Professional Documents
Culture Documents
36,3/4
From sociohistory to psychohistory
M.I. Yolles
378 Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK
Abstract
Purpose – This study seeks to postulate a theory of psychohistory as a “think-piece”. It develops
from some earlier theoretical work on sociohistory that can model cultures that are large-scale (e.g.
societies) over the long term or small scale (e.g. corporations) over the short term. Sociohistory, as
developed by Yolles and Frieden, provides a new theory to explore the possibilities of tracking and
explaining social and cultural change. It offers entry to the development of a theory of psychohistory
that explores the psychological basis for decision making and social action and interaction, and
connects with both Jung’s propositions on psychological profiling and with the popular Myers-Briggs
instruments of personality testing.
Design/methodology/approach – Sociohistory was developed by coupling three theoretical
frameworks: the knowledge cybernetics of Maurice Yolles, the mathematical approach in extreme
physical information (EPI) of Roy Frieden, and the sociocultural dynamics of Pitrin Sorokin. Knowledge
cybernetics creates the vehicle for the exploration of the sociocultural dynamics that reflects the
theoretical structures of Sorokin, and uses EPI as a way of fine tuning one’s understanding of the
qualitative and quantitative dynamics uncovered. The basic fractal nature of knowledge cybernetics is
be used to extend the theory of sociohistory from sociocultural dynamics to psychosocial dynamics.
Elaborating on the fractal nature of the approach, an indicative theory of psychohistory is formulated.
Findings – The theoretical basis for sociohistory is outlined and extended from sociocultural to
psychosocial dynamics, and it is shown how the methodological approach can then be extended to the
development of psychohistory. An agenda for further sociohistorical and psychohistorical research is
also developed in this process.
Originality/value – Sociocultural dynamics is extended to the promise of being able to deal with
social dynamics within a cultural setting. The postulated theory of psychohistory both explores social
dynamics in psychological terms and is linked to the potential for developing a new personality
inventory.
Keywords Sociology, Psychology, Cybernetics, Sociocybernetics
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
This paper is in part a “think-piece” development of the notion of sociohistory by Yolles
and Frieden (2005) and Frieden et al. (2005). It explores this theory of sociohistory that
arises through the knowledge cybernetics schema (Yolles, 2006a) that has been developed
in conjunction with Frieden’s (1998, personal communication, 2004) and Frieden and
Gatenby (2006) theory of extreme physical information (EPI) and developed according to
the sociocultural principles of Sorokin (1937-1942). These principles explore the dynamics
of cultural change processes applicable in principle to either large-scale continuous
cultures (like societies) over the long term or small scale continuous cultures
Kybernetes (like corporations) over the short term. Knowledge cybernetics creates a flexible
Vol. 36 No. 3/4, 2007
pp. 378-405 knowledge-based frame of reference that offers a methodological approach capable of
exploring and relating a variety of differently conceived but thematically connected
theories by exploring aspects of their knowledge bases. The integration of EPI turns the
approach from a qualitative exploration of cultural change to one which has quantitative From
attributes, enabling specific outcomes to be generated from qualitative inputs. The sociohistory to
particular theme of cultural change is a very important one. While Sorokin’s theories are
directed towards providing an understanding of cultural condition and change in psychohistory
large-scale cultures as occur in civilisations, the application of the sociohistorical theory
indicated here is also potentially useful for the exploration of small scale cultures as they
occur in corporate environments. Understanding the nature of such cultural environments 379
provides an entry into the change imperative that every organisation experiences today.
The basis of sociohistory which explored the historical dynamics of social collectives
will be presented following Yolles and Frieden (2005), but it will only indicate the
mathematical approach adopted. While the general theory outlines the qualitative
explanations of sociocultural change, the mathematical theory has the capacity to deepen
the explanations and develop a quantitative dimension to the theory. The same
methodological approach as is provided to explore sociocultures can be applied at a
different focus of inquiry to the individual, therefore having the promise of a theory
of psychohistory, which explores the dynamics of individuals through the exploration of
their psychological attributes, i.e. a theory of psychosocial dynamics. While the theoretical
approach for this is not as well developed as that of sociohistory, it has the potential to link
with the Myer-Briggs psychometric tool that has become so popular with corporate
human resource environments. Introducing this aspect of the paper is what constitutes its
think-piece attribute, and provide entry into a broad research agenda.
