Behavioral MetaDYNAMICS – Perspective

Behavioral MetaDYNAMICS – Perspective @F-L-O-W

the book @F-L-O-W

No Thanks

Member Login

                      Capability @F-L-O-W

                               BmD: Capability – Part 3 – Perspective


Since "I" have made peace with the
Self-Knowledge>>Self-Awareness algorithm, I want to continue
on with my discussion of the components of Capability as I
experience them.

But first, one caveat.

In order to design MetaDYNAMICS, I believe that you have to
have a model that works on itself. In other words, a meta-model
has to automatically, without conscious attention, work the
magic you intend by merely being in evidence.

Which means, if i teach you this model, even if you just walk
away and say that is all BS, the meta-model will become
psychoactive and work subconsciously, in my opinion.

This is what I have attempted to cynthesize for leaders with

I’m not arrogant enough to think that this is the model of
everything, nor is the model right for everyone, although I do
believe anyone can use this in whatever form they are capable,
or it wouldn’t be a meta-model, or meta-system.

What follows is an overview of each part of CAPABILITY

Here is the element of Perspective, a fractal of
Capability that I have found IMPORTANT to address in
creating Self-Knowledge>>Self-Awareness, along with their
major constituents:


Applying Elaborating Seeking
Giving Assimilating Integrating
Taking Coordinating Differentiating


1 a:  the technique or process of representing
on a plane or curved surface the spatial relation of
objects as they might appear to the eye; specifically : 
representation in a drawing or painting of parallel lines
as converging in order to give the illusion of depth and
b:  a picture in perspective

2 a:  the interrelation in which a subject or
its parts are mentally viewed ; also : point of view
b:  the capacity to view
things in their true relations or relative importance

3 a:  a visible scene; especially :  one
giving a distinctive impression of distance :  vista

b:  a mental view or prospect

4:  the appearance to the eye of objects in
respect to their relative distance and positions

Beginning with the definitions, I think, in general,
people have a fairly common "point of view" of perspective
and what it might mean, although in making sense, each
will use it with a little different "perspective."

"In our research, we have
discovered that the English language contains a number of
rich expressions that convey an appreciation of
perspectival observation. These include: where you stand
depends on where you sit, beauty is in the eye of the
beholder, everyone looks at the world through his own
glasses, the glass is half-empty or half-full, a
self-fulfilling prophecy, it’s the blind man and the
elephant, the Rashomon phenomenon, the umpire training
school joke about “the pitch ain’t nothin’ until I call
it,” and that there are two sides to every story.

Such a broad set of common
expressions would lead one to believe that perspectival
observation is a widely held assumption in society.
Paradoxically, our research and experience within
organizations has been the opposite. We have interviewed
individuals, for example, who were perfectly willing to
accept perspectival observation about what happened at an
extended family Thanksgiving dinner, but who would insist
that at work there is only one true story of what really
happened." – Eric Dent, Complexity Science: A Worldview

Let me briefly focus on what I mean by outlining 9
elements of perspective.

First Perspective –> New Perspective as a transition,
to hold a container for these components or as I might
say, transitions in perspective.

I chose to illustrate perspective as a series of what
I feel are hierarchical transitions.  In other words, the
first "application" of perspective, or "applying" a
perspective, is less complex than "giving" a perspective
and so on to "taking" a perspective.

In the beginning:

All of us have a perspective.


We may be unaware of that perspective, as in it being
objectively known.  Yet, we have one and we apply it as a
point of view when we are being, doing, having, becoming,
and contributing, which I’ll start abbreviating now as
BDHBC to save time. BDHBC are values vectors, which I’ll
discuss later in ValuDYNAMICS.

I have the fastest RED CAR on the road.


When we start to become aware that we have a perspective,
we can then give it consciously, and know that we can give
our perspective.  This is hierarchically more complex than
just "using subjectively what we have as a perspective",
or as you will soon learn, "being subject to your

I have a RED CAR. 
It is the fastest RED CAR on the road,
and it can win any race against any other car.


To take a perspective means that you can step outside your
own perspective as object and actually "take, or try on" a
perspective that is different from the one you have. It
means that we can step away from our perspective long
enough to know that there is another perspective
available. It doesn’t mean that we can use the new
perspective, it just means we are capable of taking one,
acknowledging it exists.

