1. The Language/Action Perspective
PAIN CONSULT
Concepts, History, & Applications
Concept design workshop
Peter Jones, OCAD University
ISSS 2012 San Jose

2. WHAT IS A CONVERSATION?
Communication
Colin Cherry defined “communication” as the exchange
of normatively defined meanings and creating
understanding between purposeful social participants.

3. WHAT IS A CONVERSATION?
Communication act
… creates understanding between purposeful social
That
participants.
A particular exchange takes place between at least 2 people,
representing individual interests or intentions, or collective
interests represented by individuals.

4. TWO DIVERGING VIEWS …
Shannon-Weaver Communication Theory
Signal expressed from a Source to Destination.
Transmitter-receiver (Very AT&T)
Feedback repairs breakdowns.
Constructivist
Agents co-create conversation based on
mutual meaning (background).
Intentions are interpreted, actions coordinated.
Emergence & novelty are possible.
Sensemaking repairs breakdowns.

5. WHICH FIT WHERE IN SYSTEMS LINEAGE?
5

6. History of key ideas
…
2006
Christakis & Bausch publish
How people harness their c
wisdom to create the future
colaboratories of democrac
nfinished timeline by Hugh Dubberly, 2009

7. CONVERSATIONAL SYSTEMS
Rittel Argumentation (IBIS)
Pask Conversation Theory (Interaction of Actors)
Winograd Language-Action Perspective
& Flores Ontological Design, a phenomenological
approach to conversations that invent
new modes of being & co-create action.
Christakis Dialogic Design
& Warfield Science of Generic Design
7

8. PIVOTAL PUBLICATIONS
1969 1986 2006
8

9. CONTEXT & BACKGROUND
Language-Action Roots in 3 movements (1980’s)
UC Berkeley Dreyfus, Flores critique of AI
Winograd joined from Stanford
Understanding Computers & Cognition (1986)
Electronic Workplace Flores’ PhD & vision of paperless office (1980)
“Management & Communication in the Office of the Future”
Coordination Theory Movement toward CSCW & workflow based on
commitment governance
The Coordinator email system (1987)
Action Workflow
9

10. MATURANA & Living Systems
Is conversation a structural coupling of cognitive agents?
Autopoesis Humans are self-producing, self-organizing
Structural coupling Complementary interaction with environment –
Largely in a social medium
Cognitive system Domain of interactions with
environment to act with relevance
Languaging Arises as coordinating actions for
coordinating action.
Recursion to create a consensual linguistic domain.
10

11. SOFTWARE EMBODIMENTS
The Coordinator – 1986
Orchestrator Mail - 2010
11

12. SOFTWARE EMBODIMENTS
Action Works – Coordinator & Action Workflow
12

13. SERVICE SYSTEMS MODEL
David Ing, 2008: Offerings as Commitments and Context: Service
Systems from a Language Action Perspective
September 1, 2008, at UKSS 2008, Oxford, UK
13

14. SERVICE SYSTEMS MODEL
Protocol for coordination of commitment to deliverables, process, relationship.
David Ing, 2008: Offerings as Commitments and Context: Service Systems from a Language Action Perspective
14

15. TYPES OF CONVERSATIONS
Austin & Searle: Speech Acts theory of speech behavior
Social facts “two or more agents with collective intentionality”
Institutional facts: Social facts that become public, established events
(e.g., money, organizations, systems)
Conversations for
…
Orientation Interpersonal Purposeful
Conversations for Conversations
Acknowledgemen Conversations
t
for Possibility for Action
Conversations
for Clarification

16. What if we were to allow
patients to post personal
Too much yard reflections in the medical What would that
work. Yours? do for us? How
Phatic records system?
might we do that?
Conversations Conversation for
Possibility
How was your
weekend?
(Offer) Let’s write a
proposal to the IT
board for a I’m in. (Accepted)
research project on We need a position
this idea. paper. Can you write
a draft by next
Conversation for week? (Request)
Action

17. Conversation for Possibility
Interpersonal queries, inquiries, & propositions that open a context.
Common ground (background), including prior intent & continuing conversations.
No “goals” in conversations for possibility, but rather co-creation of
understanding and novelty.
Diagram by Hugh Dubberly, from Jones (2009) The Language/Action Model of Conversation: Can conversation perform acts of design?
17

18. Conversation for Action
Purposeful communications that coordinate actions between individuals.
Initiation of requests, agreement on conditions, accounting for promises.
18

19. 5 BASIC PERFORMATIVE SPEECH ACTS
From Searle / Austin’s Illocutionary Points
Assertives commit a speaker to the truth of an expression.
Directives (requests, commands, & advice) cause the listener to follow a
requested action.
Commissives (promises & oaths) commit the speaker to future actions.
Declarations establish accord with a proposition (e.g., pronounce a couple as
married).
Expressives convey a speaker’s attitudes or emotions about a proposition
(e.g., praise, gratitude).
19

20. Conversations for Action
20

21. What is an organization were
conceived as a network of
conversations? Inside & Out?
What if – fundamentally –
unit level operations were
commissives & directives?
21

22. DESIGN METHODS & THEORIES
Design and business are conversation systems.
Products & services are networks of conversations for action.
Designing acts are performed & recognized by language.
22

23. Geometry of Languaging
Christakis (2006) extends Conversation in
Dialogic Design Science – based on principles
established in Warfield’s Domain of Science Model
Geometries of language action shape intent / outcome
Dyad Smallest social system
Triad Introduces witness & offset perspective
Quartet Balanced pairs structure
5-7 Collaboration required
12-20 Dialogue required
20-50 Listening required
23

24. Syntegrity Model
Group dialogue geometry to
triangulate perspectives on a topic
24

25. Mapping to Design Action
DESIGN
DISCOVERY ENVISIONING
& DELIVER
Orientation Possibility Action
The declarative act is generative, literally creative.
A state is created where there was nothing preceding it.
25

26. Conversation is not a tool for
outcomes; rather, language
uses us, shaping & constraining
our work & experience.
Riding our intentions, language
both opens & limits collective
experiences.
26