Knowledge cybernetics
As an introduction to knowledge cybernetics and its use of ontological categories,
consider three types of reality that can be attributed to archetypical rational beings:
believing, thinking and doing (Figure 1). Epistemologically speaking, believing is
connected to knowledge while thinking is connected to information and doing
is empirically connected and is therefore data related; these connections may not be
immediate and linear however. In the archetypical emotional being it may be said that
processes of thinking are complexified by feeling, though this extension is beyond my
interest here. While the natures of the three attributes of Figure 1 are all very different,
they do have a mutual relationship in the autonomous being. Knowledge cybernetics is
interested in exploring aspects of these complex relationships.
In particular, knowledge cybernetics is a systemically based schema that: explores
knowledge formation and its relationship to information; encourages a critical view of
Conditions
Affects
its component subsystems. However, this can be extended to the concept to transitive
ontological parts, as in the relationship between a system and its metasystem.
Hence, this can be extended to the concept to transitive ontological parts, as in the
relationship between a system (with its immediate interaction with the virtual system)
and its controlling metasystem.
As such the holon may best be regarded as a transitively extended system,
constituted through a development of Schwarz’s ontological schema. We constitute a
social holon as a three domain model that defines distinct ontological modes of being:
measurable energetic phenomenal behaviour, information rich ideate (taken as a valued
and perhaps complex image or system of thought), and knowledge-related existence
that is expressed through patterns of meaning.
The domains of SVS are analytically distinct classifications of being, and they each
have epistemological properties that are expressible as varieties of knowledge
classifications. The phenomenal domain has social interests adapted from Habermas’s
(1971) in a way explained by Yolles and Guo (2003). The other domain properties arise
as an extension of this, are listed in Table I, and draw on both systemic and cybernetic
notions. There is a connection here to Schutz and Luckmann (1974) who are interested
in narrative, in that the epistemological content of each of the three domains can be
defined in terms of relevancies. The existential domain has thematic relevance that
determines the constituents of an experience; the noumenal or virtual domain has
interpretative relevance that creates direction through the selection of relevant aspects
of a stock of knowledge to formulate ideate structures or a system of thought; and the
phenomenal domain is associated with motivational relevance that causes a local
conclusion through action. While this development is constructivist, an application of
K
382
36,3/4
Table I.
(sociality)
social orientation
Domain cognitive
properties that determine
Sociality
Possibilities/potential (through variety
Cognitive properties Kinematics (through social motion) Direction (determining social trajectory) development)
Existential Domain
Value system
Noumenal domain
Ideate: a valued system of Phenomenal domain
Existential domain conceptual thought and Valued phenomena
Valued concepts images that constructs including objects
and symbols world-view knowledge Residence of
Residence of sensatism
ideationality
The patterner/dramatist elaborator dimension was taken from Shotwell et al. (1980)
from their exploration of children at play, and the fundamentalism/pragmatism
executor dimension is an original postulate. Each of these dimensions, like that for the
identifier attributes, can be expressed in terms of the noumenal/phenomenal
dimensions (Yolles, 2006a). Extending Sorokin’s notion of immanent change from
identifier to elaborator and executor knowledge types suggests that there will always
be sociality flux that may well give an appearance of cyclic change.
These are set up according to Figures 7-9 (Yolles, 2006a). Each of these enantiomers From
can be connected together to generate a composite social system in which each of the sociohistory to
domains can be expressed in terms the set of enantiomer pairs. These can be used to
define the dynamics of any social system, as shown in Figure 10. Let us postulate an psychohistory
illustration for this.
