The Constructivist Modeling Relation
On the above chart, there is a subject existing in a context and doing the perceiving. Since it is important to be explicit, we state that the goal is to recognize the essence of whatever the external thing is, however one may want to go about defining essence. Once we have recognized that essence, we create the possibility for acting upon or with it. We are going to define “model” as a reduced representation of the thing. It’s a reduced representation of the essence. The chart includes three hermeneutic circles, and all three are important. The circles recognize that the self will have some ongoing, continually revised relationship with a reduced representation, which will change as one goes about making predictions and seeing whether they get validated by one’s understanding of the essence as one deals with it. Notice that there is no room to ascribe a label to the essence. This chart relies on an activity-based conception of the external thing and not on categories. Changing the modeling relation in this way puts the self back, but it also changes how managers go about dealing with their world because once they recognize that the ascribed labels are reduced representations that only get validated in activity, they’re no longer fixed and stable. They’re always open for questioning. They’re always part of a hermeneutic circle. The questioning and thought embodied by a hermeneutic circle are not how we teach our managers to behave. The traditional approach of define, label, and then act in accordance with the label is no longer sufficient. Instead, there is a dialogue between temporary definition and potential action that must be attended to.
By doing this, the perceiving subject has been restored to prominence. The very notion of encoding and decoding that was at the top and bottom of Rosen’s chart have been replaced by a set of hermeneutic circles – I come up with a representation; it cues me into meaning; I have a dialogue with context that may alter the representation, which cues me into more meaning, repeat.The real world has been replaced, instead, by a notion of an essence of whatever the external item is. A model’s validity becomes a function of its usefulness in articulating that essence to self and to others. If the model doesn’t help articulate something about the essence that is at least potentially actionable, then the model is no good.This is a very different test than can one make predictions and do the predictions have implications in the real world?
