culture 2
Culture 8
Culture 1
Culture 4
Culture 7
Culture 3
Culture 6
Culture 5
Similar cultures have similar schema → easier to share knowledge, but arguably the variety of insights is diminished.
Epistemologies at the global level
Similar cultures share similar epistemologies
Is it possible, at a global level, for there to be a hegemonic, shared epistemology?
‹#›
16
Culture 9
Culture 2
Culture 8
Culture 1
Culture 4
Culture 7
Culture 3
Culture 6
Culture 5
Similar cultures have similar schema → easier to share knowledge, but arguably the variety of insights is diminished.
Epistemologies at the global level
De Sousa Santos (2018):
There exists a “cognitive empire”: Eurocentric thought
The “epistemologies of the South” – a “collection of knowledges born of and anchored in the experiences of marginalized peoples who actively resist capitalism, colonialism, and patriarchy” – have been oppressed
‹#›
17
Culture 9
Culture 2
Culture 8
Culture 1
Culture 4
Culture 7
Culture 3
Culture 6
Culture 5
Similar cultures have similar schema → easier to share knowledge, but arguably the variety of insights is diminished.
Epistemologies at the global level
Yet, “the understanding of the world by far exceeds the Western understanding of the world” (de Sousa Santos, 2014: viii)
And, “the basic tradition of Western thinking has not provided a simple model of constructive thinking” (de Bono, 1985: 3)
‹#›
18
Culture 9
Culture 2
Culture 8
Culture 1
Culture 4
Culture 7
Culture 3
Culture 6
Culture 5
Similar cultures have similar schema → easier to share knowledge, but arguably the variety of insights is diminished.
Epistemologies at the global level
Yet, “the understanding of the world by far exceeds the Western understanding of the world” (de Sousa Santos, 2014: viii)
And, “the basic tradition of Western thinking has not provided a simple model of constructive thinking” (de Bono, 1985: 3)
Relevance to organisational analysis and management?
Global business
International trade and diplomacy
International institutions (e.g. World Bank; International Monetary Fund)
Multi-national organisations
International development organisations
Etc. etc.
‹#›
19
RMIT University
How to achieve diversity of thought?
Don’t “[filter] out people who raise unacceptable questions” (Chomsky, 1987: 30, cited in de Sousa Santos, 2018: 222).
Recall epistemology lecture. If knowledge is tacit and embodied, then we must give great credence to personal experience. Incorporate into teams people who have come from places, been places, done things, seen things, and experienced things that you and others have not. Actively seek trans-experiential input.
Enlist those who can broker, translate, and mobilise knowledge. To move knowledge around and beyond organisation, you need diplomats who can decode, interpret, and break down disciplinary and cognitive boundaries.
If we are hard-wired to recoil from cognitive boundary-crossing phenomena (Douglas, 1966), then we must resist these instincts.
Seek out diverse epistemologies.
‹#›
20
RMIT University
How to achieve diversity of thought?
Facilitate “perspective taking”: “the ability to entertain the perspective of another” (Galinsky & Moskowitz, 2000: 708).
Increases “self-other overlap”, suppressing “accessibility of stereotypes” and increasing openness to others (Galinsky & Moskowitz, 2000).
Can stimulate creativity in teams if they are diverse, but depends on “degree to which team members engage in perspective taking” (Hoever et al., 2012: 982).
Engage in “parallel thinking” rather than argument (de Bono, 1985).
White hat: neutral & objective; gather facts & figures
Red hat: emotions; emotional viewpoints
Black hat: caution & careful; search for weaknesses in ideas
Yellow hat: sunny & positive; hope, positive thinking
Green hat: fertile growth; creativity & new ideas
Blue hat: cool, controlled; organise the thinking process
‹#›
21
RMIT University
How to achieve diversity of thought?
Engage in multi-paradigmatic perception
‹#›
22
RMIT University
Seeking diversity of thought: a further epistemological virtue?
Recall “virtue epistemology”: “the study of the cognitive character traits and attitudes that make us effective at, and responsible for, acquiring and transmitting epistemic goods”. (Baird & Calvard, 2019: 264)
Might not we consider the active search for diversity of thought an epistemological virtue?
‹#›
23
RMIT University
Thought leadership
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-24/banking-royal-commission-commonwealth-bank-bosses-not-learning/10549754
Your learning outcomes (Lecture 1)
‹#›
24
RMIT University
Thought leadership
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-24/banking-royal-commission-commonwealth-bank-bosses-not-learning/10549754
Your learning outcomes (Lecture 1)
Foster epistemic virtues within self and others
Facilitate and harness diversity of thought – within self, within teams, within organisations, and within society
Recognise and address, where possible, cognitive injustices
‹#›
25
Lecture Aims
Understand how the mind (and therefore our thinking) is socially constructed
Understand why diversity of thought is elusive
Understand why diversity of thought is desirable
Understand diversity of thought:
At the individual level
At the organisational level
At the global level
Understand ‘thought leadership’
RMIT University
26
‹#›
26
“The mind is not a vessel to be filled, but a fire to be kindled.”
RMIT University
27
Plutarch, AD 46-119
‹#›
27
References
Baird, C., & Calvard, T.S. (2019). Epistemic vices in organizations: Knowledge, truth, and unethical conduct. Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 160: 263–276.
Berger, P. & Luckmann, T. (1066). The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. USA: Penguin Books.
Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis: Elements of the Sociology of Corporate Life. New York, NY, USA: Routledge.
De Bono, E. (1985). Six Thinking Hats. Melbourne: Penguin Books.
De Sousa Santos, B. (2014). Epistemologies of the South. New York, NY: Routledge.
De Sousa Santos, B. (2018). The End of the Cognitive Empire: The Coming of Age of Epistemologies of the South. Croydon, UK: Duke University Press.
Douglas, M. (1986). How Institutions Think. New York: Syracuse University Press.
Galinsky, A.D. & Moskowitz, G.B. (2000). Perspective-taking: Decreasing stereotype expression, stereotype accessibility, and in-group favoritism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(4): 708–724.
Hoever, I.J., van Kippenberg, D., van Ginkel, W.P., & Barkema, H.G. (2012). Fostering team creativity: Perspective-taking as key to unlocking diversity’s potential. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(5): 982–996.
Schutz, A. & Luckmann, T. (1973). The Structures of the Life World. London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.
RMIT University
28
‹#›
