AN EXAMPLE OF USING DOOYEWEERD IN STRATEGY PLANNING: BRINGING COHERENCE TO DISPARATE COLLECTION OF DISCIPLINES The situation is a University Faculty, that of Business and Informatics, that is composed of a disparate collection of disciplines. A new Dean was appointed and was concerned about how to bring some coherence. This file contains the text of several emails that illustrate how Dooyeweerd's ideas might help in such a task. ------------------- The Original Email ------------------------- Dear Carole, It was very interesting talking with you after Grahame's Inaugural Lecture. I like what I was hearing from you. You voiced a query about how to speak a coherent story and strategy in such a disparate faculty. Perhaps, as we said, one central theme is management. Perhaps one is information. But perhaps an equally valuable approach is to identify the diversity rather than the unity, and make a strength of that. On the train home I was thinking about the scientific areas that each of the departments cover, and converted it to a diagram (deliberately omitting the labels until below): |**** |*** | |* |*** |** |***** |****** |****** |**** |****** |****** |*** | | The significance of this spread can be seen if we compare it with other faculties. (Actually, I am only guessing what is in other faculties, so maybe if this approach is useful then a better analysis should be done.) Faculty of Science, Engineering and Environment: |**** |*** |** |****** |****** |**** |**** |** | | | | | | | Faculty of Health and Social Care | | | |* |****** |***** |**** | | |****** | | | |*** | Faculty of Arts, Media and Social Sciences | | | | | | | |****** |****** |****** | |****** | | | Notice three things. One is that our faculty has interests in more of the scientific areas than any of the others. Another is that it spreads from the earliest to nearly the latest while the other faculties have particular 'bunches'. A third is that our faculty covers both determinative and normative sciences (earlier and later ones). Now, what is the framework I am using? I believe I have mentioned the pluralistic suite of 'independent' aspects proposed by the Dutch philospher Herman Dooyeweerd. His proposal is that: # that each aspect is an irreducibly distinct mode of being and meaning in which we might function, # that each has its own set of laws, # that Science is the discovery of these laws, hence an aspect defines the kernel of a scientific area # that each scientific area has different epistomologies and appropriate scientific research methods (e.g. theorem proof for mathematics, experiment with deduction for physics, interviews and surveys for social science, etc.) The fifteen aspects, and sciences, are: # Quantitative aspect, of amount: maths, accounting # Spatial aspect, of continuous extension: geometry, etc. # Kinematic aspect, of flowing movement: kinematics # Physical aspect, of energy and mass: physics, chemistry, etc. # Biotic aspect, of life functions: biology # Sensitive aspect, of sense, feeling and emotion: zoology, --- (determinative - normative divide) # Analytical aspect, of distinction, clarity and logic: logic # Formative aspect, of history, culture, creativity, achievement and technology: 'sciences of the artificial' (Simon) # Lingual aspect, of symbolic meaning and communication: semiotics, linguistics # Social aspect, of social interaction, relationships and institutions: social science # Economic aspect, of frugality, skilled use of limited resources: economic and management science # Aesthetic aspect, of harmony, surprise and fun: aesthetics # Juridical asepct, of 'what is due', rights, responsibilities: juridics # Ethical aspect, of self-giving love, generosity: ? # Pistic aspect, of faith, commitment and vision: theology With our faculty's scores, and also the key words in department names: Quantitative |**** Accounting Spatial |*** Construction Kinematic | Physical |* Construction Biotic |*** Food Sensitive |** Food and leisure emotions --- Analytical |***** Information Systems Formative |****** Construction, I. Systems Lingual |****** Information Social |**** Hospitality Economic |****** Economic, Management Aesthetic |****** Leisure Juridical |*** Property Ethical | Pistic | Now, so what? I think this shows that our faculty has a wide range and a genuine interdisciplinarity which is not just the bringing together of a few similar disciplines. It is what I call 'wide interdisciplinarity' and it is a unique challenge. Moreover, the switchover from determinative to normative sciences occurs (I believe with some phasing in, though some old-timers believe it to be a step function) at the sensitive aspect. Our sciences cover both sides of this divide. Might this help? Let me know, Andrew. ---------------------- The Reply --------------------------------- Andrew You must have thought I'd totally ignored your e-mail! This certainly isn't the case. I have re-read it several times. Even if your analysis of the other Faculties is based on less knowledge of these than ours, I think the results are fascinating. I suppose it emphasises things I have already unconsciously known. For example, I have