Developing the Q-Expansion

THEE Note:
This is a technical account giving an overview. You can skip this page.
Review the Q-expansion in the Hub.
Be aware that the label Q- is a historical vestige.

Modal Hierarchy

Jaques' original formulations for the progressive changes from level to level appear to be a THEE Style Hierarchy. In this structure, the 4 Levels are 4 Styles of operating a mentality (or approach or paradigm or identity). In this case, «operating» means mentally processing language so as to control the relevant reality.

The Styles of processing are as follows in ascending order:

• Level-α: Articulate and assert [aspect of language]
• Level-β: Accumulate and arrange to appreciate significance of [aspect of language]
• Level-γ: Form a system of [aspect of language]
• Level-δ: Relate and develop multiple systems of [aspect of language]

These are abbreviated for convenience as follows:

• Level-α: Assert via [aspect of language]
• Level-β: Appraise via [aspect of language]
• Level-γ: Systematize via [aspect of language]
• Level-δ: Develop via [aspect of language]

Aspect of Language

Here are the conjectured correspondences between the use of language and the aspect of language that is processed in doing the core work. These conjectures are subject to further investigations.

• L'1: Concrete Language — actions: work entails processing actions.
• L'2: Associative Language — information: work entails processing information.
• L'3: Conceptual Language — concepts: work entails processing concepts.
• L'4: Universal Language — values: work entails processing values.
• L'5: Gestalt Language — beliefs: work entails processing beliefs.
• L'6: Logical Language — names: work entails processing names.
• L'7: Mythic Language — images: work entails processing images.

Isn't it all information processing? Conceptually, it might be, if you have some theory where that seems sensible. But experientially, it most certainly is not. These are offered as atheoretical observable taxonomic distinctions that enable further discovery of our functioning as human beings.

To clarify the above, it might be more evocative to provide a qualifying term:

1. Actions → necessary actions i.e. necessary because it is more procedural-unavoidable, than optional.
2. Information → available information i.e. available because it is familiar and immediate, rather than data that is sought or pre-specified.
3. Concepts → general concepts i.e. general because it covers a field and is not simply an idea that a person holds.
4. Values → popular values i.e. popular because it must tune into a social group, and not be an idiosyncratic personal value.
5. Beliefs → established beliefs i.e. established because they are fixed via enculturation and spontaneous awareness, and purely logical or knowledge-based beliefs are not relevant.
6. Names → unequivocal names i.e. unequivocal because fuzzy or changing references for terms interferes with the work.
7. Images → primeval images i.e. primeval because the symbolism of the images must resonate deeply.

When the use of language determines responsible work within one of society's arenas of association, further elaboration is definitely required to accord with the form of the arena. The various two word descriptors are still conjectural. See more.

Making Sense of 28 Levels

If we combine these 7 Levels/Types in the Principal Typology with the 4 Styles for each Type in the Modal (or Style) Hierarchy, then the result is 7 x 4 = 28 Levels/Types as shown in the full diagram (LL = Language-use Level).

These 28 Levels are conceptual and do not correspond to any personal or social structure. However, they probably do reflect increasing complexity and sophistication in handling psychosocial reality. The competitive attitudes of members loyal to their own arena might make it difficult to get agreement on this.

The nature of this complexity will be examined in detail, with evidence for progression, in due course.
For now:

Observe that only a very limited part of the world can be considered when concrete language-L'1 is used to accompany actions. Similarly conceptual language-L'3 defines a limited field and its practitioners are constrained within it. By contrast, when using universal language-L'4, communications embrace the whole of a society and cover many fields and many organizations. However, this use of language is culture-bounded.

To bring this grand hierarchy into psychosocial reality, it is necessary to identify the 7 Q-Hierarchical structures. These are formed by combining adjacent Principal Types—all 4 subsidiary Levels of one Type and the lower three subsidiary Levels of the next higher Type. The system is cyclic so Type-1 is viewed as higher than Type-7, and there are 7 Q-Hierarchies in all.

The structures defined by the Q-Hierarchies are arenas of responsibility for work to sustain an association within a complex society. The formulation of these arenas has commenced with posting in the TOP Studio, but it has not been completed.

As we ascend the 28 Levels and 7 arenas (QH1 to QH7), there appears to be an increased grasp of complexity. However, the price paid for a gain in scope, depth and generality is a loss in specifics and granularity. Nonetheless, the beauty to be revealed is that, within any particular arena of work-responsibility (i.e. Q-Hierarchy), everything from the most minute details of activity to the broadest identify-defining scope is covered in principle by someone working at the appropriate Level.

---

• Continue to the arenas of work-responsibility required by humanity.

Originally posted: 25-Oct-2013