Open in app

Sign in

Write

Sign in

Mastodon

Mapping Strategic Moves #2: Engaging with Activity Theory

Oliver Ding
CALL4
Published in
18 min readSep 14, 2024

--

Using the House of Project Engagement as a Strategic Map

This is part of the series of Mapping Strategic Moves.

In this second case study, I will use the House of Project Engagement as a strategic map to reflect on the journey of Engaging with Activity Theory.

In Dec 2022, I reflected on engaging with Activity Theory from 2015 to 2022 and edited a book (titled) Appropriating Activity Theory. Using the Ecological Transformation framework, I found several important journey movements. See the diagram below.

Why reflect on this journey again?

I revisited the journey as part of a case study for the Strategic Moves project, this time utilizing the House of Project Engagement to conduct a diagramming exercise — Mapping Strategic Moves. New developments since December 2022 have also emerged, prompting further reflection.

The House of Project Engagement

Designed as a Map, the House of Project Engagement uses a “Museum” metaphor to represent space. The House is organized into 12 thematic rooms, with each room representing a distinct type of social landscape. Together, these rooms depict the following themes:

  • Before
  • Role Models
  • Ideas
  • Possible Project
  • Meet with Others
  • Actual Project
  • Settings
  • Supportive Platform
  • Public Square
  • Network of Project
  • Conflict
  • After

For more information, please refer to the following link:

The Journey of Engaging with Activity Theory

Activity Theory or “Cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT),” is an interdisciplinary philosophical framework for studying both individual and social aspects of human behavior. Initially, it was a psychological theory focused on the development of individual psychological functions and the mind.

A major development of activity theory was contributed by Finnish educational researcher Yrjö Engeström who upgraded the activity theory from individual activities to collective activities by introducing a conceptual model of an “activity system.” This allowed Activity Theory to be applied to educational settings, organizational development, and other fields (Engeström,1987).

More recently, Andy Blunden contributed to CHAT by developing the concept of “Project as a unit of activity.” Drawing on Hegel’s logic and Vygotsky’s theories on the “Unit of Analysis” and “Concept,” Blunden aimed to create a theoretical foundation for a new interdisciplinary theory of Activity. His approach is documented in four books: An Interdisciplinary Theory of Activity (2010), Concepts: A Critical Approach (2012), Collaborative Projects: An Interdisciplinary Study (2014), and Hegel for Social Movements (2019).

I began studying Activity Theory around 2015. In 2020, I worked on the Activity U project, resulting in two book drafts and the initial development of the Project Engagement approach. From 2021 to 2022, I created the Anticipatory Activity System (AAS) framework and applied it to explore life strategy. In 2023, I designed the Activity Analysis & Intervention (AAI) Program. By 2024, I revisited and refined the Project Engagement approach, developing its v3.0. Recently, I launched Applied Activity Theory, a tool for selecting activity-theoretical frameworks.

The journey has led to many creations, including book drafts, knowledge frameworks, diagrams, digital boards, and more.

Mapping Strategic Moves

Let’s explore the strategic moves I made while engaging with Activity Theory from 2019 to 2024 through the lens of the House of Project Engagement.

By applying the House of Project Engagement, I identified 17 key movements throughout the journey. Each move represents a distinct aspect of the social landscape within the knowledge engagement process, highlighting the interplay between mental exploration and social exploration.

1

In 2014, I reflected on my career development and began studying various theories, including Activity Theory.

2

As a digital interaction researcher and designer, I found Bonnie A. Nardi’s books particularly relevant, as she serves as a key bridge between Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction (HCI).

3

I soon realized that engaging with Activity Theory required an additional step: applying it to conduct a case study.

4

In 2018, I applied Activity Theory to reflect on my work with the BagTheWeb project.

5

By September 2018, I revisited the “Activity Theory — BagTheWeb” project. This exploration eventually led me to transition from Activity Theory to Ecological Psychology. The outcome was my first theoretical book, Curativity.

6

In 2019, I began blogging on Medium.com, writing articles on Action-based Creativity and other related topics.

7

In August 2020, I launched the Activity U project as a knowledge curation initiative.

8

While working on the Activity U project, I discovered Clay Spinuzzi’s blog and Andy Blunden’s books on Activity Theory, which deepened my understanding of the field.

9

Andy Blunden’s theoretical approach provided a strong foundation for exploring new possibilities within Activity Theory.

10

In August 2021, a friend supported me in studying a life discovery program, where the early concept of the “Anticipatory Activity System” (AAS) framework emerged.

11

By the end of 2021, I chose “Strategy” and the AAS framework as the central theme for my work in 2022.

12

In September 2022, I turned the apparent conflict between Activity Theory and Ecological Psychology into a productive, creative dialogue.

13

In May 2024, while following discussions among professionals on LinkedIn, I developed a framework called Public Square.

14

Between May and August 2024, I explored the application of the Project Engagement (v3.1) theoretical toolkit across various practical fields, which resulted in the creation of a new network encompassing several related projects.

15

In August 2024, I revisited the theory-practice gap and reconsidered the role of Activity Theory in Transdisciplinary Thinking.

16

In June 2024, I began thinking about the Genidentity of Activity Theory.

17

In August 2024, I introduced a new tool for selecting frameworks called Applied Activity Theory.

Let’s begin unpacking the details of each of the 17 strategic moves, one by one.

Move 1: The Shift to Theoretical Learning (2014–2015)

Thematic Room: Before

In 2014, I reflected on my previous career development and began a deeper engagement with various theoretical frameworks, including Activity Theory. As a serial creator and lifelong thinker, my passion for intellectual development and life reflection drove me to explore new avenues of thought.

Before this period, I spent most of my spare time participating in digital nonprofit communities as a digital activist. However, from 2014 to 2015, I transitioned from nonprofit activities to a focus on theoretical learning. This marked a critical strategic shift in my intellectual journey, as I began studying frameworks such as Ecological Psychology, Activity Theory, and creativity research.

I was initially influenced by Chris Argyris’ Action Science and Donald Schön’s works, including Theory in Practice and The Reflective Practitioner. These early influences helped shape my understanding of reflective practice and action-based research, which would later play a significant role in my exploration of Activity Theory.

This period of self-directed learning laid the foundation for the strategic moves that followed, especially in terms of bridging theory with practical applications.

Reference: Frame Analysis in Context: Personal Psychobiography as Context

Move 2: Discovering Activity Theory through Bonnie A. Nardi (2015–2020)

Thematic Room: Role Models

As a digital interaction researcher and designer, I found Bonnie A. Nardi’s works highly relevant to my journey, especially as she bridges the gap between Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction (HCI). Nardi’s research, which blends activity theory with technology and society, resonated with my professional trajectory.

By this point in my career, I had over two decades of work experience, which could be divided into three stages:

  • Creative Stage: During this period, I worked as a creative copywriter and designer in the advertising and media industries.
  • Strategic Stage: I transitioned to working as a business strategist and fundraising consultant for pre-IPO enterprises.
  • Innovative Stage: In this phase, I focused on researching and designing innovative digital tools and platforms, combining creativity with practical solutions.

Nardi’s interdisciplinary approach, particularly her focus on boundary knowledge work, inspired me to dive deeper into Activity Theory and how it could be applied to my work in digital design and interaction research. Her biographical piece, Appropriating Theory, encouraged me to explore Activity Theory beyond its theoretical roots and engage with it in a hands-on, applicable way.

Reference: Activity U (III): Bonnie Nardi’s Choices and Boundary Knowledge Work (2020)

Move 3: The “One More Step” — Applying Activity Theory to a Case Study (2018)

Thematic Room: Ideas

By 2018, after several years of studying Ecological Psychology, Activity Theory, and other theoretical frameworks, I realized that my intellectual development required more than just reading and discussing ideas. To truly grasp and engage with these theories, I needed to conduct an empirical case study — this was the “one more step” in my journey.

My usual approach to learning involved reading academic papers and theoretical books, writing notes, and creating conceptual decks. Occasionally, I would engage in discussions with friends about relevant topics. But I came to understand that hands-on application of these theories was essential for deepening my understanding.

