Abstract

Current paradigms in organizational behavior and human resource development treat collective mind principally as the simple sum of thought processes within an organization. These paradigms view organizational change and learning as essentially a mass effort of modifying individual behavior. This worldview is also consistent with traditional Western philosophy and theology. However, implicit in much of the research and literature in organization theory, anthropology, and other life sciences is the idea of mind that is of a higher system order, and distinct from that of the aggregate collection. ;The study conducted here uses a method of analogic discourse. The method has not been previously outlined in any substantial detail, but is based on well documented concepts of learning through analogy. Pursuit of the method was enhanced through the aid of computer software that is designed for ethnographic examination of unstructured qualitative data. ;Using this method, it is possible to sort ideas developed through multiple analogies for high levels of material congruence called systematicity . This process is enabled by the constructs of General Systems Theory, and the Santiago Theory of Living System developed by Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela. ;The findings of the study suggest that there is adductive or substantial evidence to conclude that organizations are higher order living systems. As such, these living systems have internal relationships among their subsystems, and structures that are causally associated with purpose. Having concluded that the nature of the collective may be observed as a life form, similar examination suggests that a distinct organizational cognition also exists. Analogies of cognition emerge from the concepts of self-identity and reality construction contained in the Santiago Theory, and clustered around the idea of relationships. ;The shift in paradigm offered here promises entirely new ways to view data about living systems, from small groups to large organizations. Data from prior research might be re-examined for new and different conclusions from those originally postulated.