A.K.A. the addiction to theoretical thought patterns
I have been in the role of consultant/teacher/coach/manager for about the
past sixteen years. In that time I have noticed this general pattern that
can be highly determental to growth and change within individuals and can
also be a causal variable of lack of growth in groups also.
That pattern I find with myself and with many other people, actually it is
a natural part of being human, is the avoidance of unconsciously
conditioned painful stimuli and situations. As a reaction to those painful
possible events I have sought understanding and knowledge regarding them.
Sometimes that seeking of information and models was impart a process of
avoiding dealing with the situations at hand -- enough knowledge was known
to procede but action was not taken. An over seeking pattern was often the
case.
It has long been known that nervous systems are geared towards comforting
pleasureable stimuli and adverse to painful stimuli. Infants cry when wet,
bored, hungry, and irritated, hoping that the care giver will relieve that
discomfort. They smile, wiggle, and drool when in comfort. We all at a
base level never grow out of that genetic predisposition of approach
avoidance behavior. However as adults we have a free will to elect to go
through painful situations if so chosen.
One area I do consulting in is with weight management. Each week new diet
books, tapes, programs, supplements, and such emerge in the market.
However the basics of adipose tissue reduction, fat loss, is well known,
eat less -- move more. It is a simple ratio equation of reducing the
caloric intake below the caloric energy need over a period of time. That
process will work with every functioning human system. What are people
avoiding? Why are the needing more information?
Even scientists get into the avoidance act. One of my favorite discoveries
in this area of avoiding the basics is the research line surrounding UCP2
( uncoupling protein 2). Why I find this humorous is that millions of
dollars are spent in this area to investigate these mysterious reasons for
fat gain. The UCP2 theory is the latest in a long line. What the
researchers basically found was that laboratory rats with the genetic
marker of lessor UCP2 functioning put on more weight than lab rats who had
a greater level of UCP2.
What they failed to highlight was that the UCP2 level only makes a
difference when the rats are fed an extremely high fat diet. When fed a
"normal" diet the level of UCP2 didn't make a difference. However this
initial finding of UCP2 differences was touted as an enourmous break
through in the understanding of obescity.
The data in those studies of UCP2 would more support the realistic
findings that eat less/ move more is the more rational approach. However
it was used to validate more theoretical discovery. That process of
contorting the data is what psychologists call a self validating
heuristic, the seeking of the comfort of ones present knowledge structure
over the continuation of dissonance resolution.
I mentally loop back to the initial issue at hand, approach avoidance
behavior and getting lost in theory. An example was given regarding a
basic issue in the context of weight management. I will now connect that
with the idea of becoming lost in theory, metaphor, and modeling. More
specifically about the possibility of the field of learning organization
having a tendency to follow a similar pattern that exists in the weight
management field. This concerns me because in the weight management area
monies spent excede 35 billion dollars every year just in the positive
pursuit of fat loss but the average dieter gains weight. That to me is
complete failure industry wide.
I will make a disclaimer at this point. I am very much pro science,
discovery, modeling making ( heck my masters work was in a Mathematical
Model of Fractional Memory using Bayesion estimation procedures... just
about as theoretical and modeling as one can get in psychological
circles). I also think that research and theory discussion is helpful. I
am also an advocate of using metaphors in a context of learning when the
metaphors are used to explicate well researched areas, not to be confused
with using metaphors as supporting or validating conclusions. Conclusions
are best validated and found reliable based on replicated studies and with
an expansion of investigation of possible influencing factors. Well
researched areas then would best be fitted into an overall picture of the
situation.
Like with the UCP2 example, it fits the overall picture of why someone
might gain weight quicker in a highly unhealthy situation. It doesn't
however fit very well in the fat loss area very well. Actually it has very
little to do with fat loss but only fat gain. It explains why in unhealthy
dietetic conditions some people get extremely obese and some just obese.
My main concern is when a divergence into theory becomes a
distraction/avoidance behavior. That situation is even more disheartening
when the level of present knowledge is at an adequate level for an
implementation program.
Like with the example in weight management, I see learning organization
theoretical pursuits in some ways as distractions from known basic
knowledge that is at an adequate present level for implementation
pursuits. The understanding of weight loss is known, as is the information
of how people learn. Yes there is an endless amount of research that can
be done in the highly intricate biochemical interactions in the human
body, but the basics of what is needed to lose weight is known. The same
conculsion can be drawn in the area of learning, whether on the individual
or group level. I see most of the research in pharmacological treatments,
nutritional supplementation, and physiological differences between obese
and normal weight individuals as supporting the avoidance related
behaviors. I am concerned that the same validating the distraction
strategy is happening in the area of learning organizations.
I see a similar pattern in this area of Learning Organizations. This is
not a criticism but an observation to help guide and Focus people into
action as I do as a weight management coach.
As with helping people to emotionaly adapt to known information in weight
management, I am reasonably sure the same psychological variables exist in
the context of adjusting to making changes in other learning areas where
the discomfort of breaking out of the precieved comfort zone exists.
In weight management people often get lost in "what is the right diet or
exercise program" and I compare that to the searching and high emotional
need for better models in learning organization theory.
I will end here for today.
Just some thoughts on the matter,
Glen
--Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>