always believed that our Business Studies students face more of an intellectual challenge than many believe because they have to span so many scientific areas each with their different epistomologies and scientific research methods. (They cover from "quantitative" through to juridical). As you say how to really capitalise on our "wide interdisciplinarity" is the challenge! I haven't got much further in my thinking. There are some collaborations in teaching being developed between CPM and SoM and of course there are programmes that run across AEMS and SoM. On the enterprise side we are planning to adopt a more strategic approach to bidding to enable cross-school complimentary bids. I wondered if you have given it any more thought since you e- mailed me? Take care Carole ----------------------- The 'More Thought' ----------------------- Dear Carole, Many thanks for your reply - even if delayed; I am sorry my own reply has taken so long. You said: = As you say how to really capitalise on our "wide interdisciplinarity" = is the challenge! I haven't got much further in my thinking. There = are some collaborations in teaching being developed between CPM = and SoM and of course there are programmes that run across = AEMS and SoM. On the enterprise side we are planning to adopt = a more strategic approach to bidding to enable cross-school = complimentary bids. = = I wondered if you have given it any more thought since you e- = mailed me? I have now given it some more thought. I cannot say that I have any well-defined guidelines that can be applied in our situation, but I have indeed some further thoughts, and I offer you some of them in case they might be useful. If you remember, I said that the aspects are those proposed by the late Herman Dooyeweerd, a mid-20C Dutch philosopher. He proposed 15 such aspects and, though the precise set is under debate, the alternatives are not much different and the general notions behind aspectuality are fairly well agreed. I mentioned some of these in my original email: # that each aspect is an irreducibly distinct mode of being and meaning in which we might function, # that each has its own set of laws, # that Science is the discovery of these laws, hence an aspect defines the kernel of a scientific area # that each scientific area has different epistomologies and appropriate scientific research methods (e.g. theorem proof for mathematics, experiment with deduction for physics, interviews and surveys for social science, etc.) (FYI, the list of aspects is copied in at the end.) But there are others that are relevant to taking the idea further. The most important, for our purposes, are two: # Inter-Aspect Relationships. Though the aspects are irreducible to each other, they are meaningfully intertwined in two ways: dependency and analogy. # Dependency: The laws of an aspect depend, for their proper working, on those of earlier aspects (e.g. laws of biology depend on the proper working of the laws of physics). # Analogy: In each aspect there are echoes of all the others, leading to anticipations and retrocipations. # Shalom Hypothesis, or Simultaneous Realization of Norms. The aspects form a coherent whole such that if we function in line with the laws of all the aspects then this will lead to 'shalom', a Hebrew word for which there seems to be no English equivalent, that means a full, rich, rounded well-being. 'Success', 'prosperity', 'health', etc. are words that reflect this in various aspects (respectively, the formative, economic and biotic). Most human functioning in real life is multi-aspectual, and if poor functioning in any one aspect can jeopardize the whole activity. For example, in running a business or building an information system or any other activity, if we perpetrate injustice (juridical aspect) or foster ungenerosity (ethical aspect) or produce ugliness and disharmony (aesthetic aspect) or alienate people (social aspect) or ... then in the long run our running a business or building an information system will not be as fully successful as we might wish. I believe that these two concepts can help us, along with a recognition of the irreducibility of the aspects, in understanding interdisciplinarity and in coming to principles or guidelines for interdisciplinary working. Briefly, in considering two issues of faculty strategy and the direction that research might take (both here and worldwide): # Irreducibility leads us to mutual respect. Since each aspect is irreducible to others, none can be subsumed into others and each is important, in principle. No aspect is necessarily less complex or sophisticated than any other; so no discipline should be seen as of lesser status. Therefore I must respect those working in an aspect I am not expert in, in that I must recognise that it holds complexities and beauties that I cannot perceive. I place this issue of mutual respect first because I think it is crucial to team-building, but I do not necessarily imply it is more important than the other points. It prevents one discipline in our faculty being seen as merely there to 'service' another 'more important' one. # Dependency inter-aspect