Oligopoly Inc. is a European corporate body that like other many of its compatriot
organisations is hosted financially and culturally in an ambiently sensate environment. 393
Existential Domain
Value system
Autogenesis and Autopoiesis and production
production of of processes to manifest the
meaningful ideate phenomenally
principles
Noumenal domain
Valued system of Phenomenal domain
Existential domain conceptual thought and Valued phenomena
Valued concepts images (the ideate) that including objects
and symbols constructs worldview Residence of
knowledge sensatism
Residence of
ideationality
Nounemal Domain
The ideate
Autogenesis and Autopoiesis and production
production of of processes to manifest
meaningful coordinated images and/or
principles for the pattern/system of thought
ideate
Phenomenal domain
Noumenal domain Narrative models or dramatic
Constructed visualisations of event
Existential domain unintegrated system sequences that create
Elaboration of thought and/or expectation, are phenomenally
knowledge images & logically projected, and facilitate
structured ideas. communications.
Residence of Residence of dramatising
patterning
Noumenal domain
Manifested system of Phenomenal domain
thought, images, and Phenomenal behavioural
Existential domain ideas that define experiences embedded in
Execution phenomena and create circumstance
knowledge structural anticipations. Residence of
Residence of pragmatism
fundamentalism
Autogenesis: cultural
principles of Autopoiesis:
Social Being network of processes that
underpins the formation of
behaviour
Noumenal domain Phenomenal domain
Existential domain
Identifier: Executor:
Elaborator: Patterning/ Fundamentism/
Sensate/Ideational Dramatising Pragmatism
Figure 10.
Relationship between
three types of enantiomer
The company has been in existence for almost a century, and over its history there are
some who claim that its sociality appears to be cyclic in nature. This sociality is
affected by its identifier, elaborator and executor knowledge types, in particular in
respect of its political nature (Yolles, 2006b). The former affects its political culture and
in particular the principles under which it operates its governance, elaborator
knowledge affects its ability to create visions, its ideology and the related ethical stance
it takes, and the latter the way in which it behaves. It is influenced by the Principle of
Immanent Change, and as such develops a sociality that oscillates over the decades.
The ideational organizations that attempt to coexist with it, like the Church, are just
managing to survive by shifting towards sensate values. Its image of the world around
it was not the development of a dramatizing grand narrative, within which it envisaged
itself as the leader of its corporate category. This might have been consistent, From
it perceived, to a political structure that directed its operations through a rigid sociohistory to
hierarchy to achieve that end. Rather it operated as a patterning organisation,
developing a network of production units and exploring the patterns of problems that psychohistory
arose within them against the outputs that it perceived were needed to make thee
network as a whole sustainable. The development of its operational behaviour was not
like that of some of its competitors, who imposed rigorous rules that has to be followed 395
no matter what situations arose – this form of fundamentalism was foreign to its
nature. Rather, it operated a more pragmatic approach accepting the notion that its
employees were individuals who should operate individually on behalf of the company
and for its overall benefit. It is this attitude that contributed to its improved employee
trust and motivation. Fortunately, unlike the audit company Anderson and its
infamous involvement with Enron (Grant, 2003), there was no need to ensure that it
operated a fundamentalist approach to its operational environment.
The mathematics of the formulation in Figure 10 is more complex than that of the
relatively simple sociocultural dynamic shown earlier, and the dynamics internal to
the autonomous system has not so far been explored.
Yang Yin
Rational concrete, ego, yang Thinking, energy Feeling, matter
Non-rational abstract, ego, yin Perception, space Intuition, time Table IV.
Jung’s notion of the
Source: Aveleira (2004) yin-yang of personality
K Jung’s exploration of the theory of personality is contained in Jung (1957-1979).