This realization marked a turning point, where theoretical learning would now evolve into a more grounded, empirical exploration.

Reference: Challenge as Opportunity

Move 4: Reflecting on BagTheWeb Using Activity Theory (2018)

Thematic Room: Possible Project

In 2018, I applied Activity Theory to reflect on my long-term involvement with the BagTheWeb project. Having worked in the curation field for over a decade, including serving as the Chief Information Architect for BagTheWeb — an early web content curation tool launched in 2010 — I felt it was time to use the theories I had been studying to analyze this practical experience.

Using the Activity System model and the concept of “mediated artifact” from Activity Theory, I aimed to develop a framework for understanding the curation activities that had taken place through BagTheWeb. This reflection was part of my broader commitment to the theme of curation, a field I had been deeply invested in for ten years.

However, the results of this exercise were not as successful as I had hoped. I discovered that someone else had already applied Activity Theory to study curation, and my framework did not align perfectly with the tenets of Activity Theory. Furthermore, this project didn’t present the level of intellectual challenge I had anticipated.

Reference: How did I develop Curativity Theory?

Move 5: Shifting to Ecological Psychology and Developing the Ecological Practice Approach (2018–2019)

Thematic Room: Actual Project

After reflecting on the BagTheWeb project using Activity Theory, I shifted my focus to Ecological Psychology. However, there were no established frameworks for applying Ecological Psychology to empirical research at the time. Instead of being deterred, I embraced the challenge and decided to create a framework for myself.

From September 2018 to March 2019, I wrote a 615-page book titled Curativity: The Ecological Approach to Curatorial Practice, where I developed a new theory about curation. This theory introduced a unique ontology called “Whole, Piece, and Part” and drew upon James Gibson’s concept of “Affordance,” George Lakoff’s “Container,” and Donald Schön’s “Reflection” as epistemological tools. Initially, I called this framework the “Gibson — Lakoff — Schön” solution but later renamed it the Ecological Practice approach.

Looking back, I recognize the significance of this decision. Without pushing forward on my intellectual journey and taking on the challenge of Ecological Psychology, the Ecological Practice approach wouldn’t have been born.

Reference: Challenge as Opportunity

Move 6: Launching CALL and Exploring Action-based Creativity (2019)

Thematic Room: Settings

In 2019, I began blogging on Medium, focusing on topics like Action-based Creativity. In October 2019, I launched a publication called CALL (Creative Action Learning Lab) on Medium, marking the beginning of a personal journey to build a learning community centered around action design, action study, and action theory.

There were a few key motivations behind CALL:

  1. Bridging Past and Future: My past career encompassed a wide range of work and learning experiences. After engaging with various theories, I realized that what once seemed chaotic had transformed into valuable insights for my future career.
  2. Transformation Opportunities: I saw a significant opportunity to bridge the gap between scientific knowledge creation and everyday life creativity.
  3. Theories on Action: Both Ecological Psychology, with its focus on the perception-action loop, and Practice Theories, emphasizing acts and activities in daily life, played central roles in my thinking.

Six months later, I adopted Action-based Creativity as CALL’s slogan. A year after that, I shifted the focus to The House of Boundary Innovation.

Reference: CALL: The House of Boundary Innovation

Move 7: Launching the Activity U Project and Developing HERO U (2020)

Thematic Room: Actual Project

In August 2020, I initiated the Activity U project, a knowledge curation endeavor aimed at exploring the landscape of Activity Theory. This project stemmed from the development of a new framework called HERO U, which I created in June 2020 for knowledge creators.

To test and refine HERO U, I applied the landscape of Activity Theory, resulting in a diagram named Activity U. This diagram became the cornerstone of a knowledge curation project that spanned several months and led to the creation of two book drafts:

  • Activity U: How to Think and Act Like an Activity Theorist
  • Project-oriented Activity Theory

Additionally, I produced a series of diagrams to support and illustrate the concepts discussed in these writings.

