Here’s the thing, what would a new (future?) model of business look like, what distinguishes a new model from an old model, do we really need one and why, what would be the consequences of not transitioning to a new model and if a new model is necessary what is required to transition from one to the other?
But here’s a good place to start - What is meant by a model [of business] and what does it have to do with the average person, you and I, just doing our thing?
We can’t escape models, we have models of TV programming, construction, businesses, medicine, marriage, law, politics, communication, leadership... etc. Whether you’re aware of it or not, makes no difference, your using a model, it’s impossible not to.
At the heart of a model lies, logic and behaviour. So I could just as easily say the logic of business behaviour, the logic of medical behaviour, the logic of leadership behaviour and political behaviour - I’m sure you get the point.
A model therefore means a ‘logic of behaviour’.
In talking (behaviour), I use words and no matter what model I’m using, I’m still going to be using words. However, what words I use and how I put them together (order or sequence), is determined by a logic.
A logic can be understood as an ‘argument’, not a fight, lets say and intelligent and creative investigation between two people who have different assumptions on a specific topic, like reducing the public deficit. That’s a nice way of saying the debt politicians incurred on your behalf and which they expect you to pay back on theirs.
Or the logic of building a house. We start with the foundations and move up, why, because the fundamental assumption is one of gravity.
The assumption of gravity determines the logic and if we look at the way the house is constructed, in other words watch the logic of construction behaviour, we’ll soon be able to work out, whether we knew anything about gravity of not, that there must be a force pulling down, because the logic of construction is clearly showing that.
This is important - We can deduce or infer assumptions from the logic of behaviour, but we can’t see the assumptions themselves. We can’t see gravity, but we can infer gravity through the behaviour of a ball when we drop it.
Imagine building a house in zero gravity - a different assumptive base.
The construction process would use a different logic, not so.
It wouldn’t just affect the sequence or order of construction but the very materials used.
But consider this - If there was no gravity, would there be atmosphere. This would mean there’s no resistance, atmospheric pressure, weather, but there would be solar radiation and extreme temperatures. All of these ‘assumptions’ although relatively independent are held in place by the one absolute assumption of gravity.
Gravity, no gravity is an absolute assumption and atmospheric pressure a relative assumption, because it depends on the existence or non-existence of gravity.
As a thought experiment, imagine watching people build a house in a zero gravity environment, when such a thing was completely and utterly unknown and foreign to you. Would what they where doing make any sense. No, of course not, at first glance they would just seem to be silly.
A model is the logic of behaviour and behaviour is a flow of logic, all determined by layers of invisible relative assumption grounded in one absolute fundamental assumption.
At the heart of a model, at the heart of EVERYTHING we do lies a logic, and at the heart of logic lies one single absolute assumption.
Imagine me talking to you about a new model of business behaviour. Do you really think it’s going to make any sense if you are not aware of the absolute and relative assumptions determining the logic of that model.
It would just seem silly. Silly me!
I’m micro-blogging about this on the Enlightened Business Facebook Page, developing the investigation and taking questions, so as weird as that logic may seem ...
We can’t escape models, we have models of TV programming, construction, businesses, medicine, marriage, law, politics, communication, leadership... etc. Whether you’re aware of it or not, makes no difference, your using a model, it’s impossible not to.
At the heart of a model lies, logic and behaviour. So I could just as easily say the logic of business behaviour, the logic of medical behaviour, the logic of leadership behaviour and political behaviour - I’m sure you get the point.
A model therefore means a ‘logic of behaviour’.
In talking (behaviour), I use words and no matter what model I’m using, I’m still going to be using words. However, what words I use and how I put them together (order or sequence), is determined by a logic.
A logic can be understood as an ‘argument’, not a fight, lets say and intelligent and creative investigation between two people who have different assumptions on a specific topic, like reducing the public deficit. That’s a nice way of saying the debt politicians incurred on your behalf and which they expect you to pay back on theirs.
Or the logic of building a house. We start with the foundations and move up, why, because the fundamental assumption is one of gravity.
The assumption of gravity determines the logic and if we look at the way the house is constructed, in other words watch the logic of construction behaviour, we’ll soon be able to work out, whether we knew anything about gravity of not, that there must be a force pulling down, because the logic of construction is clearly showing that.
This is important - We can deduce or infer assumptions from the logic of behaviour, but we can’t see the assumptions themselves. We can’t see gravity, but we can infer gravity through the behaviour of a ball when we drop it.
Imagine building a house in zero gravity - a different assumptive base.
The construction process would use a different logic, not so.
It wouldn’t just affect the sequence or order of construction but the very materials used.
But consider this - If there was no gravity, would there be atmosphere. This would mean there’s no resistance, atmospheric pressure, weather, but there would be solar radiation and extreme temperatures. All of these ‘assumptions’ although relatively independent are held in place by the one absolute assumption of gravity.
Gravity, no gravity is an absolute assumption and atmospheric pressure a relative assumption, because it depends on the existence or non-existence of gravity.
As a thought experiment, imagine watching people build a house in a zero gravity environment, when such a thing was completely and utterly unknown and foreign to you. Would what they where doing make any sense. No, of course not, at first glance they would just seem to be silly.
A model is the logic of behaviour and behaviour is a flow of logic, all determined by layers of invisible relative assumption grounded in one absolute fundamental assumption.
At the heart of a model, at the heart of EVERYTHING we do lies a logic, and at the heart of logic lies one single absolute assumption.
Imagine me talking to you about a new model of business behaviour. Do you really think it’s going to make any sense if you are not aware of the absolute and relative assumptions determining the logic of that model.
It would just seem silly. Silly me!
I’m micro-blogging about this on the Enlightened Business Facebook Page, developing the investigation and taking questions, so as weird as that logic may seem ...
No comments:
Post a Comment