Comparing Decision Methods with a TET
The set of is a THEE Principal Typology.
Typologies within THEE contain ways of acting with commitment. The types can be plotted on a 2x2 Table, called a Typology-Essences Table (= TET).
The resulting TET layout reveals features of practical importance that would otherwise be difficult to notice. So construction of a TET is necessary in any serious inquiry.
Each TET requires names for its axes. These names define the executing duality (eD) of the THEE-Type (= Approach = Mentality = System).
■ One executing dimension relates to the essence of the desired output (or outcome/effect/result) when using any approach.
By convention, it is the X-axis. The X-axis is always outer, social, environmental, situational or objective: i.e. the X-axis is the «-social» aspect of psycho-social reality.
■ The other executing dimension relates to a focus on the essential personal means used to produce the relevant output.
By convention, it is the Y-axis. The Y-axis can be categorized variously as inner, personal, mental, psychological or subjective. i.e. the Y-axis is the «psycho-»(logical) aspect of psycho-social reality.
Once we have the correct formulations of the approaches in the Typology and have identified the appropriate executing duality, then each of the 7 approaches can be assessed and compared as: «very high» or «moderate» — covering the higher part of each axis; or «low» or «very low» — covering the lower part of each axis.
The crucial inquiry challenge is to name the TET axes validly and sufficiently precisely for the domain being investigated.
Getting it Right
With this general explanation in mind, we can reconsider the . The first step is to identify the psychosocial essences of decision and action i.e. the executing duality.
Originally posted: 21-Apr-2011