References:

Move 8: Exploring Andy Blunden’s Contributions to Activity Theory (2020)

Thematic Room: Meet with Others

In 2020, I discovered Andy Blunden’s work on Activity Theory through Clay Spinuzzi’s blog. Between August and December 2020, I explored Spinuzzi’s book reviews, where I came across a review of Blunden’s 2010 book, An Interdisciplinary Theory of Activity.

Activity Theory, also known as Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT), is an interdisciplinary framework that examines both individual and social aspects of human behavior. Originating from Russian/Soviet psychology in the 1920s and 1930s, it has evolved through various theoretical approaches developed by different scholars.

A significant development in this tradition came with Yrjö Engeström’s 1987 publication, Learning by Expanding. Engeström introduced the Activity System triangle, the concept of Expansive Learning, and early methodologies for development work research.

Blunden’s work represents a major advancement in Activity Theory in the 21st century. His approach focuses on the notion of “Project as a Unit of Activity” and integrates Hegel’s logic and Vygotsky’s theories on “Unit of Analysis” and “Concept.” This approach is documented across four books:

  • An Interdisciplinary Theory of Activity (2010)
  • Concepts: A Critical Approach (2012)
  • Collaborative Projects: An Interdisciplinary Study (2014)
  • Hegel for Social Movements (2019)

References:

Move 9: Engaging with Andy Blunden’s Approach (2021)

Thematic Room: Supportive Platform

Andy Blunden’s theoretical approach provided significant support for exploring new possibilities within Activity Theory. I delved into this approach and introduced several novel interpretations and extensions, including:

  • Diagram Series: I designed a series of diagrams to represent Blunden’s approach visually.
  • New Concepts: I incorporated “Projectivity” and “Zone of Project” as theoretical concepts, drawing on resources from Ecological Psychology.
  • Distinction Between Ideas and Concepts: I differentiated between “Idea” and “Concept” to maintain clarity in using the term “Project” for various applications, including both routine work and social movements. I argue that it is feasible to integrate Blunden’s approach with the Activity System model into a cohesive theoretical framework by making this distinction.
  • Cultural Projection Analysis: Based on “Projectivity,” I developed a model called “Cultural Projection Analysis.”
  • Developmental Project Model: I created this model to explain the internal structure of Projects.

While Blunden focused on expanding Activity Theory from a psychological theory to an interdisciplinary framework, I worked on extending his meta-theory from academic to non-academic domains, adopting a transdisciplinary mindset.

In early 2021, I compiled these ideas into a book draft titled Project-oriented Activity Theory. Concurrently, I applied Blunden’s ideas alongside the Ecological Practice approach to study platforms and development, resulting in another book draft titled Platform for Development.

References:

Move 10: Developing the Anticipatory Activity System (AAS) Framework (2021)

Thematic Room: Supportive Platform

In August 2021, a significant shift occurred in my work due to a supportive friend who introduced me to a life discovery program. This program led to the initial development of the “Anticipatory Activity System” (AAS) framework.

The program, which my friend initiated, was designed with three main components: Life Purpose Awareness, Personal OKR Practice, and Peer Review and Feedback. Additionally, my friend employed the Building In-public approach, sharing her goals, challenges, and progress on social media platforms.

In August 2021, I utilized the Anticipatory System Theory as the core theoretical resource and developed the iART framework to reflect on the program. The framework, named iART, stands for i + Activity + Relationship + Themes. It addresses the complexity of life growth and applies to various situations, including different types of relationships such as “Self, Other, Present, Future.”

By September 2021, I had introduced the concept of “Second-order Activity” and integrated it with the iART framework. This resulted in the development of the “Anticipatory Activity System” (AAS), a new framework that extends the original ideas to offer a comprehensive model for understanding anticipatory activities.

References:

Move 11: Choosing “Strategy” and Developing the AAS Framework (End of 2021–2022)

Thematic Room: After

At the end of 2021, I made a crucial decision to focus on “Strategy” and the “Anticipatory Activity System” (AAS) framework as the central theme for 2022. This decision marked a significant turning point in my creative journey, profoundly shaping my approach to intellectual and practical endeavors.

