Erasmus Syllogisms in Cognition and Facilitation of Organizational Innovation

  • Rolf Johan Bye SINTEF Digital
  • Stein Erik Johansen Norwegian University of Technology and Science

Abstract

By use of an empirical example from a planned organizational change program within an international company, we examine how specific characteristics of objects (forms) used to represent ideas –  in interaction with “hard-wired” aspects of human cognition –  may contribute to explain outcomes of translation processes and the extent of alteration of the design of the future organization.  We argue that a type of syllogism judged as invalid by criteria of formal logics – denoted as Erasmus syllogism – could be rather common in reasoning, and that these logically invalid interferences may contribute to significant innovations. Situations where syllogisms are not recognized as invalid by the involved actors seem to be more prevalent when e.g. the actors are unfamiliar with the semantic content (as e.g. abstract symbols). We argue that understanding of semiotic conditions for occurrence of formal logically invalid syllogism, as well as of the neglect of their invalidity by involved actors in ongoing discourses and reasoning, may contribute to a better understanding of how ideas and objects are translated, within organizations as well as in general. The discussion is a contribution to better understanding of why and how ideas are altered as part of ongoing sense making processes within organizations.

Author Biographies

Rolf Johan Bye, SINTEF Digital
Rolf Johan Bye is senior researcher at SINTEF Digital, Norway and associated with Department of social anthropology at Norwegian University of Technology and Science. He holds a PhD in sociology and a PhD (Norwegian ‘magistergrad’) in social anthropology. His main areas of research are processes of organizational change, organizational learning, work practices, organizational safety, and related applications of management theories. He has been involved in several research project within organizations in various industries (including oil and gas, aviation, shipping, and chemical industry) and various countries (including Norway, UK, Hungary, Oman, and China). Corresponding author: rolf.johan.bye@sintef.no.
Stein Erik Johansen , Norwegian University of Technology and Science
Stein Erik Johansen is full professor in social anthropology at Norwegian University of Technology and Science, and adjunct professor at Division of Physics, Institute for Basic Research, Florida, USA. He holds a D.Sc. (classical Norwegian dr. philos.) in economics (1991) and a PhD (Norwegian ‘magistergrad’) in philosophy (1985). He has received the Santilli-Galilei Award (Gold Medal and Prize 2008) from Santilli-Galilei Academy ” in honour of contributions to natural philosophy”, and the SIPS Scientific Award (2016) to scientists having “achieved notable contribution in mathematical sciences” – “for unprecedented advances in the Fibonacci numbers”. His main areas of research have been within economic theory and anthropology, number theory, complexity and system theory, epistemology/ontology, and cognitive anthropology.

References

Bateson G. 1972. Steps to an Ecology of Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Bateson G. 1988 [1979]. Mind and Nature. A Necessary Unity. NewYork: Bantam.

Bateson G. 1987. Angels Fear. Towards an Epistemology of the Sacred. New York: Macmillan.

Brunsson, N. 2000. The Irrational Organization: Irrationality as a Basis for Organizational Action and Change. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.

Brunsson, N. 1989. The organization of hypocrisy: Talk, decisions and actions in organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Brunsson, N. 1986. Organizing for inconsistencies: On organizational conflict, depression and hypocrisy as substitutes for action. Scandinavian Journal of Management Studies. 2 (3-4):165-185. https://doi.org/10.1016/0281-7527(86)90014-9

Bye R.J. 2010. Endring som læring: En studie av innføringen av SAP og nye arbeidsprosesser i Statoils BRA-prosjekt. PhD thesis 2010 (129). Trondheim: NTNU.

Chambers, R. 2006. Participatory mapping and geographic information systems: Whose map? Who is empowered and who disempowered? Who gains and who loses? The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries 251:1-11. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1681-4835.2006.tb00163.x

Churchland, P.S. 1986. Neurophilosophy. Toward a Unified Science of the Mind-Bran. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Cohen, M.D., March, J.G. & Olsen, J.P. 1972. A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice. Administrative Science Quarterly. 17 (1):1-25. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392088

Czarniawska-Joerges, B. 2007. Shadowing: and other techniques for doing fieldwork in modern societies. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press DK.

Czarniawska, B. 2001. Anthropology and organizational learning. In M. Dierkes et al. (eds.) Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge, pp.118-136. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Czarniawska, B. & Joerges, B. 1996. Travels of ideas. In Czarniawska, B. & G. Sevón (Eds.), Translating Organizational Change. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110879735.13

Czarniawska, B. & G. Sevón 2005. Translation is a vehicle, imitation its motor, and fashion sits at the wheel. In B. Czarniawska & G. Sevón (eds.) Global ideas: how ideas, objects and practices travel in a global economy (Vol. 13). Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.51.3.512

D´Andrade, R. 1989. Culturally Based Reasoning. In A.R.H. Gellatly, D. Rogers & J.A. Sloboda (eds.) Cognitions and Social Worlds. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

D´Andrade, R. 1992. “Cognitive Anthropology.” In T. Schwartz, G.M. White and C.A. Lutz (eds.) New directions in psychological anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

D'Andrade, R.G. 1995. The development of cognitive anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Davenport, T.H. 1993. Process Innovation. Reengineering Work through Information Technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Davenport, T.H. 1993. Process Innovation. Reengineering Work through Information Technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Deming, W. E. 1982. Out of the Crisis. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Deming, W.E. & D.W. Edwards 1982. Quality, productivity, and competitive position (Vol. 183). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Center for advanced engineering study, MIT.

