Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL

The behaviour of an organism depends on the map of reality drawn by the organism itself. This
mental map plays the role of 'order parameter'. That, in turn, determines certain 'modes' of its
behaviour. The consistency of the mental map conditions the consistency of behaviour.
In looking at the 'collective consciousness' of an organization, one can see a certain paradox of
mental maps. Because of different life experience, different individuals have not only inaccurate
maps (which is inevitable), but these maps are also inaccurate in different ways. Differences in
mental maps are an obstacle for interaction that is based on these maps, especially if the maps
remain unchanged during the process of interaction (as CD-R). On the other hand, the variety of
individual experiences provides an opportunity for rapid acceleration of the learning process due to
the exchange of experiences within these mental maps, if they are correctable (CD-RW).
Intellectual interaction, in which the contents of mental maps are discussible or negotiable and not
limited or unchangeable, may transform obstacles into opportunities.
In an organization that consists of many individuals, differences in mental maps lead to conflicts
between varying ‘order parameters’, and if there are more than three such parameters – almost
inevitably to chaos. Knowledge can become a cause for disorder. The more uncorrelated
knowledge exists in an organization – the more disorder may be present. This chaos may be
reduced by introducing dominating order parameters (‘Listen to my command!’), or by diminishing
differences in the contents of the mental maps. To do that, everyone should, at a minimum,
recognize their equal right to exist. ‘Common truth’ is not in any of the individual mental maps, but
in a virtual space that is formed by the intersection of individual fields of knowledge – ‘that is what
everyone in our organization knows and agrees with’. Thus correlated knowledge becomes an
order parameter. The more correlation – the more order.
If the mental map of an organization (which resides in the heads of many individuals) is torn into
motley pieces – the only way to ensure coordination or the possibility of synergy is by switching off
brains and carrying out orders. Utilization of the potential of self-organization requires a more or
less identical understanding of the situation; in another words – applicable information and mental
maps must sufficiently coincide. To have shared information field or database is not enough.
Common interpretation of data is also required - and for this a common knowledge field is needed.
That might be an ‘organizational chart of reality’, based on congruent meta-models of the relevant
world.
Creating a common field of knowledge does not mean ‘unification of thought’ between members of
an organization. Just climbing up to the top, each on his side of the hill, we become closer to one
another. The world is how it is. Things that we really know and understand cannot separate us; we
129