From August 2021 to August 2022, I dedicated myself to developing the AAS framework through various projects, including concept development, framework design, program testing, and case studies. This period of intensive work led to the creation of the book Advanced Life Strategy: Anticipatory Activity System and Life Achievements. The HERO U framework was instrumental in reflecting on this creative journey, uncovering nine distinct moves across several thematic spaces.

During the first half of 2022, I delved into Life Discovery Projects and explored the Life-as-Project framework. This led me to test the Project Engagement (v1.0) approach and consider the complexities of a network of projects. The realization that I needed to expand from the “Person — Project” relationship to the “Project — Project” relationship prompted the development of the Project Engagement (v2.1) approach in July 2022.

Moreover, I found that the Project Engagement approach and the AAS framework work together perfectly. For instance, Life Discovery Projects are considered Second-order Activities within the AAS framework. The year 2022 was a big win!

References:

Move 12: Turning the Conflict Between Activity Theory and Ecological Psychology into a Creative Thematic Dialogue (September 2022)

Thematic Room: Conflict

In September 2022, I turned the inherent conflict between Activity Theory and Ecological Psychology into a creative thematic dialogue. This process marked a significant step in my work, reflecting a deeper engagement with the challenges and opportunities arising from bridging different theoretical approaches.

From 2019 to 2022, my focus was on connecting THEORY and PRACTICE. Navigating between multiple theories, such as Activity Theory and Ecological Psychology, presented a unique challenge: maintaining a clear boundary between them while exploring their intersections. I discovered that these boundaries often represent fertile ground for creative exploration.

In this context, I found the zone of boundary to be a powerful space for developing new ideas. For instance, I launched the Thematic Engagement Toolkit (v1.0) on September 15, 2022. This toolkit aims to facilitate understanding of knowledge engagement, thematic conversation, controversy, and reflection. It draws from two primary knowledge frameworks:

  • The Themes of Practice Approach (2019, 2021), inspired by the Ecological Practice approach.
  • The Project Engagement Approach (2021, 2022), inspired by Activity Theory.

This toolkit exemplifies how dialogue between different theories can yield innovative insights. I discovered a new way to foster thematic dialogue between these distinct theoretical frameworks, enriching both the understanding and application of these theories.

References:

Move 13: Developing the Public Square Framework and Advancing the Project Engagement (v3.1) Theoretical Toolkit (May 2024)

Thematic Room: Public Square

In May 2024, while following public discussions and comments on LinkedIn, I developed a new framework called Public Square. This framework was inspired by the rich and varied conversations taking place in the comment sections of LinkedIn posts.

The Public Square framework played a pivotal role in shaping my work, leading to the development of the Project Engagement (v3.1) theoretical toolkit. This represents a significant advancement, integrating a set of relevant knowledge frameworks.

To deepen the theoretical toolkit, I used a year-long observation of [Teacher Leaf’s math class] as a case study. This observation provided a foundational template for applying and testing the framework. Following this, I sought additional case studies to further enhance and validate the toolkit’s effectiveness across different contexts.

Move 14: Explored the Project Engagement (v3.1) Theoretical Toolkit Across Various Practical Fields (May 2024 — September 2024)

Thematic Room: Network of Projects

From May 2024 to August 2024, I explored the application of the Project Engagement (v3.1) theoretical toolkit across various practical fields, leading to the development of a new network of related projects.

In June 2024, A friend needed to introduce relevant knowledge in a workshop, providing me with the opportunity to design a simplified version of the toolkit. This effort resulted in the creation of the [House of Project Engagement].

Throughout the design, narration, discussion, and testing phases of the House of Project Engagement, the theme of [Social Landscape] gradually emerged. This theme eventually contributed to the development of the [House of Social Theories].

As the House of Project Engagement took shape, I applied the toolkit (v3.1) to the field of Life Narrative Practice, exploring a method called [Narrative Engagement].

During June 2024 to July 2024, I visited family in China for about four weeks to care for a family member who underwent surgery. After returning to the U.S., I reflected on my experiences and wrote two pieces: Project-oriented Social Ecology: Social Life Inside and Outside Projects and Narrative Engagement: Life Narrative Practice and the House of Project Engagement.

