Pairing Arenas in PH'1Q

The Story So Far

It appears from close study of PH'5Q-Associating Arenas that there are 3 natural pairs of Arenas plus an 7th Arena that operates in a diffuse mode. Investigations in PH'2Q-Knowing arenas, PH'4Q-Individualizing arenas and PH'6Q-Governing Arenas are broadly confirmatory, although not fully persuasive.

This investigation of PH'1-Governing Arenas again starts with the assumption that the closely related pairs in this Domain will be identical to those discovered in PH'5Q as follows:

I will also assume that the TET layout is identical.

As in PH'2Q, alternatives will be considered to the pairing and the quadrant layout.

Pairing

Q5-Leadership & Q3-Viablity

These seem to go together in that Q5-Leadership should be preoccupied above all with Q3-Viability of the enterprise or project. Informal leadership often gets activated when there is a crisis threatening viability.

Here, Q5-Leadership is most under personal control and lies peripherally.

ClosedAlternatives

Alternate pairing of Q5: 
Q5-Leadership appears to be rather fundamental and it could pair with any of the others.

Alternate pairing of Q3: 
Q3-Viability does not seem so basic: it need not pair with any of the others.

Q7-Motivation & Q2-Improvement

These seem to provide each other with powerful support. Motivation for achievement typically generates a search for ways to make improvements.

Q7-Motivation is most under personal control and, as expected, is located peripherally.

ClosedAlternatives

Alternate pairings:

Q7-Motivation and Q2-Improvement, like Q5-Leadership, appear to be able to pair supportively with any of the others.

Q4-Compromise & Q1-Effectiveness

These seem to go together, because both deal with values, the former in the sense of interests and the latter in the sense of rationale for a project.

Q4-Compromise is under personal control, and so is placed peripherally.

ClosedAlternatives

While both Q4-Compromise and Q1-Improvementcan link with others, there is no obvious alternative pairing.

Q6-Authority is the singleton which extends from being based on formal accountability in a work role to a more powerful , if informal, personal drive to deliver the mission.

Axes

Having established the pairings and found the same extreme-central patterns, it seems reasonable to assume a similar location of the Arena pairs on the TET quadrants (as shown in the diagram above). However, we need to specify the axes.

As always, the axes define the psychosocial field or context within which the plotted arenas operate. In the case of the PH'1Q-Achieving Arenas, this could be stated as:

«A manager questioning the status quo so as to become more able to generate momentum in an enterprise.»

The X-axis output could then be the orientation to handling the unexpected with Arenas varying in the degree of concern.

Q7-Motivation and Q4-Compromise have a minimal concern with any future state of affairs and are focused on the present and what is expected.

Q1-Improvement and Q2-Effectiveness do have some concern with anything unexpected, but this is low.

Q3-Viability is about dealing with crises which are never expected, and Q6-Leadership needs to be about anticipating the unexpected.

Q6-Authority in relation to the mission is naturally concerned with anything unexpected in the future, but less so in relation to a formal position.

The Y-axis input could be enabling stability of the project and its participants with Arenas varying in the degree of effect generated.

Q6-Authority that is informal is not strongly activated by project stability, but there is greater concern when authority flows from formal accountability to a superior.

Q7-Motivation should be largely independent of stability issues, while Q2-Improvement depends on some minimal amount of stability.

Q1-Effectiveness and Q3-Viability both strive for a stable project and supportiveness within the group.

Q4-Compromiseis about stabilizing the group, and Q5-Leadership is highly oriented to stability.

Originally posted: 30-Sep-2022