36,3/4 The attributes of the model have been simply represented by Myers (2000, p. 9) and by
Carroll (2003), and a summary is given in Table VI. The enantiomer attributes are also
represented graphically through the SVS model in Figure 10. In this we have set up as
a system an autonomous personality agent in which the connection between the Jung’s
dimensions of personality type is expressed. It is embedded in the social collective
396 virtual system since all of the primary (unshaded) enantiomer dimensions are ideate
composites. The link between the virtual and phenomenal domains is an interesting
one, but needs at least a brief explanation. Individuals tend to exhibit behavioral
patterns in what they say and do, how they relate to people, and how they perform
tasks or process information (McKenna et al., 2002).
This connects directly to decision-making behavior and more generally behavioral
style, though it should be seen to be conditioned by context and circumstance.
McKenna et al. (2002) note that in the literature a connection is often taken between
personality type and behavioral style, and there is a tendency in the management
literature to adopt the premise that consistent behavioral patterns are synonymous
with personality. Thus, for instance, George and Jones (2002, p. 43) define personality
as the pattern of relatively enduring ways in which a person feels, thinks and behaves,
while Robbins (2001, p. 92) discusses personality in terms of the sum total of ways in
which an individual reacts to and interacts with others, and is most often described in
terms of measurable traits that a person exhibits. Taking personality type and
behavioral style to be related therefore enables us to connect agent personality
attributes to behavioral potential in an environment. Unlike the propositions of
Myers-Briggs, the ontological nature of personality type as shown in Figure 7 demands
that we take behavioral style as being determined by the primary enantiomers, with
orientation conditioning the behavior that occurs within the social context. Hence,
while personality style is represented at one focus of examination, orientation is
represented at another.
While in Figure 11 we have defined the personality type of an individual in an
autonomous personality system, composed of three sub-systems (the personality
system, the virtual system and personality metasystem). The personality system is
created through judging/perceiving and is constituted as an image of, or system of
thought about the current phenomenal experience interpreted by the personality and
taken to be representative of phenomenal reality. It ultimately acts as a basis for the
creation of decision-making behavior in the social collective. The other two
sub-systems are representative of what the Myer-Briggs model calls the functions:
the virtual system provides contextual form for that image through feeling/thinking,
while the metasystem establishes it within a base of existent knowledge and
conception through sensing/intuition. This model can be projected to a higher focus
of consideration using the fractal logic developed through the SVS model. The coupling
Executor Judging Need planned processes and regulation. Perceiving Are flexible in a spontaneous way, seeking
(fundamentalism) Highly structured lives, adhering to plans (pragmatism) to experience and understand phenomena
rather than to control them. Energized by
resourcefulness. More interested in their
surroundings than by their own intentions
Elaborator Thinking Involves logical consequences for choices Feeling (patterning) Involves evaluating information, and is
(dramatizing) of action. Connects to judging rather than associated with emotional responses.
intake of simple information Connects with purely subjective
perspective of situations, and orientated
towards personal values
Existential Sensing (senate) Involves perception rather than judging Intuition Connected to the unconscious. Comes from
information. Preference is for sensing (ideational) complex integration of large amounts of
relating to the tangible and manifest information. Consequence is to see the
bigger picture, focusing on the structured
relationships and connection between facts
and finding patterns. Tends to
accommodate the abstract and conceptual
Personality Introvert Focus on the inner world of ideas and Extravert Focus on the external world and
orientation experiences, reflecting on thoughts, participatory activities and actions within
memories and feelings it. It is based on the internal world
psychohistory
attributes
From
orientation conditions
two “universal”
affiliation, identifying
personality type
Table VI.
sociohistory to
K
36,3/4 Existential domain
of the social
Autogenesis: principles to
make sense of the collective
collective Being
knowledge attributes
Personality
From
temperaments types in
comparison with
Table VII.
