Discussion: View Thread

Hi Chet,

It's nice to hear you here, also.

>Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 16:06:13 -0500
>From: Chester Bowling <bowling.43@OSU.EDU>
>Subject: Re: Defining Teams
>
>>>To study this question we must be able to assess/determine whether a team
>>>exists, otherwise we cannot distinguish between a team and not a team. To
>>>determine whether a team exists requires that the essential characteristics
>>>of a team be measurable (directly or indirectly).
>>
>>I frankly don't agree with this assumption. The emphasis on measurability
>>often precludes any emphasis on essential aspects which are inherently
>>immeasurable!
>>
>>When I teach Organizational Behavior I often point out to the students that
>>almost all of the constructs in the text books were generated to facilitate
>>some researcher studying his/her logical model. They unfortunately rarely
>>jive with a manager's day to day commonsense experience. This is a big
>>failing, and I would assert, an unnecessary one! I for one find quality
>>elaboration of essential common sense to be more applicable than scientific
>>measurement of tightly controlled reductive models. I was a line manager
>>for twenty years before entering academia, so this has something to do with
>>my bias.
>
>Don
>
>Nice to see-hear you on this list. This subject of measurement really
>interests me. If we aren't measuring something, e.g. quality elaboration
>or Appreciative Dialogues, how do we know that they exist? It seems to me
>there is measurement and there is measurement. It was clear to me in your
>dissertation defense you were measuring the difference between Appreciative
>Dialogues and Non-Appreciative Dialogues. It was not clear how you were
>doing it but I could tell that you were because you identified some of
>each. Using that same type of measurement could you measure a team?

What bothers me most is the idea that something doesn't exist, or it can't
be dealt with, unless it is first (precisely) measureable.

I would not say that I was "measuring," but I don't have any trouble using
the word the way that you are doing. I certainly value taking note of
something, even counting the instances, or taking note of contrasts.

Taking a close look at teams and discussing what we find makes a lot of
sense to me, so that we can promote what we value. I don't think we will
agree on some common means of measuring their degree of existence, though.

Hope all is well with you,

Don

At 10:05 AM 1/7/98 -0500, you wrote:
>What bothers me most is the idea that something doesn't exist, or it can't
>be dealt with, unless it is first (precisely) measureable.
>
>I would not say that I was "measuring," but I don't have any trouble using
>the word the way that you are doing. I certainly value taking note of
>something, even counting the instances, or taking note of contrasts.
>
>Taking a close look at teams and discussing what we find makes a lot of
>sense to me, so that we can promote what we value. I don't think we will
>agree on some common means of measuring their degree of existence, though.

Don

I completely agree. What I'm wondering about is what words do we use to
describe the observations that we are making when we see something that is
real but not as you say "precisely" measurable?

It seems to me that if we can find meaningful words it will allow us to
more successfully promote what we value. What do you think?

Chet

Chester Bowling wrote:
>
> At 10:05 AM 1/7/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >What bothers me most is the idea that something doesn't exist, or it can't
> >be dealt with, unless it is first (precisely) measureable.
> >
> >I would not say that I was "measuring," but I don't have any trouble using
> >the word the way that you are doing. I certainly value taking note of
> >something, even counting the instances, or taking note of contrasts.
> >
> >Taking a close look at teams and discussing what we find makes a lot of
> >sense to me, so that we can promote what we value. I don't think we will
> >agree on some common means of measuring their degree of existence, though.
>
> Don
>
> I completely agree. What I'm wondering about is what words do we use to
> describe the observations that we are making when we see something that is
> real but not as you say "precisely" measurable?
>
> It seems to me that if we can find meaningful words it will allow us to
> more successfully promote what we value. What do you think?
>
> Chet

No human behavior is "precisely measurable." That's why many of our
colleagues are using creative writing excerpts to explore the
complexities of human interaction (see others' E-mails on this), and why
there is a surge of interest in the use of qualitative; i.e.,
non-quantitative, methodology in business research. See Van Maanen,
Baba, etc.
Leon

May I suggest that the word evaluate may be used when measurement is not
(yet) practicable?

Charleskramer@compuserve.com