Stage-2: Structural Model

ClosedReminder of the clarification process so far:

Develop a Holistic Model

The requirement for explanation is the foundation for all modes of clarification that are progressively called into play.

Situations vary in their relevance and our preoccupation with them varies according to many factors. So a person can be satisfied with the explanation that emerges in the Causal mode (Stage-1).

However, progress to obtain greater clarity will be driven by the limitations of Mode-1, which might be variously described as superficiality, conventionality, simplicity, naivety, implausibility, artificiality, partiality.

More details do not help. Greater clarity comes from stepping back and seeing the bigger picture of which the situation is a part or an example. This requires setting bounds to the situation and seeking an overview within those bounds. It becomes necessary to look beyond salient factors to an underlying system within which they manifest.

Taken together, these requirements are naturally be met by values from the Structural paradigm (L'6).

Values & Assumptions

Stage-2-structural to provide an overview of the situation.

Promoting Acceptability

ClosedEssence: Holistic Model

A holistic model is an organized structure. It sets out the relevant components underpinning a situation 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.

ClosedDesired Benefit: Stable Framework

The well-developed model is a stable structure that remains even as the situation evolves and 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.

ClosedMeans: Abstract Categories

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 are recognized as applying to such well-defined categories.

Handling the Group

ClosedParticipation: Affirm Validity

All in the group need to be persuaded of the validity of the model for clarification to develop. That is most likely if they have been consulted or have actively participated in the model-building process. When that is impossible, then affirmation and backing by respected authorities or by long-standing use must be substituted.

Affirmation of validity does not mean the model is adequate.

Example: Montesquieu 's"separation of powers" model of government which identifies the Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary as the necessary organs, is widely affirmed. A moment's reflection reveals that this model is incomplete because it excludes powers possessed by a Head of State (or Monarch), the Administrative Bureaucracy, and the Military. Omitting powerful political entities that are professional and practically independent can impact the whole of society and so limits the model's ability to clarify and predict political developments.

ClosedCommunication: Explain the Schema

The goal in clarification is to develop a useful tool for collaboration or to enable permission for particular initiatives. So any schema needs to be explained clearly so that others will appreciate its nature and usefulness. The schematic reduction can be supported with relevant data and statistical analyses (from Causal values) to deepen acceptance. Properly understood, the model acts as a framework for creativity in responding to the situation.

ClosedIndividualization: Identify Implications

Holistic thinking is not natural for most people, but it is fostered when a model that clarifies issues is provided. By indicating the implications that you see and perhaps desire or fear, the model is shown to have impact. The model with its data can then assist others in identifying hidden risks or opportunities. By contrast, implications of a situation can be easily missed by only focusing on specific salient features in Stage-1.

Channeling Your Functioning:

ClosedGain Support: Expertise

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

The situation explained at Stage-1 indicated that all the Board needed to do was get consensus on policy. But this was not something that could be easily implemented. The Board had a standard guide to policy-making but arguments developed around each step. It was evident that more clarification was needed.

«Policy» is a form of purpose to direct the organisation and so the mystery and disputes might be resolved by developing a holistic model of purposes with a place for policy. Enquiry revealed that purpose could be modelled as a seven level hierarchy of elemental forms with the purpose at each level answering "why" to the level below, and "how" to the level above.

Directions to promote change had to constrain and channel purposive activity and this was based on combining adjacent levels e.g. "plans" were strategic objectives (outcomes) delivered via tactical objectives (tasks). Policies fitted into this schema as "priorities" delivered via "outcomes". That formulation provided significantly greater clarification to get consensus and aid the policy-making process.

Limitations

The additional clarification provided by a well-crafted model at Stage-2 represents a step-change in clarity.

However, models that simply order categories are liable to be lifeless abstractions. Frameworks lack the disputes, differences, give-and-take and diverse agendas that characterize real-world situations.

Example: 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.

Settling at this Stage

Placing a plausible explanation in the context of a holistic model that provides an overview of the situation may provide sufficient clarity, especially if there are statistical analyses as well.

If this is the case, then there will be no felt need to seek further clarification.

Transition

However, if a sense of mystery persists and there is dissatisfaction with the degree of clarification, then the situation requires further attention.

Organized structures are constructed out of abstract categories and have no life. A key quality of human situations is that they are filled with emotions, that ambiguities are prevalent, that people within them disagree, and that tensions and stresses exist. That means all situations are subject to social energies and ethical pressures. The natural next step in clarification is therefore to clarify these phenomena.

Tensions based on human biases, frailties and idiosyncrasies generate requirements for handling. The position of groups representing these infuse any model and operate as a backdrop for specific interactions within the framework. With a holistic ordered model in place, it becomes possible to identify tensions affecting it.

The initial Stage-1 causal explanation looked inwards to a desire to remove confusion and could be subjectively generated without excessive concern for the realities.

The present structural model developed in Stage-2 must be objectively developed in order to cover a class of real-world situations.

So, it might be expected that Stage-3 would again be subjectively generated. Identifying these tensions requires empathy with the individuals and groups in the situation.

The clarity mode that naturally provides for tension is the Dualistic-L'4.

ClosedRuling Out Alternative Moves

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.

Originally posted: 30-Oct-2024. Last amended: 30-Apr-2025.