Our ability to group things is part of our cognitive architecture: it is inherent in How we learnand beyond our own heads towards communication, and therefore imagine and build our complex companiesas well as to continue to evolve them.
We “bring together” together “of the ideas of what we love, appreciate or need, and call them our” culture “, our” values ​​”, our” beliefs “. We bring together rules in systems, laws and standards. We bring together behaviors in categories of “good” and “bad”. We bring together ideas for work, organization, reward and control, in more fundamental ideas of “work” and “leisure”, “citizenship” and “nation”.
In my widest work, I describe social age not only as a “thing”, but rather as a collection of changes which, in general, describe a fundamentally evolved ecosystem. And a characteristic of social age is a unbundling or disintegration of what preceded.
This is logical, because the “grouping” of things is essential to the creation of a coherent and consensual structure (for example, children go to school, go from exams, graduates, etc.), but it also traps us in the epimes, or “ ways to know ‘who blinds us or obliges, new truths.
I have explored this in a wide range of contexts in recent years. In the work on AI, we see how the disintegration of the conception of mastery, value, confidence, expertise and work. In the work of planetary philosophy, we see how the notions of citizenship and nation are aggressively unbundled by parallel and alternative structures of capacity, culture, security and belonging.
I recently shared a new jobsigns‘ – Ways of knowing – and I used this in the AI Strategic Workshop yesterday: to explore how our “ways of knowing” do not simply represent contextual perspectives on awarenessBut also represent power structures. The power and the system, in this sense, are intertwined. As the notion of “citizenship” is not abstract, but rather a fundamental concept in our national power structures. You cannot be a nation, it is not your citizens to believe that they belong, or pay taxes or feel safe. Especially if they feel that they “belong” elsewhere.
Learning itself, in a structural sense – both within organizations and in our broader education systems – is almost certainty something that is aggressively unbundled by emerging social norms and technologies, despite certain resistance of the structures in place. Although we have always used terms such as “personalized learning” and “on demand”, learning, learning “in the flow” or “at the point of need”, it turns out that when a technology can finally give it to us, but we realize that we realize that these summaries or these lands, a large part of the learning structures we hablite. Currently, it looks like a very valid question to ask, what do we really want “learning” functions within our organizations and our society, because a large part of what we do is now focused on quantification, control or economic ideas somewhat abstract around skills and behaviors. We run the risk of sliding from the activator (limited by technology), to the guard or to the guard, defending against the technologies that have slipped our scope.
In the Socially dynamic organization Work, I maintain that we must consciously consider our widest aspects of organizational design, to create less industrial, more interconnected structures. Changeable by design, partly because they do not bring together so closely as many features. Consider if we disseminate the notions of “task”, “role” and “work”, rather creating an emphasis on the team and tribal structures, a definition, measurement, data analysis capacity, etc., as opposed to the distinct and industrial concept of directing people to do things.
An unbundling lens, understanding of forces and disaggregation mechanisms can be useful both to “cancel” the aspects of our current understanding, but also to design and prototyper possible alternative future. An organization limited by the notions of inherited structure will find it difficult to prototyper, or even imagine new ones.
At Learnopoly, Finn has championed a mission to deliver unbiased, in-depth reviews of online courses that empower learners to make well-informed decisions. With over a decade of experience in financial services, he has honed his expertise in strategic partnerships and business development, cultivating both a sharp analytical perspective and a collaborative spirit. A lifelong learner, Finn’s commitment to creating a trusted guide for online education was ignited by a frustrating encounter with biased course reviews.