How much emphasis should be on material structures (physical or technological)?

General
1

This is a question I need some help answering. On one hand, I can use material structures as a helpful metaphor for understanding how agreement structures work. On the other hand, this is a more critical point because many issues can be resolved through changing material structures rather than agreement structures. Like changing admin access on a document rather than passing a policy limiting who can change it.

Currently, my thinking is that considerations over material structures must be included for reasons captured in the above example. And it is partly why I prefer the term “structure-orientation” because it covers both.

However, it is awkward when I refer to “structures” as any ongoing, explicit, and binding “expectation,” because that clearly doesn’t include material structures. Maybe I’m just over thinking it and the distinction can be made whenever it is necessary. Any thoughts or reactions?

2

I agree that it must be considered. Definitely when ‘exploring’. It is, in many cases, a very smart move to adjust material structures (a bit similar to assigning a domain in Holacracy. no?) . If I have a leak at home, I can agreement with the rest of the family to not step on the water so there is no water everywhere or I can explore using material structure to resolve the tension.

Is that what yoy meant?

1 Like
3

Yes, precisely.

Said another way. Even though my focus is on social/agreement structures, I keep finding myself returning to these kind of material structure examples and I could just consider them one of the many ways in which a tension might get resolved, and since I don’t feel it’s necessary to explain all of the possible ways tensions might get resolved, maybe I don’t need to talk very much about them. This would preserve the construct of “structure” to mean only expectations.

But then again, I don’t think I can drop them as a specific consideration because they do bear some specific relevance for helping to shape behavior. A parallel to this is how “performance support” tools (e.g. tools tips, signage, etc.) are integrated in the field of training and development. In both fields, structures led to a specific and shared goal, and it matters less whether those structures are material or agreement based.

1 Like