Morty asserts that "all behavior is a function of beliefs," and if
I'm understanding this correctly, such a notion is very consonant
with Argyris' Ladder of Inference model. So we use experience and
other data to construct ways of thinking and believing, and these are
the source of action.
Senge and others seem to use "mental model" to reference a further
developed construct which might be imaged as an interactive cluster
or matrix of beliefs which are manifested in a range of behaviors and
activities.
"Paradigm," as popularized by Kuhn and marketed by Joel Barker, seems
to me to go a step further, toward an overarching schema by which we
make sense of large systems/constellations of our reality. And if we
were to keep going, "Weltanschauung" would seem to denote "the full
catastrophe."
Questions to ponder and discuss:
1. Is this progressive or staged model useful or necessary?
2. What is the relationship between the individual and larger
populations in this matter? That is, is it possible for an
individual to "hold" a paradigm or Weltanschauung as a single self,
or do these inherently imply a shared construct?
3. If there is a line in the sand between a mental model and a
paradigm, what is the implication for organizations? These may,
after all, be dependent on a particular paradigm for their success or
failure, but such a structure would be constantly being jostled by
the beliefs and mental models of the employees/members?
and probably lots more questions, but that's enough. Any thoughts?
--Malcolm Burson currently seeking an organization to learn with!
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>