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.
The sequence of artificial signals (may be symbols or words) that transfers in a coded <strong>for</strong>m certain<br />
content, constitutes a message.<br />
The more primitive language is (or the smaller number of various words it has <strong>and</strong> consequently<br />
the smaller capacity of each word), the more words or longer message is needed to transfer<br />
certain in<strong>for</strong>mational content. That is probably why most primitive creatures used to speak a lot …<br />
that’s a joke. They just like to communicate. Content is not the point.<br />
In order to transfer more ‘delicate’ (gradation of more tiny details), or more ‘complex’ (gradation of<br />
more variable senses) content within the acceptable time limit, one should use a rich language that<br />
possesses more available words <strong>and</strong> their combinations. However, as in the case of signals, using<br />
more powerful language does not automatically mean transferring more in<strong>for</strong>mation.<br />
Language hierarchy<br />
If some groups of words may be recognized as having certain invariable meanings <strong>and</strong> could be<br />
assigned on this basis to a category of universal meaning – then <strong>for</strong> that category <strong>and</strong> related<br />
meanings, a new special word may be introduced – let say ‘a food’, or ‘a colour’, or ‘a servant’, etc.<br />
Thus a language of another level may be created – in this case it could be called metalanguage.<br />
One word in metalanguage substitutes <strong>for</strong> many words of basic language, but also looses a big<br />
part of the in<strong>for</strong>mational content. Sometimes it is not important (e.g. it does not matter if it is a<br />
carrot or a tomato – just vegetables), <strong>and</strong> then usage of metalanguage saves a lot of time by<br />
transferring one important feature or phenomenon, while not overloading channels of<br />
communication with details. However, there is big danger. Any generalization causes a loss of<br />
in<strong>for</strong>mation. This lost in<strong>for</strong>mation may be very important <strong>for</strong> making practical decisions <strong>and</strong><br />
organizing corresponding actions.<br />
Metalanguages are widely used in sciences <strong>and</strong> other abstract applications, <strong>and</strong> some people<br />
think that use of a metalanguage evidences their outst<strong>and</strong>ing literacy. They say ‘a vehicle’, instead<br />
of saying ‘a car’, <strong>and</strong> ‘a vessel’ instead of ‘a motorboat’, <strong>and</strong> so on. In fact, they use the same<br />
number of words, or sometimes need many more words to transfer similar content. It makes<br />
communication very complicated <strong>and</strong> looks more stupid than literal. One great word is a<br />
metalanguage <strong>for</strong> all that – it is ‘bullshit’.<br />
With regard to organizations, it should now be clear that when a hierarchical structure is in place,<br />
each level of controllers operate with their own language, which is a metalanguage <strong>for</strong><br />
57