399
sociohistory to
K The core of Brugha’s (1998a) work comes from Hamilton who developed his notions
36,3/4 from the previous work by Kant. Hamilton had interest in the development of
Nomology, the science of laws of the mind (Hamilton (1877, pp. 122-8) that used the
terms cognition, affect and conation as a triad of mental activities corresponding to
knowing, feeling and willing. These operate within what he called somatic, psychic and
pneumatic levels that for us define ontological distinctions. For Brugha (2002), the
400 somatic level refers to needs, the psychic level with likes, the pneumatic level refers to
likes, and the pneumatic level refers to basic values. According to C.M. Brugha
(personal communication, 2006), these levels relate well to the domains of our SVS
model in knowledge cybernetics, and provide a wealth of exploration of noumenal
attributes that could with utility be integrated into knowledge cybernetics.
In particular for Brugha (1998a), Hamilton’s formulation can be expressed in terms
of decision-making processes that connect with extroverts and introverts, and this also
can be represented as a SVS fractal. Decision making arises when the decision
possessor is subjectively involved as the participant, and deemed to be introverted or
extroverted. Introverted decision making is shown to correspond to Hamilton’s
somatic, psychic and pneumatic levels of commitment. Extroverted decision making is
shown to correspond to three levels of conviction (becoming convinced): technical,
relating to other people (others) and situational. Where decision making combines both,
extroverted decision making is shown to be nested within introverted decision making,
making nine kinds of behaviour or stages of relating to or dealing with a problem
(Brugha, 1998a, b).
Developing psychohistory
We have now arrived at a point that is conjectural, and points to a research
agenda. The mathematics of a psychohistory that connect with Figure 11 centers in
part on the extrovert/introvert attributes of the model and its interaction with other
actors (in a known phenomenal space of size N). In effect, the psychohistorical process
visualizes a suprasystem of N interacting actors all of whom interact in a way that
is determined by their personality profiles, and conditioned by their personality
orientation (extrovert/introvert) and the contextual situation in which they find
themselves.
To explore this, and as a result of recent discussions with Roy Frieden, we can
assume that there are N (known) agents in a social collective. Each is defined in terms
of a personality vector (n1,n2,n3,n4) determined by its enantiomers that result in agent
traits. For example, suppose Mr Jones has a personality vector (3,5,1,10). These traits
are the result of the interaction between the dominant enantiomers and the social
interaction that the agent engages in. Possible examples are degree of shyness for
trait 1, degree of assertiveness for trait 2, degree of inquisitiveness for trait 3. There
will be a number of people in the population with this same personality vector
(3,5,1,10). The relative number of them is denoted as p(3,5,1,10jt), that is the relative
number at the time t. The objective is to generally predict the relative number
p(n1,n2,n3,n4jt) of people present with each possible personality vector. The problem is
now that much more prior knowledge is now needed to make the theory work than in
the case of sociohistory. One way forward here is that it can be assumed that individual
personality types are known from a Myers-Briggs type analysis, resulting in an
indication of their dominant enantiomers.
The dimensionality that defines personality traits is given by Myers-Briggs as 4 From
(Table VI). The fourth is extroversion/introversion, which is at the social rather than sociohistory to
individual focus, and it is a response as opposed to an innate state. This is also an
apparent conclusion that arises from the way in which Brugha has dealt with these psychohistory
variables. If this is true, then we need to set up the dynamics to enable a 4 enantiomer
reference outcome to emerge.
It may be noticed that in connection with the Myers-Briggs instrument, the original 401
Jungian dimensions of sensing/intuition (which can be related to Sorokin’s sensate/
ideational pair) and thinking/feeling (that can be related to dramatizing/patterning) are
called functions, and some of these functions can become dominant. The judging/
perceiving is, in knowledge cybernetics, equivalent to fundamentalism/pragmatism,
and connects to the internal view a person has of phenomenal reality. It is not the
experience of the phenomenal reality, but a mental image that is produced of that
experience.
Frieden suggests the following ideas in developing the theory. Consider linking the
orientation (extraversion/introversion) attribute into the system. The use of Fisher
information I allows one to mix “apples and oranges”, i.e. things with different
dimensions. This is because it depends completely upon a mere conditional probability
law p (data of parameters) where the data (e.g. apples, oranges, cars, jet planes)
y-vector are conditional upon unknown parameters (say, mean numbers of apples,
oranges, cars, jet planes). EPI allows one to solve for this conditional probability law.
