The Orgtology Glossary

Data are the facts and statistics that we collect for reference or analysis. Data are simply facts or figures. These are bits that make information, but it is not information itself. Data becomes information when it becomes meaningful or useful to work within a context. Before data can become information, we must process, interpret, organize, structure, or present it.

This is a method of analysis where we take an idea or process apart so that we can reinterpret it. Through this process, that which we deconstruct will get new meaning. In orgtology, we Deconstruct when we rethink the parts of an idea or process. In that we can make it better than before. With “parts”, we mean inputs; movement; functionality; resources; concepts; outputs; etc. Unlike the evolution of Construct, Deconstruct is revolutionary. Post-modern philosophy mostly uses the concept Deconstruction. During text analysis. It will imply that the reader rather than the author is central in determining meaning of the text. In the field of management, Deconstruction implies that any management or leadership theory is legitimate within its context. This contradicts a modernist approach where we constantly look for a “best practice” in the field of organizational management and leadership. Deconstruction is a process of unlearning and revolution, whilst Construct is a process of learning and evolution. When developing a construct, we create paradigm. When deconstructing, we reframe and break down paradigm.

We derive Deconstruct from Post-Modern philosophy. In orgtology, its meaning is alike. To be “deconstructive”, we must question all the traditional assumptions about the ability and function of a process. In this, we believe that a process has no stable meaning, because its activity only gets its worth in relation to other activities. If you remove, start, or adjust an activity, you alter the entire process. The change might be slight, or it could alter the meaning of the whole process. It is not possible to construct without being deconstructive. We gain perfection through imperfection.

Dependent, dependence, and dependency all mean that a precondition exists before something else can exist. In orgtology we use dependency to decide process and project flow. We also use it to classify the maturity of Org to be a Relevant and Performing Organisation (RPO). In 2017, Derek Hendrikz introduced an RPO maturity model. It aims to decide how mature Org is to be both Relevant and Performing. The model poses five levels of maturity. They are from level one to five: dependency; controlled dependency; independence; controlled independence; and interdependence. The criteria for “dependency” are:

• Cannot function without a leader.
• Highly reactive (everything is urgent).
• Organisation is in survival mode.
• Performance is dependent on instruction.
• Autocracy is the preferred style of leadership.

A dependency sequence shows which activities precede and succeed each other in process and project flow. A flow chart gives a visual representation of the steps in a process, procedure, or project. However, their rules differ. In process flow, we aim to optimise cycle efficiency. In procedural flow there are no complicated cycles – we start over when it ends. In project flow we aim to reduce duration through creating a critical path.

Derek Hendrikz is the father of orgtology and its two disciplines, orgamatics and organamics. He is also the creator of Hypothesis 2x and its eight theories. These are Theory 2I of Orgtelligence; Theory 2P of Work; Theory 2E of Results; Theory D of the RPO; Theory Ix on Intelligence; Theory Px on Paradigm; Theory Sx on Identity; and Theory O on the RPO. As founding member of the International Orgtology Institute, he became the first Orgtologist. His company Derek Hendrikz Consulting exclusively specialises in orgtology services.

In orgtology we often use the terms “binary” and “duality” synonymously. Both “binary” and “duality” is something that has two parts. Mostly their difference is that Duality holds opposition or contrast between two concepts or two aspects of something. From there the term “dualism”. In orgtology Duality will always show an inverse relationship between two opposing forces. We derive our assumption that they are inverse because in Org opposing forces always draw from the same resource pool. E.g., there is only one resource pool that Org must execute its strategy and run its operations. This means that where we use resources for strategy there are less available for operations, and vice versa. Also, the two parts within a duality must need each other. E.g., without strategy, operations will face irrelevance. Without operations, strategy will have no meaning. They thus form an interdependent whole. Further, they oppose each other because strategy is disruptive whilst operations bring order. Lastly, strategy and operations are distinct and separable. Each part has a clear definition. Jointly they create an inverse duality for Org. In orgtology we have several inverse dual concepts. Some of these are: relevance and performance; leadership and management; repetitive and non-repetitive activity, etc.

In orgtology we study Workplace Dynamics through organamics. It is a study of the forces and properties within humans, which stimulate growth, development, and change within Org. Unlike Systematics, the variables of Dynamics are not known. In so, a lot of our work here is contextual and based on perception. To study the dynamics of Org we must grasp intelligence, paradigm, identity, and the relevant and performing individual (RPI).