[from Autumn Winter (961008. 1159PST)]
Bill Powers (961008.1415 MDT)
Autumn Winter (961006.0800PST)
BP:
This is obviously collective control because no one person could make the
square
appear.
Me:
Why isn't this co-operative control? Maybe orginally each of the 4 would
have a different image of the square and there would be some initial
conflict, but once the square was completed wouldn't each of the 4 accept
this explicit outcome as what they wanted to achieve?
What's the distinction you're making between "collective" and "cooperative"
control?
For some reason, I was under the assumption that pure co-operative control
and collective control are mutually exclusive terms. Upon skimming Kent
McClelland's paper again, I don't see it that way anymore.
I was probably thought that way as I am doing a lot of thinking about
business outcomes, which ideally should be explicit with everyone involved
controlling for the same level of a common variable. I still like the idea
of one word for this ideal type of joint control (either pure cooperative
control and/or control contingent on people controlling other variables). I
guess "Ideal joint control" will do for now.
Autumn