One problem appears to be that the theory cannot address interactive scenarios where
the dimensions changes during evolution of the system. To resolve this the maximum
possible dimensionality must be known and used throughout, letting it (say) start
effectively at a small number and then later increase to the maximum number as
required. This trick in effect accommodates a changing dimension. As such the n-bodies
are now interacting over a given context determined by the probability distributions.
They would be interacting as determined by what are called fitness values w1 ; w2 ; . . .
which are part of the overall system equations (Frieden et al., 2005; Yolles and Frieden,
2005). These are presumed to be some known functions of all the pn at time t.
The initial conditions are now set up, i.e. a set of occurrences p(nj0) at t ¼ 0. In effect
the approach that can be adopted to is use the Lotka-Volterra equations (R. Frieden,
personal communication, 2004) to form a solvable system of differential equations
which allows one in principle to compute p(njt), the relative numbers of people with
traits prescribed by the various values of n. Formally, this is a simple problem because
the equations are only first-order in the time derivatives.
However, there are practical complications, in that the problem is famously
ill-posed, i.e. goes into chaotic solutions for n modestly large. The “art” is then to seek
approximate solutions that “regularize” the problem, i.e. make it well posed (not
chaotic). Books have been written on this. Then the choice of “regularization” scheme
used determines the predictions that result. Hence, the choice must be very good if ones
predictions are to be defensible. In other words one should not just choose some
arbitrary regularization scheme such as least-squares. Instead, the scheme should
represent some known or plausible effect that would reasonably affect predictions in
reality. Past choices of this type have been maximum entropy or minimum Fisher
information. In other words, one must make a choice that seems plausible as to how
nature would work to regularize/stabilize the system. The assumption is that nature
K does operate in this way. However, this leads to a fundamental question: does
36,3/4 nature operate to preserve unstable prediction, or is there some key assumption that
nature imposes that lifts the instability?
Even more fundamentally, does nature “want” to be made predictable, or does it
“want” to remain elusive in this respect?
402 Reflection
The field of knowledge cybernetics has provided a capacity, through its fractal context
sensitive nature, to create knowledge-based models of sociohistorical and
psychohistorical processes. While the theory of sociohistory has no empirical
support at present, it is at least better theoretically developed than psychohistory. The
discussion of psycholistory therefore leads to the idea that this paper is a think-piece
that defines an extended research agenda.
The promise of a theory of psychohistory that can explore the dynamic behaviour of
individuals in social settings, given that they have a determinable psychological
profile, is a most interesting one. Not least it provides a potential to create a personality
testing instrument that unlike the Myers-Briggs instruments has a well grounded
theoretical base. Jungian theory acts as a core for this, with a potential to incorporate
the theoretical developments of Cathal Brugha. However, the Myers-Briggs instrument
must be replaced by the theoretical constructs represented here, so that all personality
characteristics and their interactive relations are more appropriately formulated. This
in particular constitutes a rather large research agenda.
The mathematics approach of psychohistory as considered by Roy Frieden
provides a very useful way forward, as long as the formal constraints are recognised
and responded to, and with all assumptions and conditions made explicit and
pragmatically reasonable. We cannot be in the unfortunate position of the game
theoretical approaches that postulate unrealistic constraints that make the
development of a theory impractical for the prediction of real situations, which after
all is the intention for psychohistory.
Notes
1. This is a 16th C. idea that suggests the existence of a universal set of truths and values
common to all peoples and cultures.
2. In a letter on 3 May 1939 that discusses Psychological Types.
3. According to the on-line Oxford English Dictionary.
4. As a point of information, since Fisher I measures the degree of complexity of a system, the
Fisher I of the overall sociocultural system would rise at this point of increased “social
complexification”.
5. This dispersed agent, once it is conceptualized, is deemed to exist either: in an ideational
world because it is an essence that can be manifested in its ideate; and in a sensate world if it
can be identified phenomenally and measured.
