The document reflects on a study conducted by practitioners exploring the reorganization process in an organization, focusing on the gestalt theory and the significance of meaning-making in navigating change. It highlights challenges faced by individuals in imagining future organizational frameworks, emphasizing the importance of subjective perceptions over objective truths in guiding actions. Furthermore, it discusses the gap between management practice and research, advocating for a process-oriented understanding of organizations as dynamic systems rather than static machines.

1. Two practitioners’ reflections on
action
An attempt to create a common
Gestalt in a re-organization process
Lars Marmgren, MSc Anette Strömberg, PhD
Marmgren Konsulter AB/Gestaltakademin Scandinavia Mälardalen University
(works as organizational consultant) (works as lecturer and are just
about going in to science)

2. Our presentation
? !
?

3. Gestalt theory in short; Figure - Ground and the
process of creating meaning
• As human beings we are predisposed to create meaning!
• The gestalt principle of figure formation is a process in which
the individual creates meaning in the here and now, based on:
– Perceived data through all available senses
– The contextual framework of the situation at hand
– All personal life experience, education and knowledge
• The gestalt is the meaningful whole, a figure against the
ground, that in the moment, tells us who where and what we
are in the world,
• This process is not controlled by our will but is an
automatic, internal, self-organizing process that helps us to
navigate in the world at the same time as it helps us to create
energy to act in the world.

4. What is this: ?
BCDEF A The letter A?
A triangle?
A tipi?

5. © Szorstki@stock.xchng.hu
Our research intention
WE STARTED WITH IDENTIFYING
RESULTS AND COMPARING METHODS

6. We intended to do a small research
study
A re-organization process was initiated at MDH. The
study dealt with:
• In total 12 interviews with middle managers,
• The ”consultants task” was to:
explore change resistance,
find dilemmas,
find what is precious in existing organization.
• At first the research interest was how to use
consultant practice in research.

7. + +
They knows about the They can work with employ
daily business and and organizational
the culture. development
Expert on leadership
Expert as leaders
as leaders
- -
They might not work with They do not know the
the staff as asked for. daily business and culture.
AWARENESS – the key to change!

8. Reflections on: our (humans) ability to
simulate/fantasize
• Generally, the informants seemed to or expressed having difficulties
in understanding (fantasize about/imagine/intending) what the
organization to come actually would mean to them.
Alternative explanations
1. An organization scheme does not provide enough information to
provide as ground,
2. According to adult development theories* a high degree of ego
development is needed for that kind of imagination.
3. Thinking about the new organization and its consequences upon
ones work situation, is according to phenomenology, an empty
intention. It differs between peoples ability to engage in empty
intentions.
* Se for example Handbook of adult development, J. Demick and C. Andreoletti
Eds, The Springer series in adult development and ageing

9. Reflections on: Sharing data
• For the interviewer short notes (the third level) might be
enough since the meaning of that data is influenced by the
ground consisting of everything that is in transcript (second
level) and the full experience of the interview (first level).
• Particularly, this is the case when the interviewer also has a
long experience of her own working within the organization.
• For somebody else, solely sharing the data at the third level
may give little meaning.
• The figure in this case (the short notes) holds little meaning
without the ground (the full experience from the interviews +
the interviewers own experience from working in the
organization).

10. We became aware: Our interest in the
study took another turn
Prompted by:
• During analysis of the interviews it became clear to us
that when working with Gestalt you work with other
premises than in most of the management research,
• In Gestalt, as a facilitator you work with the clients
meaning making and awareness, so that they will find
their own actionable solutions,
• We were asked to develop what we mean with: “not to
objectify data”,
• The theory – practice gap in management research.

11. We experience a problem in some
management research
• According to Johnson and Van de Ven* there is a gap
between the scientific theories and the practice,
• We experience a gap between research and
management practice,
• Our students experiences a gap between theory and
practice, and further, they experience difficulties in
making theories actionable.
* A.H. Van de Ven, P.E. Johnson, Knowledge for theory and practice, Academy of
Management Review, 2006, 31 (4), pp 802-821

12. Objectification – or the dilemma of being too
generalization oriented vs too case oriented.
• The scope in science is to generalize such a level that
the same action is valid in an other setting, objective
– non emotional:
Not informative in specific situations (i.e. not
actionable)?
• The scope in Gestalt methods is to understand others
point of view but not make them ones own, the
others subjective – empathy:
Too situation dependent (i.e. not actionable)?

13. Different purposes in research and
consulting
The scientist
• Trying to establish if a proposition is false or true.
The Gestalt consultant
• Supporting the client system to meaningful and
purposeful action.

14. The expert paradigm
According to adult development theories,
“The Conscientious stage is the target stage for
Western culture.”*:
• “Persons at this stage are interested in reasons,
causes, goals, consequences and the effective use of
time.”
• “..(they) generally believe in the perfectibility of
humankind and in the scientific method to “uncover”
truth.”
*S. Cook-Greuter, Nine levels of increasing embrace, p 17 and ff, http://www.cook-
greuter.com/9%20levels%20of%20increasing%20embrace%20update%201%2007.pdf

15. We suggest an alternative understanding
of organizations
The new understanding is based on two simple
assumptions about organizations:
• Actions by people and groups of people are
governed by subjective rationality.
• Organizations are held together and kept in
dynamical balance by feedback (in its biological
meaning).

16. Subjective rationality
• We assume that it is the perceived reality of an
individual that guides the actions of that
individual,
• In the same way, a perceived reality shared by a
group of people will guide the actions of that
group,
• Any action taken, whether by an individual, a
group or an entire organization is not guided by
objective truths(in the scientifically meaning) but
by subjective perceptions of what is true,

17. ©ramasamy chidambaram@stock.xchng.hu
A change in embodiment
ORGANIZATIONS AS BEING ORGANISMS
RATHER THAN MACHINES

18. http://www.bordalierinstitute.com/target1.html

19. Organizational research
Philosophy Complex
systems theory
Our filter
Biology
Social sciences (Cybernetics)

20. Phenomenology
Order parameters, Attractors,
Feed back,
Gestalt methods, Subjective rationality.
Viewed through our filter!

21. Organizations embodied as organisms
will affect your actions!
Management Focus on relations,
building trust.
Org. Designers Focus on roll de-
scriptions and internal
processes which enables
self organization.
Org. Consultant Facilitate feedback (in it
biological meaning and
individuals growth,
process leaders.
Scientist Find and formulate rules
for self organization.

22. *
A culture clash
• In the expert paradigm (viewing organizations as
machines) the expectation on management as
well as scientists and consultants is to bring the
“right solutions” (fix the faults).
• The process oriented manager, scientist or
consultant (all viewing organizations as
organisms) risks to be dismissed as being dopy.
*The parallel world which has two moons in which time seems to be turbulent, described
in three books by Haruki Murakami, 1Q84, in translation to Swedish by V. Emond,
Nordstedts, Stockholm, 2011

23. Where are we heading?
How does managers/organizational consultants/
employees … set the scene* for creating learning
organizations?
* L. Marmgren and M. Ragnarsson, Organizing projects, Thomson
Fakta, Stockholm, 2001

24. Acknowledgements
Thank you!
For Your attention
The conference organizers for giving us this
opportunity
Mälardalen University for sharing their/our
experiences and supporting this work