A note on mere perception

[From Chuck Tucker 931217]

     I have been trying to recall where I had read a statement about
     "mere perception" that was quite relevant to many of the posts
     on CSG-L about PCT and Control Theory. The quote I was thingking
     of comes from the first page of Chapter 6 (sorry, my copy has no
     page number of Tom Peters and Nancy Austin's (1985) A PASSION FOR
     EXCELLENCE. NY: Random House and reads:

         We spent four long days with the thirty top managers
         of a $1.5 billion capital-good manufacturer. We scrutinized
         sales problems, marketing problems, manufacturing
         problems, people problems. When it can time to
         summarize, six were thought to merit top-level follow-
         up. However, in five of the six it was noted that
         persistently the approach was: "We're OK. It's ONLY a
         perception problem." Finally, Tom had had enough.
         Stepping far beyond the bounds of what's good and proper
         for a visitor, he virtually shouted, "A perception
         problem in a engineer's way of saying, 'We've got the
         right solution, if it weren't for the damned people
         who invariably get in the way of implementation.'"

         A "mere" perception problem. The real problem is that
         PERCEPTION IS ALL THERE IS. There is no reality as such.
         There is only perceived reality, the way each of us
         chooses to perceive a communication, the value of a
         service, the value of a particular product feature, the
         quality of a product. The real IS what we perceive.
         As the First Commandment of the formal, written
         Customer Philosophy at a successful forest-products
         retailer says: Feelings ARE facts." .......

      I would suggest that instead of trying to relate PCT to CT
      one can see the difference between the two approaches by
      examining a detailed description of one act that you engage
      in on a daily basis (e.g., making a cup of coffee, getting a
      glass of juice, getting in and driving your auto out of the
      driveway, dressing yourself) and see if you can PARSE the
      description without including the feedback loop of the
      simple PCT model or can it be done simply with the CT
      model. If it can be done with the CT model (as long as
      it is not just different tags for the same functions of
      the PCT model) then put it on the net and let us look at
      this description and its characterization in CT terms. I
      this would get to the heart and soul on many of the "spats"
      that I read on the net. Remember, PCT is a model of human
      experience and it becomes very difficult to understand or
      critically evaluate without some experience to discuss.

      Regards, Chuck