Johari Window & PCT

[From Fred Nickols (2004.03.03.1005 EST)] –

It occurred to me that the Johari Window might be a useful framework for
thinking about reference conditions.
The Johari Window is essentially a 2x2 matrix in which the four cells
represent matters known and unknown to self and others.

Known to Self and to Others = Public

Known to Self but not Others = Private

Known to Others but not Self = Blind

Unknown to Others and Self = Hidden

“The test” could be used to inform others and to inform self as
well. The test could confirm
Public reference conditions, disclose Private reference conditions, illuminate
Blind reference conditions and expose Hidden reference conditions.

Reactions?

Fred Nickols

nickols@att.net

···

Fred, your email caught my interest but I need a bit more detail, especially the context for application.
I suspect I may be missing something that I "should" be aware of.

David Wolsk (who's reference is definitely not economics ..... closed loop or mumbo jumbo)

···

On Wednesday, March 3, 2004, at 07:59 AM, Fred Nickols wrote:

[From Fred Nickols (2004.03.03.1005 EST)] –

It occurred to me that the Johari Window might be a useful framework for thinking about reference conditions. The Johari Window is essentially a 2x2 matrix in which the four cells represent matters known and unknown to self and others.

Known to Self and to Others = Public

Known to Self but not Others = Private

Known to Others but not Self = Blind

Unknown to Others and Self = Hidden

“The test” could be used to inform others and to inform self as well. The test could confirm Public reference conditions, disclose Private reference conditions, illuminate Blind reference conditions and expose Hidden reference conditions.

Reactions?

Fred Nickols

nickols@att.net

Dr. David Wolsk
Associate, Centre for Global Studies
Adjunct Professor, Faculty of Education
University of Victoria, Canada

From[Bill Williams 3 March 2004 4:00 PM CST]

David Wolsk (who’s reference is definitely not economics … closed loop or mumbo jumbo)

I can sympathize with those who’s reference levels are not in alignment with the economic threads. I would myself like to see the masturbation with the data cease-- as Kenneth Arrow says, “Data Mining is a sin.”

I think Fred’s contribution is thought provoking-- like “What do others know about me that I don’t know?”

Bill Williams

Message
[From David Goldstein (2004.03.06.1423 EST)]

[From David Wolsk (2004.03.03.1627)]

Dear David and listmates:

I think that the Johari Window is interesting but I do have some questions/issues with it and its usefulness. I am teaching my son to drive and so, driving is on my mind and I will use driving examples to illustrate and discuss the Johari Window.

Let us take the Public area–a goal is known to the person and Others. Let us suppose that we see a person driving a car and making a right turn at an intersection. The Others can be pretty sure that the person wants to make a right turn. The person knows that he/she is making a right turn and observers know this.

Let us take the Private area–a goal is known to the person but not to others. It seems that Others are always in the position of not knowing a goal. I guess we are saying that the outside person doens’t even have a clue. A person is driving but we don’t know the person’s destination unless we ask the person or follow the the person’s car until the car stops and the person gets out of the car.

Let us take the Blind area–a goal is know by Others but not by the person. I know this happens. But the Other is still making a good guess. As applied to driving, a person may be weaving when driving under the influence of alcohol. Others may observe this, but the person may be unaware that this is happening.

Finally, the Hidden area–Neither the person or Others know the goal. A person may be upset by something happening at work and plow into a car which is stopped at a traffic light. The person is not in the control mode. Maybe the person is thinking, remembering or imagining about the problem situation at work. The person is not aware that this is what he/she is doing. The Others are not aware of what is going on. It was an accident, not on purpose.

David

David M. Goldstein, Ph.D.

···

-----Original Message-----
From: Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet) [mailto:CSGNET@listserv.uiuc.edu] ** On Behalf Of** David Wolsk
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 4:27 PM
To: CSGNET@listserv.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: Johari Window & PCT

Fred, your email caught my interest but I need a bit more detail, especially the context for application.
I suspect I may be missing something that I “should” be aware of.