6. Any place of complete mental bliss and delight and peace.
References
Andersen, J.A. (2000), “Intuition in managers: are intuitive managers more effective?”, Journal of
Managerial Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 46-63.
Aveleira, A. (2004), “Consciousness and reality: a stable-dynamic model based on Jungian From
psychology, Metareligion”, available at: www.meta-religion.com/Psychiatry/
Analytical_psychology/consciousness_and_reality.htm (accessed December 2005), sociohistory to
(October). psychohistory
Brander, B.G. (1998), Staring into Chaos: Explorations in the Decline of Western Civilization,
Spence Publishing Company, Dallas, TX.
Brown, T.L. (2003), Making Truth: Metaphor in Science, University of Illinois Press, Chicago, IL. 403
Brugha, C.M. (1998a), “The structure of development decision-making”, European Journal of
Operational Research, Vol. 104 No. 1, pp. 77-92.
Brugha, C.M. (1998b), “The structure of qualitative decision making”, European Journal of
Operational Research, Vol. 104 No. 1, pp. 46-62.
Brugha, C.M. (2002), “Understanding the dialectic: a meta-decision-making explanation of the
structure of Shili and Renli”, paper presented at MCS’202 International Workshop on
Metasynthesis and Complecx Systems, Shanghai, 7-8 August.
Carroll, R.T. (2003), Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Skeptics Dictionary, available at:
skepdic.com/myersb.html (accessed April 2005).
Feichtinger, C. and Fink, G. (1998), “The collective culture shock in transition countries –
theoretical and empirical implications”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 302-8.
Fink, G. and Feichtinger, C. (1998), “Towards a theory of collective culture shock”, Journal
of Contemporary Management Issues, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 1-134.
Fink, G. and Holden, N. (2002), “Collective culture shock: contrastive reactions to radical systemic
change”, IEF Working Paper No. 45, October 2002.
Frieden, B.R. (1998), Physics from Fisher Information, (2004), 2nd ed., Science from Fisher
Information, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Frieden, B.R. and Gatenby, R.A. (Eds) (2006), Exploratory Data Analysis Using Fisher
Information, Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.
Frieden, R., Yolles, M.I. and Kemp, G. (2005), “A metahistorical information theory of social
change: the theory”, Organizational Transformation and Social Change, Vol. 2 No. 2,
pp. 103-36.
George, J.M. and Jones, G.R. (2002), Organizational Behavior, Prentice-Hall, Saddle River, NJ.
Grant, G.H. (2003), “The evolution of corporate governance and its impact on modern corporate
America”, Management Decision, Vol. 41 No. 9, pp. 923-34.
Guo, K.J. (2006), “Strategy for organizational change in state-owned commercial banks in china: a
developing organizational development view”, doctoral thesis, Faculty of Business and
Law, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool.
Habermas, J. (1971), Knowledge and Human Interests, Beacon Press, Boston, MA.
Hamilton, W. (1877), “Lectures on metaphysics”, Lectures on Metaphysics and Logic, 6th ed.,
Vols 1 & 2, William Blackwood & Sons, London.
Iles, P. and Yolles, M. (2002), “International joint ventures, HRM and viable knowledge
migration”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 13 No. 4,
pp. 624-41.
Iles, P. and Yolles, M. (2003), “International HRD alliances in viable knowledge migration and
development: the Czech academic link project”, Human Resource Development
International, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 301-24.
K Jung, C.G. (1920), Psychologishe Typen, Rascher & Cie AG, Zurich, also in English as Jung, C.G.,
1921, Psychological Types, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
36,3/4
Jung, C.G. (1957-1979), Collected Works, Bollinger Series,Vols. 1-20, Pantheon, New York, NY.
Kemp, G. (1997), “Cultural implicit conflict: a re-examination of Sorokin’s socio-cultural
dynamics”, Journal of Conflict Processes, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 15-25.
