Gregory David Bailey, PhD / ABD. Growth Hack : Keywords: Social Economic Matters, Mental Models, and Terrorists Biohavior Models, Mobile Societies and 21st Century, Knowledge Creative Class Economy:
Part 2: A Brief White Paper: A Hypothetical Possibility of the Future Usage of Knowledge Management and The Brain. A Model for Learning From “Where the Rubber Meets the Road!
Disruptors mental models brain wiring is integrative, and deep structured with ideological beliefs and values, covered in pain, hurt, anger, abandonment, and as defined before, most of the adherence are hungry, angry, lonely and tired. Their mental models are based in traditional patriarchic dysfunctional organizational models, negative patriachical paradigms, and addicted mental models embedded and operating within organization systems thinking. The principle drivers enhancing the global systemization of the illusion of power as seen from the internal or external dysfunctional disruptors are as Glasser (2004) stated “We can only control our feeling and physiology indirectly through how we choose to act and think.” and “All long-term psychological problems are relationship problems.” Herein this statement is a Need for Power, NFP, Need for Achievement, NFA, Need for Organizational, NFO, Need for Freedom, NFF. If this is true and Glasser is correct what we are having in the form of global disruptions are relationship problems.
The mental model above doesn’t allow for a persistence conceptual Knowledge Management relationship continuum , it consistently reinforces a paradigm, as traditionally defined utilizing principally disruptive knowledge designs, with intuition, creativity and in a nonstructural environment. The formally taught leadership models in the west, as carried out in the west, is reversed by the disruptors operating from a negative bottom up and the top down real time fear and actual barbaric warfare induced traumatization of local and global victims unwittingly being sucked into the disruptors chaos. This mental model shifts the outward appearance of the disruptors, into one of internalized mental model machinations, with the core values, and beliefs of social transformation via integrative biohavioral thinking and acting, with chemical and or spontaneous warfare against the unsuspecting public, ushering in a macro socio-economic transformation, instilling 6F’s of fear, flight, fright, freeze, feel , and affecting the feed cycle of countries and communities, without boundaries and or rules, as defined in the traditional nature and nurture of warfare. Negative disruptors view thier actions as bing reinforced by terms, delinateing the egoistic values of I, Self and Me. Positive disruptors view their latent and overt vlaue sytems as [We] period. Behind teh disruptions are the same peronality personas, the driving principles and core vlaues are balanced, and not at a dis-ease, therefore; the social economic dis-ease is not inherent in the flow of their neural pathways, causing social inflmation and hemmorages leading to mayhem, and chaoctic choices of dysfunctional beliefs and values. Positive disruptive knowledge innovators honor life with a reverence for all humanity’s existence.
Dr. Suojanen’s (IMAB) or Integrative Management Brain Approach heralded in, and ushered into the fields of leadership, management, organizational behavior, and theoretical brain research a new approach. The integrative style approached the issues of global terrorism 45 years before it hit the main stream literature. His specific interests what he termed at the time, as an in-depth look into the “Shadow Side” of corporate leadership and Management. The “Shadow Side of Leadership,” as an integrative biohavioral viewpoint to organizational terrorism, examines how understanding the terrorist mindset, could address, at the core visceral brain; the irrationality and biohavioral development of terrorist organizational infrastructures.”
Waino as I came to know him redefined the very essence of knowledge oriented leaders of the 21st century. The new knowledge leader acknowledges, any approach to leadership must begin with the people and not through the people.
The IMAB is guided within the continuum of three contingencies, with each contingency situational scenario; mapping out the knowledge oriented organizations, current, past and futuristic state of being, and the leaders who lead the new knowledge oriented organizations.
The three contingencies are viewed on a quantum tachyon wave pattern, as 1.Crisis Oriented Situation, and or COS, 2. Routine Oriented Situations, and or ROS, and 3. Knowledge Oriented Organizational Situations or KOS. I have added a fourth dimension to the work. That dimension is the 4. Creativity Oriented Organization or COO.
