Project Management Central

Please login or join to subscribe to this thread

Topics: Leadership, Talent Management, Teams
Map is not territory
Network:2854



"Map is not territory"
What does this concept mean for you?
How can we apply this concept to the relationship between different stakeholders (with particular reference to project team members?)
Sort By:
Page: 1 2 next>
Network:1703



Luis -

I believe this phrase refers to the differences between our beliefs (perceptions in the case of others) and reality. One example relates to inner intent and outward behavior: a silent stakeholder might make us believe that all is well when in fact they are plotting behind our collective "backs" to hurt our project.

Kiron
...
1 reply by Luis Branco
Nov 20, 2019 10:04 AM
Luis Branco
...
Dear Kiron
Thank you for participating in this reflection and for your opinion.

Interesting the meaning of the concept to you.

For me the meaning of the concept is: The way we look and interpret reality is conditioned by our paradigms.

Put another way, we see reality through the glasses of our paradigms

Each person interprets reality differently
Network:21790



Hi Luis,

In relationship to stakeholders, I have another phrase to describe the behavior that Kiron mentioned - "Epistemic Subterfuge." This represents the idea that there are individuals and currents within an organization that rationally justify passive-aggressive behaviors to covertly achieve a contra goal to the one they are seemingly presenting themselves in "alignment with."

It's an unfortunate “valid area of focus” for our profession. In one of my recent articles, “Use Project Plumbing to Manage Corporate Politics,” I displayed a political influence diagram where you indicate those stakeholders who have “subterfuge” qualities (a diagram you are not likely to share with anyone else). For many, this type of study into stakeholders is outside the bounds of a project manager's duties – and with that, I strongly disagree.

In my experience, when a stakeholder presents a persona that does not lineup with reality (i.e., Map is not Territory), you will normally find that the behavior is based on self-preservation and rooted in one’s fear of change. An important but difficult subject – thanks Luis.
...
1 reply by Luis Branco
Nov 20, 2019 10:12 AM
Luis Branco
...
Dear george
Thank you for participating in this reflection and for your opinion.

Interesting what the concept means to you

We agree that it is a stakeholder theme that is important for project managers.

Studies that help us understand your behavior and what's behind it are critical.
Network:2854



Nov 20, 2019 7:09 AM
Replying to Kiron Bondale
...
Luis -

I believe this phrase refers to the differences between our beliefs (perceptions in the case of others) and reality. One example relates to inner intent and outward behavior: a silent stakeholder might make us believe that all is well when in fact they are plotting behind our collective "backs" to hurt our project.

Kiron
Dear Kiron
Thank you for participating in this reflection and for your opinion.

Interesting the meaning of the concept to you.

For me the meaning of the concept is: The way we look and interpret reality is conditioned by our paradigms.

Put another way, we see reality through the glasses of our paradigms

Each person interprets reality differently
...
1 reply by George Freeman
Nov 20, 2019 11:02 AM
George Freeman
...
Luis,

If you are talking about paradigms in relationship to stakeholders and team members, then it sounds like you are questioning the “basis of belief that defines our perceptions.” If that is where you are going, then you are stepping into the ambiguous realm of “relative truth,” wherein I feel like the question is outside the boundaries of our domain.

Can you please refine your question and make it more precise?
Network:2854



Nov 20, 2019 8:20 AM
Replying to George Freeman
...
Hi Luis,

In relationship to stakeholders, I have another phrase to describe the behavior that Kiron mentioned - "Epistemic Subterfuge." This represents the idea that there are individuals and currents within an organization that rationally justify passive-aggressive behaviors to covertly achieve a contra goal to the one they are seemingly presenting themselves in "alignment with."

It's an unfortunate “valid area of focus” for our profession. In one of my recent articles, “Use Project Plumbing to Manage Corporate Politics,” I displayed a political influence diagram where you indicate those stakeholders who have “subterfuge” qualities (a diagram you are not likely to share with anyone else). For many, this type of study into stakeholders is outside the bounds of a project manager's duties – and with that, I strongly disagree.

In my experience, when a stakeholder presents a persona that does not lineup with reality (i.e., Map is not Territory), you will normally find that the behavior is based on self-preservation and rooted in one’s fear of change. An important but difficult subject – thanks Luis.
Dear george
Thank you for participating in this reflection and for your opinion.

Interesting what the concept means to you

We agree that it is a stakeholder theme that is important for project managers.

Studies that help us understand your behavior and what's behind it are critical.
Network:21790



Nov 20, 2019 10:04 AM
Replying to Luis Branco
...
Dear Kiron
Thank you for participating in this reflection and for your opinion.

Interesting the meaning of the concept to you.

For me the meaning of the concept is: The way we look and interpret reality is conditioned by our paradigms.

Put another way, we see reality through the glasses of our paradigms

Each person interprets reality differently
Luis,

If you are talking about paradigms in relationship to stakeholders and team members, then it sounds like you are questioning the “basis of belief that defines our perceptions.” If that is where you are going, then you are stepping into the ambiguous realm of “relative truth,” wherein I feel like the question is outside the boundaries of our domain.

Can you please refine your question and make it more precise?
...
1 reply by Luis Branco
Nov 20, 2019 11:10 AM
Luis Branco
...
Dear George
Interesting your comment

Communication (with particular reference to written communication has much to say)

In your opinion, my question can be interpreted in various ways, is that it?