Kets de Vries, M.F.R. (1991), Organisations on the Couch: Clinical Perspectives on Organisational
404 Behaviour and Change, Jossey-Bass Inc. (a Wiley publication), New York, NY.
Koestler, A. (1967), The Ghost in the Machine, Picador, London.
McKenna, M.K., Shelton, C.D. and Darling, J.R. (2002), “The impact of behavioral style
assessment on organizational effectiveness: a call for action”, Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 314-22.
Maturana, H.R. and Varela, F.J. (1979), Autopoiesis and Cognition, Boston Studies in the
Philosophy of Science, Boston, MA.
Myers, I.B. (1998), Introduction to Type: A Guide to Understanding Your Results on the
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Consulting Psychologists Press Inc., Palo Alto, CA.
Myers, I.B. (2000), An Introduction to Types: A Guide to Understanding Your Results on
the Myers-Briggs Types Indicator, CPP, Palo Alto, CA, Revised from the 1998 edition.
Robbins, S.P. (2001), Organizational Behavior, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Schutz, A. and Luckmann, T. (1974), The Structures of the Lifeworld, Heinamann, London.
Schwarz, E. (1997), “Towards a holistic cybernetics: from science through epistemology to
being”, Cybernetics and Human Knowing, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 17-50.
Schwarz, E. (2001), “Anticipating systems: an application to the possible futures of contemporary
society”, paper presented at CAYS’2001, Fifth International Conference on Computing
Anticipatory Systems, Liege, 13-18 August.
Shotwell, J.M., Wolf, D. and Gardner, H. (1980), “Styles of achievement in early symbol use”,
in Brandes, F. (Ed.), Language, Thought, and Culture, Academic Press, New York, NY.
Sorokin, P.A. (1937-1942), Social and Cultural Dynamics, Amer. Book. Co, New York, NY,
re-published in 1962 by Bedminster Press (in 4 vols).
Sorokin, P. (1962), Social and Cultural Dynamics, Bedminster Press, New York, NY (in 4 vols).
Wilson, G.B. (1984), “Organizational Jung”, New Catholic World, 227: 1358 (March/April),
available at: www.gbwilson.homestead.com/files/Organizational_Jung.htm (accessed
2004).
Wollheim, R. (1999), On The Emotions, Yale University Press, London.
Yolles, M.I. (1980), “The dynamics of peace and war: a mathematical study”, doctoral
dissertation, Department of Politics, Lancaster University, Lancaster.
Yolles, M.I. (1999), Management Systems: A Viable Approach, Pearson, London.
Yolles, M.I. (2000), “The theory of viable joint ventures”, Cybernetics and Systems, Vol. 31 No. 4,
pp. 371-96.
Yolles, M.I. (2001), “Viable boundary critique”, Journal of Operational Research Society, Vol. 51,
pp. 1-12.
Yolles, M.I. (2006a), Organisations as Complex Systems: An Introduction to Knowledge
Cybernetics, Information Age Publishing, Inc., Greenwich, CT.
Yolles, M.I. (2006b), “Revisiting the political cybernetics of organisations”, Kybernetes, Vol. 34
Nos 5/6, pp. 617-36.
Yolles, M.I. and Frieden, B.R. (2005), “A metahistorical information theory of social change: the From
theory”, Organisational Transformation and Social Change, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 103-36.
Yolles, M.I. and Guo, K. (2003), “Paradigmatic metamorphosis and organisational development”,
sociohistory to
Sys. Res., Vol. 20, pp. 177-99. psychohistory
Further reading
Brugha, C.M. (2001), “Implications from decision science for the systems development life cycle 405
in information systems”, Information Systems Frontiers, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 91-105.
Frieden, B.R., Yolles, M.I. and Kemp, G. (2005), “A metahistorical information theory of social
change: an application”, Organisational Transformation and Social Change, Vol. 2 No. 2,
pp. 137-51.
Corresponding author
M.I. Yolles can be contacted at: m.yolles@livjm.ac.uk