I heard there are BLUE CARS that are fast, but they
haven’t raced against my RED CAR.


When we are able to discuss our own perspective, and
provide someone else with the "Teachable Points Of View"
[TPOV] of our perspective, we are said to be able to elaborate
our perspective. Often this will be in contrast, or
comparison to another perspective or perspectives that are
different from ours. We are able to point to the
differences, but not yet reject our own perspective. 
Because once we can elaborate our own perspective, we are
able to use it well, even if it’s not appropriate or
proper, or even fit to the application or requirements.

My RED CAR is the fastest car on the road, because I have
spent plenty of money making sure the motor, transmission,
and tires give me the best advantage available.


Assimilation has to do with beginning to bring other
pieces not originally contained in the original
perspective, including mashing up disparate perspectives
so they don’t make much sense, to bringing in
sophistication to the original perspective by adapting it
with the new information.

Simply, transitioning a statement like "I believe that RED
CARS are the fastest cars on the road." → a perspective,
too, "I believe that RED CARS are the fastest on the road
because my RED CAR is the fastest on the road because it
can win against any BLUE CAR, which some people think is
the fastest car on the road." — is a simple assimilation.


Being able to objectively combine or coordinate two
perspectives simultaneously is a further use of
perspective and demonstrates a different level of
capability, almost always a more complex task, than the
previous ways in which I have used perspective to describe

Some believe that RED CARS are the fastest, and others
have thought BLUE CARS are the fastest cars on the road. 
So I think it might be a good idea to test this by having
all RED CARS race to find the fastest RED CAR, and all
BLUE CARS race to find the fastest BLUE CAR and then
having a match off race.


Seeking a perspective requires a more complex view. It
means holding one’s perspective, while testing that
perspective against other perspectives, usually to make
the held perspective "better" or more robust. There seems
to be a difference when people are willing to "test" their
perspective against other perspectives, knowing that their
perspective may not be the best perspective, or most
appropriate, fit or sustainable.

I will take my RED CAR and race against other RED CARS to
see if I am the fastest RED CAR, because I have raced
other BLUE CARS and I won.


Bringing things in a perspective together and showing how
they make your perspective actually more robust or not is
a powerful process because it shows that the perspective
has been tested and can stand up to any problem that you
currently have.

My RED CAR, with all it’s new additions which I made as a
result of racing all other RED and BLUE CARS is now the
best RED CAR available.


What happens in this particular part of perspective is
something odd, which causes the success of integration to
no longer solve the problem, or remain appropriate, or
even be fit to the circumstances. It is where abandonment
begins to occur, and that the need for a new perspective
begins to appear.

It might seem that consolidation after integration is
where things remain robust and where anti-fragility occur,
but it seems that new problems arise and the old
perspective is suffering diminishing returns.

My RED CAR was the fastest car in drag racing, so now
there is no one to race, so I took it out to a road course
where ORANGE CARS are racing, and I realized that my RED
CAR was no longer the fastest car.

Summary of Perspective

While these are all simple examples to help you understand
what might appear to be subtle or minute differences, they
help us greatly in understanding what is next and also how
to scaffold a person with a particular perspective in

We can use three states: an entering state, a nodal state,
and an exiting state to define the three sets of
perspectives for discussion.


Entering Nodal Exiting
Applying Elaborating Seeking
Giving Assimilating Integrating
Taking Coordinating Differentiating


In the next part of CAPABILITY DYNAMICS, I’ll discuss
Subjectivity. Subjectivity gives us part of the
language we need to discuss other components of
perspective, and CAPABILITY.

I hope you pick up valuable insights, ideas and tools during
this process, which you can use for your own
development and your work and leadership with others.

If you have comments, please feel free to leave them here on
the blog.

You, Me, and We @F-L-O-W

Mike R. Jay is a developmentalist utilizing consulting,
coaching, mentoring and advising as methods to offer
developmental scaffolding for aspiring leaders who are
interested in being, doing, having, becoming, and
contributing… to helping people have lives.

PS: To lean more about our 2015 Program,
Behavioral MetaDYNAMICS and to enroll in the experience,


© Generati

More Info