1/ Been analyzing management language to use for #breakingsmart S2 and something jumped out at me...
Conversation
Replying to
2/ We talk about organizations in structuralist ways (eg "platform corp")
2
4
6
Replying to
3/ But we talk about automation/machines in functionalist ways (eg "can an AI drive a car")
1
4
7
Replying to
4/ And we talk about human pieces of the puzzle in behaviorist ways (incentives, motives, values, learning)
Replying to
5/ This is extraordinarily schizophrenic... a big chunk of the confusion I'm trying to sort out in 'future of orgs' thinking is due to this
1
2
13
Replying to
6/ As the history of early psychology (1900-1920 or so) shows, you need all 3 lenses on all 3 pieces to get anywhere. Full 3x3, not diag
1
8
Replying to
4.1/ Edit: 'behaviorist' in a broader sense, not pure blackbox and including things like 'power of habit', cues, 'agile processes'
1
1
Replying to
these 3 make some more sense when viewed through archetypal lens: Orgs =The Friend AT, part of the "Home" quadrant. Machines =The Titan

