Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL
Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL
Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
‘in<strong>for</strong>mation’ is a verb <strong>and</strong> means the specific process of interaction between organisms that allows<br />
them to jointly use their sensors <strong>and</strong> memories, thus increasing their chances <strong>for</strong> survival.<br />
And that is great. Now a usable experience of any member, imprinted in his picture of the world or<br />
‘mental map’ can be enhanced many times by the experience of other members of the community,<br />
if they are successful in communication.<br />
This multiplier process of exchanging in<strong>for</strong>mation in an organization may create a common<br />
in<strong>for</strong>mation field or organizational mental map, <strong>and</strong> its size is larger than any particular individual<br />
map, which is limited by the content of only one memory.<br />
‘In<strong>for</strong>mation’ does not exist in nature as a certain substance. It is impossible to say whether a<br />
signal (taken as it is) carries any in<strong>for</strong>mation or not. It depends not only on the signal, but on the<br />
result of the interaction between two mental maps. If none of these maps has been changed – then<br />
no in<strong>for</strong>mation took place. The “signal” was merely noise.<br />
Quantity of in<strong>for</strong>mation<br />
The result of an in<strong>for</strong>mation process may be estimated by the amount of uncertainty that was taken<br />
away. The uncertainty depends, in its turn, on a variety of possible situations, which should be<br />
distinguished as different. ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ – it is only one bit. ‘To be’ or ‘not to be’ – is also only one<br />
bit. But the label on a bottle of good old wine means a lot <strong>for</strong> those who underst<strong>and</strong>.<br />
The quantity of uncertainty that may be taken away by one signal is up to the in<strong>for</strong>mational<br />
capacity of the signal. It depends on how many signals exist in the applied system of coding, <strong>and</strong><br />
what is the probability of the appearance of each particular signal. The greater the variety of<br />
situations represented by the given range of signals the more uncertainty. No uncertainty is related<br />
to situations that always <strong>and</strong> definitely take place. The less probable a situation (<strong>and</strong> the<br />
appearance of its corresponding signals), the more uncertainty will be taken away when the signal<br />
comes.<br />
However, the amount of ‘in<strong>for</strong>mation‘ that a signal may carry (in<strong>for</strong>mational capacity) may not be<br />
the same as the amount actually transferred. The barrel may be big, but empty. It all depends if the<br />
in<strong>for</strong>mation process took place, which is not always the case when just sending <strong>and</strong> receiving<br />
signals takes place. Consider reading an old newspaper without any real ‘news’ in it, or listening to<br />
a lecturer who says nothing but speaks <strong>for</strong> an hour, or a philharmonic orchestra that uses the huge<br />
in<strong>for</strong>mational potential of combined signals from hundreds of instruments – <strong>and</strong> does not produce<br />
any relevant feelings.<br />
56