One of the creative things about The Social Psychology of Organising is Weick’s consciousness of metaphor, his semiotic illustrations and linguistic turn.

We see this in how Weick explains ‘think-ing’, transformation, conversion and change/movement/learning.

In his discussion (p.43) he uses the morphing of a pseudopod to exemplify the process of change/movement/learning in organisations. You can see his semiotic here:

In this illustration of change he quickly dispels the myth of ‘fast and slow’, later suggested by Kahneman. Of course, the model could be extended well beyond six stages of transformation.

In his discussion Weick emphasises the importance of using verbs and verb forms (eg. participles) in explaining the life of organisations and change. This is also why any suggestion of a static HRO should not be attributed to Weick. He states (p.43) :

The spatial aspects are preserved by nouns (“animal,” “spot,” “pseudopod,” “capillary”) and the temporal aspects by verbs and verb forms (“moving,” “extending,” “pulling”).

The verbs and verb forms in the descriptive statement capture the process features of this exhibit. Motion, change, and the flow of time would not be apparent without the verb and verb forms. However, verbs alone aren’t enough to portray processes; you also need memory. It is only through memory that temporal abstracts of events can be computed and stored and that the appropriateness of a specific verb can be demonstrated.

His discussion of verbs, verb forms and dialectic is critical in understanding how he understands the impermanence of organisations and organising. He particularly suggests that noun usage should be avoided.

In this discussion he uses metaphors intentionally like ‘streams’, ‘flow’, ‘flux’ and ‘recipe’ to convey the fluid, moving nature of organising and learning.

Weick’s discussion of metaphors called ‘Mutate Metaphors’ (p.47) is years before Lakoff and Johnson articulated the importance of metaphors in their wonderful book Metaphors We Live By (1980).

 Weick’s reference to Ortony and Bateson is particularly insightful. In his discussion he picks up on Bateson’s point that persons are ‘living metaphor’. He includes this in his anthropomorphic discussion of organisations having a life of their own. We adopt the same discourse and language in SPoR.

Weick also takes aim at the use of military metaphors in discussing organisations and states (p.50):

Whatever its origins, the military metaphor is a bad choice when used alone because it forces people to entertain a very limited set of solutions to solve any problem and a very limited set of ways to organize themselves.

This reminded me of the time I read in the so called ‘safety differently’ group the adoration of safety as a ‘lean, green safety machine’ in a three-part series. Weick states (p.50):

Chronic usage of the military metaphor will lead people repeatedly to overlook a different kind of organization, one that values improvisation rather than forecasting, dwells on opportunities rather than constraints, invents solutions rather than borrows them, devises new actions rather than defends past actions, values argument more highly than serenity, and encourages doubt and contradiction rather than belief.

So, in language semiotic and metaphor, Weick puts forward a strong argument for the nature of organising as a continuous moving ‘being’, which he sometimes calls ‘madness’.

If you want to understand more about Weick’s philosophy, ideas of organising and implications for how we tackle risk in organisations, you can register for the free workshops in June here: admin@spor.com.au