In September 2024, I incorporated the House of Project Engagement into the Strategic Moves project, marking a new phase in its application and development.

Move 15: Re-considering Activity Theory for Transdisciplinary Thinking (August 2024)

Thematic Room: Conflict

In August 2024, I returned to the Theory-Practice gap and re-evaluated Activity Theory through the lens of transdisciplinary thinking.

In 2020, I adopted “The House of Boundary Innovation” as the slogan for CALL. This concept emphasized the need for both innovative thinking and creative action. Boundary Innovation, in particular, requires a unique blend of transdisciplinary thinking and creative actions. By integrating these two elements, we can derive a formula for effectively pursuing boundary innovation.

According to The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity (2010), ‘interdisciplinarity’ involves efforts to bridge disciplinary boundaries, while ‘transdisciplinarity’ aims to produce knowledge that is relevant to non-academic actors as well. At that time, I chose ‘transdisciplinary thinking’ to describe the intersection of academic and non-academic domains. I also saw Activity Theory as a valuable framework for addressing the Theory-Practice gap, using HERO U as a learning framework and Activity Theory as a learning object to cultivate transdisciplinary thinking.

In August 2024, I reflected on the Theory-Practice gap and the concept of transdisciplinary thinking, considering how these ideas could further enhance my work and understanding.

References:

Move 16: Exploring the Genidentity of Activity Theory (June 2024)

Thematic Room: After

On the THEORY side, I frequently reflected on Activity Theory. On April 22, 2022, I employed a technique called “Deep Analogy” to analyze the historical development of Activity Theory.

By May 31, 2024, while editing a draft book titled Center, Circle, and Genidentity, I recognized that the case study provided a valuable example of General Genidentity Theory.

This realization inspired a new project idea: investigating the Genidentity of Activity Theory.

In June 2024, I began exploring the Genidentity of Activity Theory.

References:

Move 17: Introducing Applied Activity Theory (August 2024)

Thematic Room: After

In August 2024, I introduced a new tool designed to enhance the selection and application of Activity-theoretical frameworks: Applied Activity Theory.

On the PRACTICE side, this tool aims to improve how we engage with and apply various Activity-theoretical frameworks. It is organized around a “3A” framework — Aspirations, Approaches, Aspects — which guides the selection process:

  • 24 Aspirations
  • 18 Approaches
  • 8 Aspects

Additionally, the tool features a Thematic Exploration Panel. By arranging items from the Aspirations, Approaches, and Aspects categories, this panel helps generate creative themes for research and reflection.

Applied Activity Theory is designed to support the Activity Analysis & Intervention (AAI) Program, which was launched in September 2023.

References:

This isn’t a traditional, linear narrative — but that’s the value of using a spatial method in life narrative practice!

How You Can Support the Strategic Moves Project?

As an independent researcher and creator, my work is driven by curiosity, creativity, and a desire to explore new ideas. Projects like Strategic Moves, as well as others focused on creativity, social cognition, and knowledge engagement, require time, dedication, and resources.

If my work resonates with you and you find value in the ideas I’m exploring, there are several ways you can support it:

  • Visit my Ko-fi page: Your contributions help sustain ongoing research and creative development. Even small donations make a significant impact and enable me to focus on producing high-quality work.

https://ko-fi.com/oliverding

  • Engage with the content: Share my projects with your network or provide feedback. Engagement from a community of like-minded individuals helps spread the word and adds new perspectives to the work.
  • Collaborate: If you’re interested in collaboration, whether through joint projects, research, or workshops, feel free to reach out. Creative synergy can expand the scope and reach of these projects in exciting ways.

Your support, whether financial or in the form of engagement, is invaluable in helping me continue to explore and map creative landscapes, develop new frameworks, and share meaningful insights with the world.

Thank you for being part of this journey!

Strategy
Strategic Cognition
Mapping
Strategic Thinking
Strategy Thinking

--

--

Oliver Ding
CALL4

894 Followers
Editor for

Founder of CALL(Creative Action Learning Lab), information architect, knowledge curator.

Help

Status

About

Careers

Press

Blog

Privacy

Terms

Text to speech

Teams