Quine’s knowledge formation process applied to COVID-19 and business

Ignacio Maroto

San Ignacio University Graduate School

DBA801 Epistemology

Dr. Jaime Torres George

Introduction

This case analysis is an attempt to apply the concept of Quine’s naturalized

epistemology to the present business crisis caused by the COVID 19 pandemic. The

analysis will depart from the foundations of Quine’s epistemology, as described by Li

(2013) and Hetherington (2012). We will also undertake some reflections about the

concept of the scientific method.

Then, we will attempt a characterization of the present business crisis caused by

COVID 19 through the application of the concept of the VUCA environment as

described by Whiteman (1998). We will show how COVID 19 has created a business

context that is extremely volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous. We will argue

whether a naturalized approach is possible in such an extreme VUCA environment.

Following this development, we will try to find possible applications of Quine’s

naturalized epistemology to the present COVID 19 business crisis, applying the

concepts of the scientific method and of Adaptive Leadership, following the works of

Glover et Al. (2002).

Finally, the concepts of learning by assimilation and learning by

accommodation introduced by Piaget (1971) will help us find a link between Adaptive

Leadership and Quine’s naturalized epistemology as a strategic alternative to be applied

to the present COVID 19 business crisis.

 Development: Quine’s epistemology, and COVID 19’s business crisis

Quine’s approach suggests that epistemology should be naturalized, and

considered a branch of science, namely a discipline within psychology. Following Li

(2013), we can see how Quine discards the traditional sorts of epistemological studies

(conceptual and doctrinal) because they lack advantages over science in general and

psychology in particular. In this respect, Li analyses the challenge of integrating

normativity within the framework of naturalized epistemology.

Hetherington (2012), however, denies that Quine’s epistemology should be

identified with an attempt to abandon the “study of how we ought to think”, to

concentrate only on the “study of how we actually do think”. According to Hetherington,

the foundation of Quine’s epistemology as a branch of psychology has to be found in

the nature of the scientific method itself.

We can characterize the scientific method as an inductive-deductive method, by

deducing what might happen if a given hypothesis was true, and then refer to factual

information to assess whether it coincides with the conclusions that should follow the

fulfillment of the hypothesis. In this respect, scientific work is about gathering enough

empirical data to be able to give a meaningful explanation of the relationships among

variables. In this respect, the goal of science lies within theory formation.

Following Hetherington, Quine’s view is that both the assessment of

phenomenological or factual pieces of evidence, and the assessment of theories

themselves, are purely empirical endeavors, and this explains how epistemology should

be considered a chapter of psychology.

How should we try to face the challenges of the COVID 19 business crisis

following this psychological approach to knowledge? COVID 19 has made a deep

impact on the economy, and it has changed the outlook for all industries and businesses.
It was an unforeseen incident that has created huge transformations of business

dynamics because it has changed the lives of the whole of the world population.

This kind of context can be analyzed through the concept of the VUCA

environment. This is a concept first introduced by Whiteman (1998) for the military,

and then repeatedly applied to the business environment, particularly to understand the

impact of disruptive innovation brought about by technological revolutions. VUCA

stands for a context that is Volatile (with unexpected and unstable

challenges), Uncertain (with lack of predictability), Complex (with many interconnected

variables and parts), and Ambiguous (with causal relations that are unclear).

COVID 19 has introduced an extreme VUCA environment for business.

Volatility is explained by the evolution of the virus itself, with unpredictable and

dramatic changes that follow chain reactions in many aspects of life and business

throughout the world every day. Uncertainty of COVID 19 can be identified with the

lack of predictability of the end of the crisis: we believe that massive vaccination will

allow us to come back to a way of living more similar to the one preceding the outbreak

of the pandemics, but it is still unclear to what extent and for how long the vaccine will

grant immunity towards the virus. Complexity is explained by how the virus has

affected all aspects of daily life (social life, health care, market demand, business

operations, the economy as a whole, politics, family life, to name a few) in very

complex and intertwined ways. As for ambiguity, there is no business recipe to cope

with such a broad and deep impact; we lack preceding examples of best practices that

we can refer to because there is no precedent of a shock so profound and generalized in

businesses.

