E2.0 and The Psychology of Transactions.


I am yet to be convinced that human beings make transactional decisions based on multiple factors – Using an E2.0 tool is a transactional decision- People are neither altruists nor selfish..they simply expect that someone can and will gather the knowledge that they cant capture because they are too busy ‘getting things done’. .. Like all things transactional, it is essential to understand such behavior through the lens of ‘ Parent -Child – Adult ‘ model of Transactional Psychology.

I believe that every transaction leads to varied types and degrees of learning based on whether the type or mode of communication leads the individual into ‘Parent’ mode, ‘child’ mode or ‘Adult’ mode. To give you a simple example, lets consider the process of filling up a feedback form. You have had a very good experience and have been sent a feedback form with multiple choices and a comments sections. How often does the ‘comments’ section in a feedback form get filled with verbose or even specific comments if there are 10 other questions on the same sheet that are of the multiple choice type ? – > Very Rarely! In the child mode, we like to quickly flip through selections and move on.. Filling the feedback form requires an adult response.. Now, on the contrary, if you have had a very negative response, it is extremely likely that not only will you make your selections for all multiple choice queries, you will also ensure that the comments section is filled appropriately —Think about this as something similar to a ‘Parent’ response ; ‘ you have erred and so you shall be punished ‘!

You must be wondering how or why this has relevance to E2.0.. Well, it does, if you are designing an E2.0 tool , it means that you’ll need to understand what the primary motive of your user will be and ensure that the user interface design and workflow of the tool considers the mode(Parent/Child/Adult) that you want your user to adopt in response to a User Input requirement or a workflow step. The idea here is that the tool should elicit the type of response essential in the process of fulfilling its purpose. If the tool ends up modifying or deviating the behavioral flow required to elicit information required to improve the organisation’s knowledge base or executing capabilities, the tool has failed!

Advertisements

~ by exploreamaze on July 30, 2009.

2 Responses to “E2.0 and The Psychology of Transactions.”

  1. I am intrigued by the Parent-Child-Adult transactional psychology! But I can’t help wondering if the decision to use an E2.0 tool becomes transactional only after the initial – primary – decision to leverage on it is made….if you get my drift. Example: The fact that I decide to blog is not transactional…I want to blog because I like to write, I know I’ll learn more, meet other thinkers etc. Once I decide to blog, whether I use a blogging tool and how often I use it or when I use it maybe transactional…..

  2. @Nimmy – There are many ways to express and meet thinkers… however you chose blogging.. There’s a bit of PAC transaction there.. Blogging is easy to use and allows a form of multicast communication that other mechanisms dont.. To share your thoughts without a person standing right in front you to scrutinize, it allows a form of unrestrained expression for many people. I have met passionate bloggers who dont actually seem so passionate when you interact with them! We often chose writing as against talking for certain types of discussions or expression, that again is PAC psychology at play.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: