Based on the cybernetic agency theory of part 1, the paper creates a parallel theory to Maruyama's Mindscape theory called mindset theory, relying on the three-trait organisational value system of Sagiv and Schwartz that arises from extensive theoretical and empirical work on cultural values originally undertaken by Shalom Schwartz. The derived normative personality types are embedded into a cultural system and interacting with a social system. The paper aims to discuss these issues.
First, the paper deals with Sorokin's theory of the immanent cultural dynamics arising from swings between more sensate or more ideational culture. For characterisation of interaction with the social environment, the paper relies on the dramatist/patterner trait from empirical work by Shotwell et al., which acts as an attractor of agency behaviour. Thus, the paper designs a five trait agency model, with one trait that serves as an attractor of agency behaviour, three formative normative personality traits, and one social trait that directs the how of behaviour.
The Sagiv-Schwartz mindset types reveal the missing four types of the Maruyama-universe, as sought by Boje. Sagiv-Schwartz mindset types create generic transparency and a theoretical and empirical base for the selection of mindset meta-types. Through its perfect match with Mindset Agency Theory as developed in part 1, this research creates a structural model that has the potential to distinguish between normal and pathological personalities within the same framework.
The modelling approach can be applied to social, economic and political situations, with the likelihood of anticipating the likely behaviour of social collectives like durable organisation and/or nation states. Analytical and empirical application in different contexts is yet to be provided.
The paper sets up a means by which patterns of behaviour can be analysed in different organisational or national contexts. Empirical analysis based on this theory has the potential to identify normal states and shifts away from normal states of social systems, which may shift into stages of tension and crises, and/or mobilise forces directed towards paradigm changes in social systems.
The paper draws on earlier work undertaken in the last few years by the same authors, who in a new way are pursuing new directions and extensions of that earlier research.
CitationDownload as .RIS
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2014, Emerald Group Publishing Limited