In view of this ambiguity, how can we apply a naturalized framework to

knowledge so that the challenges of this crisis can be tackled? We will try now to find a
way to apply naturalized epistemology by looking at the scientific method in the context

of Adaptive Leadership.

Strategic alternative: Naturalized Epistemology, the scientific method and

Adaptive leadership

At this point, we can fall back to Quine. The way in which Quine brings forth

the naturalization of epistemology is by founding it in the study of evidential support.

This is a key concept since we must apply the study to a phenomenological context in

which there are repeated and unanticipated changes, unpredictable reactions, multiple

variables interconnected in very complex ways, and causal relationships that are

extremely difficult to identify.

According to Hetherington (2012), this concept of epistemology as the study of

evidential support has three different branches: The first branch would be the study of

existing evidence and theories, a study to be undertaken in Quine’s view exclusively

with an empirical and psychological approach. This kind of approach is difficult to put

into practice with the COVID 19 business crisis, since the VUCA variables keep

challenging the correct determination of factual evidence, and also theory formation in

such a complex and changing environment. However, the psychological considerations

about how this VUCA context impacts decision-making in business could be very

helpful within the attempt to study how factual evidence should be interpreted, and how

business theories should be applied to this completely new situation.

The second branch of Quine’s epistemology as the study of evidential support

corresponds to the study about strategies for theory change. This branch is at the same

time empirical and normative. This is probably the key aspect that will allow us to apply

Quine’s epistemology to the current COVID 19 business crisis: We need to improve our

ability to change and adapt theories in the light of new challenges and situations,
anticipating possible factual observations. It is in this respect that we can find a link

between Quine’s epistemology and a very useful business tool to cope with the VUCA

environments: Adaptive Leadership.

We will analyze Adaptive Leadership for this purpose, but first, let us consider

the third branch of Quine’s epistemology as the study of evidential support. This third

branch lies within the study of evidential support relations. It means analyzing how our

sensory stimulation impacts our beliefs about statistical and logical relationships. This

last branch is more clearly normative, while the previous two are more strictly

empirical. Quine devoted most of his epistemology work to concentrate on the second

branch, which is the one that will be applied more directly to the challenges of business

leaders facing the COVID 19 crisis.

We can understand how strategies for theory change can be key in any attempt

to cope with the business challenges of the COVID 19 pandemics. With such a complex

and fast-changing environment, business leaders cannot limit themselves to leading

change, since change management cannot be fast enough to cope with the disruption

introduced by the COVID 19 situation. Coping with change is not enough in this

context: business leaders need not only to manage change, but they also need to create

the necessary changes to make it possible for their organizations to adapt, and to do it in

both a sustained and successful way. This means that leading change endeavors without

enabling adaptation are not enough. This is what Adaptive Leadership means: leading in

a way that organizations themselves can adapt to fast changes without the need to

implement change leadership strategies.

And how can we link Adaptive Leadership to the second branch of Quine’s

epistemology, strategies for theory change? We can find that link in the work of Piaget,

another author in the field of epistemology, who inspired the concepts that constitute the
foundation of Adaptive Leadership. Piaget is known for his constructive view of

epistemology, with the application to research programs of concepts such as hard

core, negative heuristics, and positive heuristics. Piaget (1971) develops the ideas

of learning by assimilation and learning by accommodation, which can be used to

define the framework for Adaptive Leadership.

Learning by assimilation means using already existing structures to give

meaning to the factual information that is being received, by recognizing possible

applications of those structures to the factual or empirical data. Learning by assimilation

is the traditional approach to teaching in classrooms and has been applied repeatedly by

organizations to decision-making in operations. It can also be related to Quine’s first

branch of epistemology, the study of existing evidence and theories. Leading by

assimilation is not enough in a VUCA context, where theories will need to be adapted to

the changing variables in the environment.

Learning by accommodation means a change for the learner. The learner suffers

an internal change, that affects his / her beliefs, attitudes, or ideas. When learning by

accommodation, the learner undergoes a series of trials using the mind and emotions to

be able to transform beliefs, attitudes, or ideas. This can be easily associated with the

necessary skills to cope with a VUCA environment. It also relates to Quine’s second

branch of epistemology, strategies for theory change. Many business leaders and many

organizations are facing the COVID crisis trying to learn by accommodation since the

environment is changing so fast. However, Glover et al. (2002) show how learning by

accommodation without learning by assimilation can lead to a situation characterized as

Serendipity, in which decision-making is carried out in a context of constant change

without enough evidence, input, or feedback.

 Therefore, an application of the different branches in Quine’s approach to

epistemology can be used by combining learning by assimilation with learning by

accommodation. Glover et Al. show how both ways of learning need to be combined in

order to obtain adaptive responses.

Conclusions and recommendations

Adaptive Leadership has been described as an effective way to manage

situations corresponding to a VUCA environment, such as the context of the COVID 19

pandemics.

We have shown how Adaptive Leadership can be linked to Quine’s view of

epistemology by associating Piaget’s concept of learning by assimilation to Quine’s

study of existing evidence and theories, and the concept of learning by accommodation

to Quine’s study of theory change.

The third branch of Quine’s epistemology, the study of evidential support

relations, can help us understand how both ways of learning must be combined in order

for leaders to enable their organizations to adapt to fast-changing scenarios without the

need for constant change leadership.

In the COVID 19 business crisis, corporations need adaptive leadership to cope

with the fast-changing challenges associated with the VUCA environment caused by the

pandemics.

Quine’s epistemology can contribute with an objective view to the need to

obtain knowledge by assimilation, and also by accommodation. Naturalized

epistemology can contribute to strengthening the necessary skills to manage businesses

with an adaptive approach. Study of existing theories and evidence, theory of change,

and evidential support relations can contribute to combine correctly both ways of

learning.
 References:

Codreanu, A. (2016). A VUCA ACTION FRAMEWORK FOR A VUCA

ENVIRONMENT. LEADERSHIP CHALLENGES AND

SOLUTIONS. Journal of Defense Resources Management, 7(2), 31-38.

Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/vuca-action-

framework-environment-leadership/docview/1851703435/se-2?

accountid=166613

Delval Merino, J. A. (1996). Piaget y la epistemología. Psicología Educativa,  2(2), 215.

Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/piaget-y-la-

epistemología/docview/2481189099/se-2?accountid=166613

Gettier, E. (1963). Is knowledge justified true belief? Analysis, 23, 121–3.

Glover, J., Friedman, H., & Jones, G. (2002). Adaptive leadership: When change is not

enough (part one). Organization Development Journal, 20(2), 15-32. Retrieved

from https://search.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/adaptive-leadership-when-

change-is-not-enough/docview/198000121/se-2?accountid=166613

Hetherington, S. (Ed.). (2012). Epistemology : The key thinkers : the key thinkers.

ProQuest Ebook Central https://ebookcentral.proquest.com

Li, Q. (2013). Quine ’ s Naturalized Epistemology , Epistemic Normativity and the

Gettier Problem.

Moen, D. (2017). The leader-investigator: Using leadership studies as a model for

conscientization through adaptive leadership, the four frames approach, giving

voice to values, and the competing values framework. Journal of Thought, 51(3),

22-37,73. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/leader-

investigator-using-leadership-studies-as/docview/2052796516/se-2?

accountid=166613
Piaget, J. (1971). Biology and Knowledge. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Saleh, A., & Watson, R. (2017). Business excellence in a volatile, uncertain, complex

and ambiguous environment (BEVUCA). TQM Journal, 29(5), 705-724.

Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/business-

excellence-volatile-uncertain-complex/docview/1950655541/se-2?

accountid=166613

Shufutinsky, Anton, PhD, DHSc,M.P.H., R.E.H.S., Deporres, D., EdD., Long,

Bena,PhD., M.S.M., & Sibel, James R,PhD., M.A. (2020). SHOCK

LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT FOR THE MODERN ERA OF PANDEMIC

MANAGEMENT AND PREPAREDNESS. International Journal of

Organizational Innovation (Online), 13(1), 20-42. Retrieved from

https://search.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/shock-leadership-development-

modern-era-pandemic/docview/2421041275/se-2?accountid=166613

Whiteman, W.E., (1998). Training and educating army officers for the 21st century:

implications for the United States military academy. US Army War College,

Carlisle, PA.