Dr. Suojanen methodologies are currently beginning to be known as a quantum approach to the brain, knowledge based organizational leadership, in the context of addressing 21st century knowledge oriented organizational practices. The model known in the academic literature as “An Integrative Approach to Management and the Brain,” is taking a new twist at the forefront of academic and corporate conversations, in the school without walls.
The inclusiveness of the models, changed the very essence of how leaders, are viewed and the functioning of the organizations in which they are in charge of leading. The integrative approach is built on the premise that nature and nurture are interwoven , as a fine fabric in the universe, and the quantum infinite possibilities, of integrating nature and nurture are endless. The brain constituted the core driver of the works.
As one of the most prolific and profound leadership and organizational brain theorist of the 20th century, Waino was the first to address in depth, the nature of addiction, the brain, organizational theory and animal power politics. Waino’s view of leadership, and leadership development within, and across organizational domains states, that either the (NB) new brain or old brain (OB) is running the show. Suojanen (1983), when the (OB) mitigates the irrational, impulsive, short term rules of the knowledge oriented leader and or organizational principle goals and objectives, “I want what I want and I want it now,” behaviors are predominant.
The old visceral brain, which sits within the domains of the limbic system directly feeds the irrational knowledge management process and guides as the decisive decision maker in jack up thinking. McLean (1973, 1985, 1990) overview of the triune brain in the evolution of the human species clearly holds weight in the Newtonian, Quantum, and Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity and General Theory of Relativity, and Superstring Unification Theories.
The Protoreptilian brain, in the limbic System Brain networks, is integrated with the Paleo mammalian or (VB) runs the show, the organization leader, and the organization is in trouble. McLean (1990) views are no longer purported to hold weight, in many sectors of neuroscience communities; however, it is this author’s conjecture that this is a grave error of the neuroscience community scholar –practitioners.
The same errors of earlier perpetuators of Newtonian theorems, opposed quantum field theoretical mental models. This author’s continuation of the earlier findings of Dr. Waino W. Suojanen is now being viewed in light of ground breaking points of departure research in the quantum field sciences and the brain .
My view as the heir to Suojanen works is as follows: KM must examine the pathways of , “ An Integrative Management Brain Approach, Exploring the correlations between the Brain, Quantum Mechanics, General Theory of Relativity, Quantum Field Theory, Quantum Entanglement Teleportation Models utilization, as a Theoretical framework for Knowledge Entanglement Management Information Interactivity Teleportation in KM Organizational Systems.
The (OB) overrides the rational, taught concepts of life, and the biohavioral responses of the framework are built on the 6F’s as defined by Suojanen (1983). The 6F’s are Fright, Flight, Fight, Feel, Flirt and Feed, inherent in all species. The definitive threaad herein is there is no where that disruption can’t bew carried out where the mental models have been adaoted to the biohavioral beliefs and value systems of disruptors.
These are both instinctual and cognitive at the (OB) levels of human and non-human species specific entities. The opposite of that statement is powerful, and fitting for the 21st century, if we are able to grasp the true meaning in the breath, depth and application of Suojanen perspectives. Suojanen (1983), in his writings defines, The new brain (NB) or Neomammalian Brain, constitutes both Suojanen (1983), “ The Feel Left New Brain” (TFLNB), and “The Right New Brain” (TRNB), and are constructed to make the rational decisions and mitigate the long-term survival of the species.
This author believes that “The Right New Brain,” can be also defined as “The Feel Right New Brain,” as the creativity flowing through the leaders minds, or could create illusions, creative disorders, phenomenal disruptive technologies , and or scientific artistic breakthroughs , based on the leaders and or individual’s brain conceptual, and perceptual -biomimicry- [the brain’s ability to create technologies and or products designed after nature] breakthroughs, leading to new disruptive apps, and or explorations in uncharted territories, on earth, in the earth, or beyond the earth.
Often defined as a hunch, or as a person running a team, unit, or large organization say, “what I see happening in the future is based on non-scientific evidence, it is just a feeling.” The (NB) running the show produces theoretically, rational and positive process, outcomes and lucrative impacts; however, this author believes that when the (OB) is in control and the rational brain is suppressed, that the thoughts processed are irrational, albeit. It appears that “the Rubber is Meeting the Road.”