DiMaggio, P.J. and W.W. Powell 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review. 48 (2): 147-160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101

Emery, F. & E. Thorsrud 1976. Democracy at work: The report of the Norwegian industrial democracy program (Vol. 2). Dordrecht: Springer.

Gondhalekar, S., A. Subash Babu & N.B. Godrej 1995. „Towards TQM using kaizen process dynamics: a case study.” International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 12 (9):192-209. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656719510101286

Greenwood, D.J. and M. Levin 1998. Introduction to action research. Social research for social change. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication.

Hackman, J.R. 1986. The psychology of self-management in organizations. In M.S. Pallack & R.O. Perloff (eds.) Psychology and Work: Productivity, change, and employment. Washington DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10055-003

Hammer, M. 1990. Reengineering Work: Don´t Automate, Obliterate. Harvard Business Review 64 (4):104-113.

Hammer, M. 1996. Beyond reengineering. How the process-centred organization is changing our works and our lives. London: Harper Collins Publishers.

Hammer, M. and J. Champy 1993. Reengineering the Corporation. New York: Harper Collins.

Herbst, P.G. 1976. Alternatives to hierarchies. International series on the quality of working life; vol. 2. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Social Sciences Division.

Holberg, Ludvig 1967 [1723]. Erasmus Montanus eller Rasmus Berg. Oslo: Gyldendal.

Johansen, S.E. 2018. Systematic Unfoldment of Differential Ontology from Qualitative Concept of Information. In: C. Thomas (ed.): Ontology in Information Science, ch. 10:225-254. InTechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72951

Johansen S.E. 2008. Grunnriss av en differensiell epistemologi. 2nd ed. Oslo: Abstrakt. (English translation from Norwegian in transit: Outline of Differential Epistemology.)

Kahneman, D., Slovic, S. P., Slovic, P., and Tversky, A. (eds.) 1982. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511809477

Latour, B. 1987. Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Boston: Harvard University Press.

Lundberg, K. G., and Sataøen, H. L. 2014. Institusjonell etnografi: Ei inspirasjonskjelde for den skandinaviske organisasjonsteorien? Nordiske organisasjonsstudier. 16 (1):30-50.

Mandler, J.M. 1984. Stories, Scripts, and Scenes. Aspects of Schema Theory. New York: Psychology Press.

March, J.G. 1994: A Primer on Decision Making. New York: The Free Press.

Manz, C.C. 1992. Self-leadership... the heart of empowerment. The Journal for Quality and Participation. 15 (4): 80.

Meyer, J.W. and R. Rowan 1977. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structures as myth and ceremony. American journal of Sociology. 83 (2):340-363. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550

Rosch, E. 1983. Prototype Classification and Logical Classification: The Two Systems. In E.K. Scholnick (ed.) New Trends in Conceptual Representation: Challenges to Piaget’s Theory?, pp. 73-86. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Røvik K.A. 2002. The Secrets of the Winners: Management Ideas that Flow. In K. Sahlin-Andersson and L. Engwall. (eds.) The expansion of management knowledge: Carriers, flows, and sources. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Røvik, K.A. 2011. From fashion to virus: An alternative theory of organizations’ handling of management ideas. Organization Studies. 32 (5):631-653. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840611405426

Røvik, K. A. 2016. Knowledge transfer as translation: Review and elements of an instrumental theory. International Journal of Management Reviews. 18 (3):290-310. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12097

Simon, H.A. 1955. A behavioral model of rational choice. The quarterly journal of economics 69 (1): 99-118.

Scott, W.R. 1995. Institutions and organizations. Ideas, Interests, and Identities. Los Angeles: SAGE.

Star, S.L. 1988. The structure of ill-structured solutions: Boundary objects and heterogeneous distributed problem solving. In M. Huhns & L. Gasser (eds.) Readings in distributed artificial intelligence. Menlo Park, CA: Kaufman. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-1-55860-092-8.50006-x

Star, S.L. 2010. This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science, Technology, & Human Values. 35 (5):601-617. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243910377624

Star, S.L. and J.R. Griesemer 1989. Institutional ecology, ‘translations' and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social studies of science. 19 (3):387-420. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001

Suárez-Barraza, M.F. and T. Lingham 2008. Kaizen within kaizen teams: continuous and process improvements in a Spanish municipality. Asian Journal on Quality. 9 (1):1-21. https://doi.org/10.1108/15982688200800001

Trist, E.L. 1976. Critique of scientific management in terms of socio-technical theory. In M. Weir (ed.) Job Satisfaction, pp.81-90. London: Fontana.

Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. 1982. Judgments of and by representativeness. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, and A. Tversky (eds.) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases, 84–98. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511809477.007

Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. 1983. Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review 90: 293–315. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.90.4.293

Wason, P.C. 1968. Reasoning about a Rule. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 20: 73-281.

Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wæraas, A. and Nielsen, J. A. 2016. Translation theory ‘translated’: Three perspectives on translation in organizational research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 18 (3): 236-270. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12092

Published
2020-04-30
Section
Articles