relationship. Recognition of this opens up the question of what the shape of these relationships is. For example, how does business (economic aspect) depend on information (lingual aspect). This, of course, has long been debated. But to see the economic and lingual as irreducibly distinct aspects can perhaps give a new clarity to the debate and in research and teaching, both in our faculty and potentially also in the worldwide community. A recognition that of inter-aspect dependency can perhaps also be used in faculty strategy planning, but I am not sure how at this point. # Inter-aspect anticipation and retrocipation. This is the basis for metaphor, which can help our thinking enormously - but it can also stultify and mislead our thinking when metaphors are taken too far. In any discipline there is frequently a number of perspectives from which research is planned and carried out, theories are developed and real-world action is taken. e.g. we might see the business in a number of ways. Now, the implication of this Dooyeweerdian thinking is that not every perspective is equally valid. Some will be based on cross-aspectual metaphors, and so the danger of taking such perspectives too far should be recognised. For example, it is likely to be more fruitful to treat business from a perspective that comes from the economic aspect than one that comes from the biotic (business as organism that 'grows'). At least in the long term. Recognising the analogical nature of many of our perspectives might not help faculty strategy (at least, I cannot see how at present), but I do think it might help research direction etc., especially in the worldwide communities of each discipline. # Shalom Hypothesis. This means that each discipline has an important contribution to make that should not be overlooked. This is related to the need for respect, but speaks more of a kind of logical necessity rather than social relationships in a team. In addition, it is an important element in defining success versus failure in real life. It is especially useful in information systems to tackle problems of multiple stakeholders, indirect impacts, unintended impacts, and long term impacts, which are difficult to tackle using other theories. I have indicated how these four points might help us in faculty strategy (including mutual respect), and setting direction for research. If you think there is any milage in these ideas, then we can consider them further. Some might require research. But some might require just further thinking, perhaps making use of various 'experts' in the field. I have a feeling that there is yet another application of these ideas to our faculty that I have not yet grasped. It is to do with the fact that each discipline has its own distinct culture and aspirations. But this will have to come with more pondering. But there are a couple of things I do not advocate. I am realistic enough to know that not every researcher and teacher in our faculty will adopt this view! So that cuts out a formally cohesive single research thrust based on this, even if such a thing were to be useful, which I very much doubt. A second thing to avoid is to try to take the whole world into our faculty. Such a strategy might seem to be implied by dependency and analogy, in that all aspects are important. But research must remain focused. These points above should, I believe, be used to critique and/or justify rather than to dictate. I trust this helps, and look forward to your reply. At least I should like to know which of these ideas seem useful, if any. Andrew. 16 January 2002. LIST OF ASPECTS The fifteen aspects, and sciences, are: # Quantitative aspect, of amount: maths, accounting # Spatial aspect, of continuous extension: geometry, etc. # Kinematic aspect, of flowing movement: kinematics # Physical aspect, of energy and mass: physics, chemistry, etc. # Biotic aspect, of life functions: biology # Sensitive aspect, of sense, feeling and emotion: zoology, --- (determinative - normative divide) # Analytical aspect, of distinction, clarity and logic: logic # Formative aspect, of history, culture, creativity, achievement and technology: 'sciences of the artificial' (Simon) # Lingual aspect, of symbolic meaning and communication: semiotics, linguistics # Social aspect, of social interaction, relationships and institutions: social science # Economic aspect, of frugality, skilled use of limited resources: economic and management science # Aesthetic aspect, of harmony, surprise and fun: aesthetics # Juridical asepct, of 'what is due', rights, responsibilities: juridics # Ethical aspect, of self-giving love, generosity: ? # Pistic aspect, of faith, commitment and vision: theology With our faculty's scores, and also the key words in department names: Quantitative |**** Accounting Spatial |*** Construction Kinematic | Physical |* Construction Biotic |*** Food Sensitive |** Food and leisure emotions --- Analytical |***** Information Systems Formative |****** Construction, I. Systems Lingual |****** Information Social |**** Hospitality Economic |****** Economic, Management Aesthetic |****** Leisure Juridical |*** Property Ethical | Pistic |