Models are:
- Based on paradigms (though the underlying paradigm might not be acknowledged—being part of the tacit knowledge base proposed by Michael Polanyi),
- Moderately large and diverse in number,
- Moderately powerful and influential, and
- Often borrowed from contemporary popular technologies.
As an example, Sigmund Freud based his drive theory in part on the recent invention (in the late 19th Century) of the pneumatic pump. One pushes down on a piston in one part of the room and then a piston in another part of the room moves upward with great power. The power is being transferred via air (or liquid) from one domain to another domain (this is where our psychological concept of “energy flow” comes from – not the flow of electricity, rather the flow of air or a viscous liquid). Thus, we “push down” a disturbing thought or feeling, which travels to another location and reemerges with great power (as a physical symptom or self-destructive act).
In contemporary times, a similar borrowing of models and technical terms from computer technologies is often found. We use terms and models such as “interface” and “processing.” The other very special technology of our era is space travel. From this domain, we have borrowed such words and related models as “module” and “launch”. The “ghosts” (assumptions, values, fears, hopes, conflicts—even paradigms) that emanate from these technologies are brought along (unconsciously) when we borrow this new technology. The haunting of these ghosts shows up in the inappropriate assumptive worlds associated with specific models (and practices).
Practices: The third tier is associated with its own set of tenets. Practices are:
- Based on models that are usually conscious (explicit knowledge): though the espoused practices (articulation of the model) might not align with the enacted practices
- Many in number, and
- Much less powerful or influential than models or paradigms
We find multiple practices being engaged by ourselves and other people we encounter every day. We live in a world that contains many assumptions. These assumptions are sometimes held by us individually; however, they are usually held collectively in our society. As noted, the “actual” practices might not align with what we proclaim to be the nature and purpose of a specific practice (Argyris and Schön, 1974). We tell other people that we believe in “teamwork” and prefer to work collaboratively yet spend most of our time working at home and interact with other members of the “team” only during the Friday in-person “huddle.”
We may even be ashamed to admit that we are being “lazy” in borrowing from another (often inappropriate) domain. We might wince a bit when speaking about the “interface” between two program units or recognize that our “team” is actually just a bunch of people who have been assigned to a specific project. There are no uniforms. No bands are playing when we start working together. And we don’t actually “huddle” together with a tactical plan being announced by our “quarterback”.