What suggestions would you make to refine my question?

You Wrote: "Where I feel like the question is outside the boundaries of our domain" Do you refer to the domain (community scope)?
Network:2854



Nov 20, 2019 11:02 AM
Replying to George Freeman
...
Luis,

If you are talking about paradigms in relationship to stakeholders and team members, then it sounds like you are questioning the “basis of belief that defines our perceptions.” If that is where you are going, then you are stepping into the ambiguous realm of “relative truth,” wherein I feel like the question is outside the boundaries of our domain.

Can you please refine your question and make it more precise?
Dear George
Interesting your comment

Communication (with particular reference to written communication has much to say)

In your opinion, my question can be interpreted in various ways, is that it?

What suggestions would you make to refine my question?

You Wrote: "Where I feel like the question is outside the boundaries of our domain" Do you refer to the domain (community scope)?
...
1 reply by George Freeman
Nov 20, 2019 11:34 AM
George Freeman
...
You said the meaning of the phrase to you is, “The way we look and interpret reality is conditioned by our paradigms... We see reality through the glasses of our paradigms… Each person interprets reality differently.”

So, I’m simply trying to understand your original question when put into the context of “stakeholders and teams,” which is how you anchored your original question.
Network:480



Looking at the question purely in the context of project team members, I would say that "mapping" is essentially assignment to a specific role/activity on the project (say UI Developer) to "territory" indicating areas that the person may contribute although he is not within the RACI. This distinction if used effectively can help people contribute beyond their regular assignments and enrich the project/activity since while your map restricts you, territory helps you to expand your area of influence beyond what you are expected to do.
...
1 reply by Luis Branco
Nov 20, 2019 11:48 AM
Luis Branco
...
Dear Pinaki
Thank you for participating in this reflection and for your opinion.

When I published the topic, I never thought that "map is not territory" could be interpreted in the sense that Pinaki what "this distinction if used effectively can help people contribute beyond their regular assignments and enrichment since their map restrictions" , territory helps you to expand your area of ??influence beyond what you are expected to do "
Network:21790



Nov 20, 2019 11:10 AM
Replying to Luis Branco
...
Dear George
Interesting your comment

Communication (with particular reference to written communication has much to say)

In your opinion, my question can be interpreted in various ways, is that it?

What suggestions would you make to refine my question?

You Wrote: "Where I feel like the question is outside the boundaries of our domain" Do you refer to the domain (community scope)?
You said the meaning of the phrase to you is, “The way we look and interpret reality is conditioned by our paradigms... We see reality through the glasses of our paradigms… Each person interprets reality differently.”

So, I’m simply trying to understand your original question when put into the context of “stakeholders and teams,” which is how you anchored your original question.
...
1 reply by Luis Branco
Nov 20, 2019 2:33 PM
Luis Branco
...
Dear George
Thanks for your comment

The expression "map is not territory" can be interpreted in multiple ways: Yours, so Pinaki, Kiron's and mine.

Important is your attention to tune the concepts

My initial intention was: “The way we look and interpret reality is conditioned by our paradigms… We see reality through the glasses of our paradigms… Each person interprets reality differently.”
And of course, how can we apply this concept to the relationship between different stakeholders (with particular reference to project team members?), Ie what implications does this concept have on the relationship between the different project stakeholders?
Network:2854



Nov 20, 2019 11:23 AM
Replying to PINAKI BANERJEE
...
Looking at the question purely in the context of project team members, I would say that "mapping" is essentially assignment to a specific role/activity on the project (say UI Developer) to "territory" indicating areas that the person may contribute although he is not within the RACI. This distinction if used effectively can help people contribute beyond their regular assignments and enrich the project/activity since while your map restricts you, territory helps you to expand your area of influence beyond what you are expected to do.
Dear Pinaki
Thank you for participating in this reflection and for your opinion.

When I published the topic, I never thought that "map is not territory" could be interpreted in the sense that Pinaki what "this distinction if used effectively can help people contribute beyond their regular assignments and enrichment since their map restrictions" , territory helps you to expand your area of ??influence beyond what you are expected to do "
Network:2854



Nov 20, 2019 11:34 AM
Replying to George Freeman
...
You said the meaning of the phrase to you is, “The way we look and interpret reality is conditioned by our paradigms... We see reality through the glasses of our paradigms… Each person interprets reality differently.”

So, I’m simply trying to understand your original question when put into the context of “stakeholders and teams,” which is how you anchored your original question.
Dear George
Thanks for your comment

The expression "map is not territory" can be interpreted in multiple ways: Yours, so Pinaki, Kiron's and mine.

Important is your attention to tune the concepts

My initial intention was: “The way we look and interpret reality is conditioned by our paradigms… We see reality through the glasses of our paradigms… Each person interprets reality differently.”
And of course, how can we apply this concept to the relationship between different stakeholders (with particular reference to project team members?), Ie what implications does this concept have on the relationship between the different project stakeholders?
Page: 1 2 next>  

Please login or join to reply

Content ID:
ADVERTISEMENTS

"Of course the music is a great difficulty. You see, if one plays good music, people don't listen, and if one plays bad music, people don't talk."

- Oscar Wilde

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsors