Social Psychology and Performative Interventions in Human Systems. The GENERATIVE Method

Abstract

Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to describe the GENERATIVE method, methodology for promoting in systems (i.e., contexts involving interactions, such as organizations, communities, institutions). The first part of the paper is focused on the description of the interactionist and constructionist epistemological background adopted. The second is dedicated to the presentation of systems as socially constructed realities. The third part is dedicated to the description of the three recursive steps of the GENERATIVE methodology: The system analysis, the negotiation and redefinition of goals and the pragmatic intervention. Finally, the presentation of the methodological steps is critically discussed in order to show how this methodology is particularly useful and effective in promoting in systems. The paper aims to provide insights and guidelines to professionals, practitioners and consultants working in contexts involving interactions.Keywords: Social Constructionism, Organizational Structure, Change Agents, Management Consulting, Quali-Quantitative MethodologyIntroductionThe aim of the present paper is to propose and describe in depth the GENERATIVE method (GENERATIVE methodology for performative intervention in systems), methodology of intervention in contexts involving interactions (organizations, institutions and communities), developed within theoretical framework inspired by Symbolic Interactionism and Social Constructionism (Burr, 1998; Gergen, 1999; 2009). The main focus will be on the formulation of methodological proposal and its connections to the epistemological background.This paper is developed around three key concepts: The first is shared forms of to be intended as set of meanings, values and practices which dynamically generate-and are generated by-the system. The second is human with which we intend system composed by people interacting in the framework of set of common and (at least partially) institutionalized goals, providing meaning to it. The third concept is the role of whom promotes and facilitates the connection and the continuous interaction among different forms of meaning that constitute system, that is the change facilitator: We use this label, instead of, for example, consultant, or practitioner, because we want to stress the broader field of application of this role, who can not only intervene in the field of consultancy to organizations, but also in other forms of systems.Epistemological and Theoretical BackgroundThe theoretical background of the present paper is rooted in Symbolic Interactionism (Blumer, 1969; Mead, 1934) and Social Constructionism (Gergen, 1973; 1999; 2011).The core of the interactionist approach poses meaning as the by-product of interactions (Mead, 1934). According to Blumer (1969), beings act toward social phenomena on the basis of the meaning it assumes for them. Meaning is handled and modified through an interpretative process used by the person in dealing with the things he/she encounters (Blumer, 1969). In other words, all reality, at least in the universe of symbols and meaning, is generated by the interaction between individuals (Berger and Luckmann, 1967). More specifically, when we talk about social interaction, we are not referring exclusively to interpersonal exchanges: Meaning emerges as result of wider and transversal constructions, which can be found in societal dynamics (Doise and Mapstone, 1986; Wagner and Laszlo, 2003) that provide common ground of knowledge, a set of meanings that are mutually known, believed, presupposed, or taken for granted by the participants of joint activity (Kashima, 2014).Gergen's social constructionism criticises the prominent role that the individual mind has in sciences and in culture (Gergen, 1997; 1999), which has brought, at least in psychology, to unfruitful attempts to control, predict and assess the real reality of individuals. …