On first review, this perspective does not differ greatly from that offered by Plato. The narratives may be considered nothing more than second-hand conversations about images on the cave’s walls or just the echoes that cave dwellers believe come from these images. Yet, there is a difference, for the narratives and conversations are not just ABOUT experiences, they ARE themselves experiences. This sense of a constructed reality that is reinforced by narrative and conversation is a starting point for dynamic constructivism—just as it is a starting point for static forms of constructivism.
The key point with regard to dynamic constructivism is that each specific conversation is itself a reality. Each interpersonal relationship creates a new world. Shared narratives and language are where we actually meet with other people and our society. From this perspective, our stories about self that we shared with other people will constitute our fundamental sense of self. But simply, relationships are the building blocks of our identity. Perhaps our stories about self are everything we mean by the term “self.”
Narratives of Self
This would suggest that our stories about childhood, about major adult accomplishments, and about difficult lifelong disappointments may be the basic building blocks of self-image—whether or not they are accurate. Contemporary practitioners of therapy and coaching like Julio Olalla and David Drake (Drake, Brennan & Gørtz, 2008) emphasize the role of narrative for a good reason. As I have noted, narrative is a very powerful and influential tool not only for influencing (and even determining) reality in an organization, but also for determining reality regarding one’s sense of (and appreciation for) self. Extraverts have it over the Introverts from this dynamic constructivist perspective in that they are more likely to engage in relationships and share narratives that help to define their own sense of self. It is hard finding self within a personally constructed and isolated silo.
We are profoundly impacted by two often unacknowledged (or even unseen) forces in these narratives. First, we are influenced by the broad-based social constructions of reality which are conveyed through the stories of the society and organization in which we find ourselves. This is the contribution made by static constructivists. Second, we are influenced by a more narrowly based personal construction of reality that is conveyed through stories we tell other people about ourselves (and perhaps stories that we inherit from and about our family and immediate community). This is the contribution made by dynamic constructivism. We can expand beyond the dynamic construction of self to the dynamic construction of reality in relationships, groups and organizations—as long as we choose to enter these interactive worlds.
More than ever, our work-related (transactional) and personal (autotelic) relationships are based on and dependent on these dynamic interpersonal conversations as well as shifting, context-based narratives. Most people, resources and attention in present-day transactional work groups and organizations are devoted not to the direct production of goods or direct provision of services, but instead to the use of verbal and written modes of communication about these goods and services.
In our autotelic relationships we are likely to find greatest satisfaction in the sharing of stories, reflecting on past experiences, and providing a vision of how our relationship is likely to evolve in the near future. Given these transactional and autotelic conditions, story-telling and narrative are central to 21st century relationships. Those aligned with a dynamic constructivist perspective tell us that stories are the lifeblood and source of sustenance in our personal and organizational lives. The construction of stories about personal, group and organizational successes and failures is critical to the processes of change and transformation at any of these three levels.