David Wolsk (who’s reference is definitely not economics … closed loop or mumbo jumbo)

On Wednesday, March 3, 2004, at 07:59 AM, Fred Nickols wrote:

[From Fred Nickols (2004.03.03.1005 EST)] –/smaller>/color>

/smaller>/color>

It occurred to me that the Johari Window might be a useful framework for thinking about reference conditions. The Johari Window is essentially a 2x2 matrix in which the four cells represent matters known and unknown to self and others./smaller>/color>

/smaller>/color>

Known to Self and to Others = Public/smaller>/color>

Known to Self but not Others = Private/smaller>/color>

Known to Others but not Self = Blind/smaller>/color>

Unknown to Others and Self = Hidden/smaller>/color>

/smaller>/color>

“The test” could be used to inform others and to inform self as well. The test could confirm Public reference conditions, disclose Private reference conditions, illuminate Blind reference conditions and expose Hidden reference conditions./smaller>/color>

/smaller>/color>

Reactions?/smaller>/color>

/smaller>/color>

/smaller>/color>

Fred Nickols/smaller>/color>

nickols@att.net/smaller>/color>

/color>

Dr. David Wolsk
Associate, Centre for Global Studies
Adjunct Professor, Faculty of Education
University of Victoria, Canada

[From Fred Nickols (2004.03.08.0917)] --

I need a little help understanding how using "the test" relates to the
examples below.

[From David Goldstein (2004.03.06.1423 EST)]

Let us take the Public area--a goal is known to the person and Others.
Let us suppose that we see a person driving a car and making a right
turn at an intersection. The Others can be pretty sure that the person
wants to make a right turn. The person knows that he/she is making a
right turn and observers know this.

Is the goal above one of making a right turn or is that simply an action (or
perhaps a lower level goal) that contributes to the achievement of some
higher level goal state; for example, arriving at work? Is arriving at work
an end unto itself or does it simply contribute to keeping one's job or
bringing home a paycheck? In any case, it doesn't seem to me that there is
truly a Public goal or reference condition unless it has been identified and
confirmed.

Let us take the Private area--a goal is known to the person but not to
others. It seems that Others are always in the position of not knowing a
goal. I guess we are saying that the outside person doens't even have a
clue. A person is driving but we don't know the person's destination
unless we ask the person or follow the the person's car until the car
stops and the person gets out of the car.

The Private cell in the Johari Window is the one I think applies to most of
what I've seen discussed about using "the test" to identify a goal or
reference condition.

Let us take the Blind area--a goal is know by Others but not by the
person. I know this happens. But the Other is still making a good guess.
As applied to driving, a person may be weaving when driving under the
influence of alcohol. Others may observe this, but the person may be
unaware that this is happening.

Here, it was my notion was NOT that others know with great certainty someone
else's goal or reference condition but that they could use "the test" to
confirm their belief or suspicion.

Finally, the Hidden area--Neither the person or Others know the goal. A
person may be upset by something happening at work and plow into a car
which is stopped at a traffic light. The person is not in the control
mode. Maybe the person is thinking, remembering or imagining about the
problem situation at work. The person is not aware that this is what
he/she is doing. The Others are not aware of what is going on. It was an
accident, not on purpose.

I'm not sure I understand this example at all. Plowing into another car
seems an accident in this case, not a goal being achieved. I thought the
Hidden cell was rife with opportunity for applying "the test."

Thanks for stimulating my thinking further. My original notion was not that
the Johari Window offered a framework for slotting goals or reference
conditions but that "the test" could be used to disclose or confirm goals or
reference conditions. The labels Public, Private, Blind and Hidden would
play out as follows:

        Private: I could apply the test to my own actions to confirm what it is I'm
controlling for and I keep my findings to myself.

        Public: I and others could apply the test to my actions and we share our
findings to confirm what it is we previously agreed were my goals or
reference conditions.

        Blind: Others have applied the test to my actions and determined my goals
or reference conditions but I have not and they have not shared their
findings with me.

        Hidden: I, others, or I and others could apply the test to identify what
I'm controlling for.

It's probably all too complicated and messy to be of any use. But I did get
something out of the discussion. I've long known (or believed or perceived)
that ends and means are relative notions. An action leads to a result or
outcome and that result or outcome is in turn a means to some other end or
result or outcome. This ends-means relationship seems reflected in the PCT
hierarchy, which is a hierarchy of reference conditions. And, come to think
of it, that raises a question about the test. How can we use the "test" to
identify anything with any certainty when whatever it is we identify is
embedded in a hierarchy of ends or goals or reference conditions? It would
seem to me that we'd have to be able to classify the level of the reference
condition identified and then chase it up (or down) the hierarchy to truly
understand it.