Belonging | Leis Network

Contacts, Network and Belonging

Some psychologists postulate that there is no need for a separation of belonging and esteem; they are the same construct[i]. We stand firmly with Maslow. Collapsing the two concepts does not recognize the fundamental differences in them. It also does not recognize and appreciate the different ways in which we learn and interact.

Maslow meant by love or belonging the need for a very close relationship with family and friends, as well as an ever expanding network of mentors, influences, contacts and acquaintances. We all need an intimate inner circle where we feel trust and appreciation. How much richer is life with close family and friends! Maslow pointed out that we must give and receive this belonging, and he believed the lack of these relationships were the most common cause of maladjustment or neurosis.

Large network of men at meeting, 1920 - 1929 by Powerhouse Museum Collection, on Flickr

Belonging also sweeps a wider birth than family and friends. Maslow noticed that esteem and effectiveness is enhanced as relations and attendant respect ripples outward to include an evolving network of various contacts, some closer than others.

Certainly networks play a crucial role in finding meaning, work, and developing careers. It may be a fundamental difference between the poor and the rich. It certainly ranks as a crucial mathematical significance in school choice.

Individuality vs. sociality and belonging

And esteem and belonging are essentially different. They represent two halves of our essential nature. One is individual, involving our sense of separateness and autonomy. The other is social. Our need to socialize is an essential part of our DNA. These two sides of our nature are prevalent themes throughout the world in which we live. They are two sides of the same coin. They both must be synthesized and nurtured.

Certainly, lack of trust and a sense of belonging are the major cause of dysfunctional teams. Conversely, great teams find their strength in their interdependency. There is simply no other way around it. A team will never function to its potential until it achieves cohesiveness mainly because of the reasons below.

Cognition and learning as a Social Construct

The process of learning is social, forming another supporting layer on the concept of ‘belonging.’ So is cognition. We internalize ideas and concepts from various communities and interest groups as we network through life. Many scholars conceptualize learning as an acculturation process, including skills, theories and processes.

This socio-centric view proposes that knowledge is the product of interactions of groups of people over time[ii]. We actually struggle to communicate unless we understand the culture and practice of various communities.

Therefore it is impossible to talk to an economist if one’s discourse does not fit into the language and constructs of his theories; he will view your thoughts as irrelevant or disproved by theory whether he understands the phenomena or not. Likewise, it is difficult to talk about baseball cards if one does not understand the forum in which they trade. The culture, hierarchy and acceptance ritual is as important as the knowledge itself.

There are multiple connections to the psychology here. Learning, like meaning, is a social exercise. We choose our thoughts, but communities and networks deeply affect them. Symbiosis occurs. Milieu is important. How and in what context the information is processed is vital. Immersed technical expertise becomes obligatory. Learning is participatory.

What does this mean in terms of the organization? Both our psychology and our social constructs demand teams centered around a common purpose or meaning, as opposed to functional expertise. They demand it for milieu, internalization, and participatory reasons. As we shall see, they demand it for innovation as well.

Sociometry

In 1934 Jacob Levy Moreno, a Romanian physician (his life story is an interesting testament to emergence) published, “Who Shall Survive?”[iii] Moreno’s book solidly established the science of sociometry as a legitimate offshoot of psychology.

Earlier, he had established that placing wayward girls in networked assignments based on complimentary traits using statistically derived surveys substantially reduced the number of runaways from The New York State Training School for Girls in Hudson, New York where he was the Director. Did Moreno pioneer strength based teams so popular in management theory today?

The book presents the philosophy of sociometry, or the science of group measurement and community regrouping. His key proposition was not only that groups or networks combine to form a dynamic all their own, a key component of complex systems. He also noticed the inherent creativity of unmanaged groups, as well as the holistic dynamics of spiritual, physical and emotional interaction.

As he spawned the study of psychological group dynamics, he introduced and investigated what are now common terms; ‘interpersonal relationships,’ psychodramas, role reversals, mirrors, and group therapy. These ‘treatments’ remain popular tools of psychological healing to the present day.
His and subsequent work clearly contains parallels with emergence midst autonomous agent groups and research on network properties. The concept of ‘belonging’ is visualized as a scale free network. This is not surprising. They are measuring the same phenomena from the perspective of different disciplines. We shall explore this topic more in depth as we review network theory and the self-organizing effect of complex systems.

From this construct, we see that practical work exercises produce more adapted students who obtain employment more readily upon graduation. Case studies are often more effective than theory. Sports teams practice not only to develop their bodies, but to ingrain their roles and contributions within the larger purpose of the team. Our understanding of concepts such as logistics, customers and process technologies are deeper and more practical if we live them.

“Never judge a man until you have walked a day in his shoes.” The old motto has two meanings. One of them is that you will learn something.

References

[i] E. Mathes, “Maslow’s hierarchy of needs as a guide for living.,” Journal of Humanistic Psychology 21, no. Fall (1981): 69-72.
[ii] L. B. Resnick, “Shared cognition: Thinking as social practice,” Perspectives on socially shared cognition (1991): 1-20.
[iii] J.L. Moreno and MD, Who Shall Survive (Mental Health Resources, 2007).