[From Bruce Gregory 960405.1405]
I sent the following to Dag Forssell as a private communication for
the reasons stated. He suggested that I post it to the net which I am
herewith doing. If, as I fear, it is heretical, I pray that Pope
Richard will absolve me.
Dag,
I am sending this to you directly rather than posting it on the Net
for two reasons: (1) It is probably heretical, and (2) it is even
more probably useless to you. Nevertheless, here are my comments.
I reviewed the tape on the rubber band demonstration and am reading
_Management and Leadership_. As a demonstration of control, I found
the video clear and informative. I enjoyed watching it and learned
from it. I gained a great deal from the book which I also found
clear, persuasive, and rich in helpful insights. I can only
speculate why some readers find it "too technical." Many non-
technical people have trouble extracting information from diagrams
and charts. Yours are fairly elaborate and may intimidate some
readers. A second problem may arise from featuring the "gears and
levers" of PCT so prominently and so early in the process. For many
viewers, the demonstration may be the solution to a problem they
have not yet recognized.
The rubber band task demonstrates the essence of PCT. But "naive"
viewers may need to be put in touch with the problems to which PCT is
a solution. I have the same problem with presenting physical theory.
The underlying principles seem so beautiful and simple to me, that I
often forget that I knew a great deal about physics at a "lower" level
before I came to appreciate the power of this underlying unity. As
tempting as it might be for me to try to short circuit this process
and "cut to the chase" by talking about underlying conservation
principles, I have learned by painful experience that I cannot
transfer my vision to others. The best I can do is try to enroll
them into a process. What I am trying to say, is that focusing on
problems familiar to potential viewers might be a way to draw them
into the process. While target tracking makes perfect sense to us,
it may be a stretch for many viewers to see it as something which
should hold their interest or that it bears upon their everyday
problems. Of course, you do show this relationship after
introducing the PCT machinery, but by then you may have lost some
of your audience.
One thought that occurs to me is to approach the topic in terms of
the analogy of pictures. I doubt anyone would have problems
identifying with the notion that they have "pictures" that specify
how they would like things to turn out. Nor would they likely find
the notion foreign that we often act in ways designed to make our
experience fit those pictures. It is also clear that different
people have different pictures. Granted all this, it is not
surprising that conflicts arise. The problem of course is how to
resolve those conflicts. Your program offers the viewer ways to
successfully address this problem.
I suspect too that introducing the representation of people as control
systems may be off-putting for some viewers. Since we all have a lot
of baggage associated with the term "control", I wouldn't emphasize it
until they have more experience of the process we are talking about
("making things fit our pictures"): We want to bring the world we
experience into conformity with the world we imagine -- we want the
world to fit our pictures. We cannot directly alter other people's
pictures; we can only invite them to reconsider their pictures, and
we can only do this effectively from a perspective that values and
respects those pictures. I think these are points you make very well,
but perhaps they can be made equally effectively without emphasizing
"control" and "perception." I would tell people that the method is
based on breakthroughs in psychology without feeling an initial need
to explain those breakthroughs. The pictures-based approach blurs
the distinction between the variable being controlled for and the
reference level, but I think this might be overcome by talking about
generic pictures such as family pictures, and specific or ideal-
family pictures.
It may be that people have to see what a management approach based on
PCT can do for them before they will be motivated to want to
understand the underlying theory.
The other tapes arrived, thanks. I trust by now you have my
check and _Inventing Reality_, which I hope you will accept as a gift.
I will not be offended if none of this seems useful to you.
Best wishes,
Bruce Gregory