Mode-2: Coherent Frameworks

• Mode-1: Produce a satisfying explanation of the situation. [Causal]

The mode of realizing (μ) refers to the set of values to be incorporated from a depiction method. Once incorporated, there is a new Stage of clarification (Φ) that includes values of all previous modes.

Stage-1 clarification (Φ1) offers an explanation that satisfies by being plausible.

A holistic model is an organized structure intrinsic to the situation. It sets out the relevant components and shows how they function and connect with each other. There is an assumed boundary with everything else regarded as part of the context or environment, or part of some other system which is not currently the focus.

Such an overview is emotionally soothing because it reduces complexity, protects us from getting lost in details, prevents tunnel vision, and reduces risks of hasty judgement driven by salience and superficial plausibility.

The well-developed model is a stable structure that remains even as the situation evolves and some factors vary. So it provides a framework for considering a response or making an intervention.

Models provide a sense of coherence based on a solid internal logic of the components and their functioning and relationships. Because the model is bounded and designed to be complete, it provides the desired overview and removes the worry that an essential factor has been forgotten or omitted in the explanation.

Particularities of the problematic situation are liable to change. In order to develop a robust model, it is necessary to abstract from actual phenomena. Even if the label appears to identify a particular group (e.g. the military) or event (e.g. death rate), the factor needs abstraction to become more general and more powerfully explanatory.

Each category needs to be explained in terms of its primary function, its properties and its relations to other categories in the model. Principles and guidelines for understanding and deciding can be built from such well-defined categories.

All in the group need to be persuaded of the validity of the model and sense that it clarifies the situation. That is most likely if they have been consulted or have actively participated in the model-building process. When that is impossible, then their own common-sense should be backed by affirmation from respected authorities or by long-standing use of the model.

Affirmation of validity does not mean the model is adequate.
Example: Montesquieu's"separation of powers" model for governing In his treatise: The Spirit of Laws (1748). .

Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary are identified as the necessary organs of social power. A moment's reflection reveals that this model is incomplete because it excludes powers of the Head of State (or Monarch), the Administrative Bureaucracy, and the Military. People unaware of these immensely powerful professionalized and independent political entities are effectively blind; and the model's ability to clarify and predict political developments is correspondingly limited.

The goal in clarification is to develop a useful tool for collaboration or to get permission for particular initiatives. So any schema needs to be explained clearly for others to appreciate its applicability. The schematic reduction may need to be supported with relevant data and statistical analyses (from Causal-μ1 values) to deepen acceptance. Properly understood, the schema then supports a creative response to the situation.

Framework thinking is not natural for most people, but it is fostered when a model that clarifies issues is provided. By indicating obvious desired or feared implications, the model is shown to have impact. The model with its data can then serve as a framework for identifying hidden risks or opportunities. By contrast, implications of a situation can be easily missed in Stage-1 which only focuses on specific salient features.

In order to develop a model, preoccupation with an aura of expertness (from mode-1) is not enough. It must be enhanced by becoming an actual expert, which may involve dedicated study or extensive lived experience. Expertise legitimises your contribution and ensures that you will speak out with clarity and authority. It helps you win support for your framework and overview.

When the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines in the Baltic Sea were sabotaged in September 2022, the discussion focused on the perpetrator: who caused the event? was it Russia, Ukraine, USA, or another country? This model of international relations is epitomized in the UN with its voting system. Little attention is given to the reality that no country is a unitary actor. There are multiple divergent organized elements in any country that are often in conflict and potentially act independently: the government executive, the parliament, the military, the intelligence services, other government agencies, business entities, pressure groups.

Governments are frequently satisfied by a structuralist account. Jaques's management framework was used in a re-structure the NHS in 1972. A group chaired by the then Permanent Secretary, Sir Phillip Rogers, produced the Management arrangements for the reorganised National Health Service report, which became known as 'The Grey Book'. It was intensely criticized as "bureaucratic" because the focus on roles and authority relationship inevitably omitted much of what insiders knew was the reality of management.

Movement directly to a mode based on Dynamic depiction (L'1) is not possible because clarification of underlying tensions and enduring polarization is a prerequisite for appreciating interactions and feedback effects. Moving to modes based on outer circle methods (Atomistic-L'2, Unitary-L7, Unified-L'5) still seem to require a more substantial and properly developed explanation.