How can we see phenomena as they really are?
In my last article, I talked about the difficulty of observing phenomena as they are and the limitations of our own cognition. In this article, I would like to consider how we can come closer to observing things as they are, even with such difficulties and limitations.
As a continuation of the previous article, this article is about the second process of improvement and innovation, which is the use of meta-consciousness and observation of phenomena.
Have multiple observation modes
When observing things as they are, it is important to have multiple modes of observation.
“Doesn’t having multiple modes of observation mean that the intention of the observer has entered the picture and it is not as it really is?”
Some of you may ask this question. That’s right, when we intentionally change the mode of observation, we are introducing our intention.
However, think of my previous article, “The Blind Men and the Elephant”. In any situation, if we assume that there is a limit to what one can recognize, we can try to get closer to capturing the elephant as it is (the elephant itself) by having multiple modes of observation.
It’s almost like the notion of having multiple ways to perceive things, rather than relying on one thing that has a limit, since perception has a limit in nature.
Now let’s talk about how we can have multiple modes of observation.
First, we need to be aware of two perspectives. One is our own point of view, with its own joys and sorrows, and the other is a meta point of view, looking at the whole event, the whole story, including ourselves. To use a movie metaphor, these are the actor’s point of view and the movie director’s point of view.
For example, let’s say you feel happy because you were able to convince the customer of what you proposed. It is your own perspective (the actor’s perspective) that “you are feeling happy because the customer nodded deeply.”
If you look at it from a slightly bird’s eye view, you might see it as “the process of creating empathy between you, the salesperson, and the customer.” This is the meta-perspective ( movie director’s perspective).
Three observation modes
Using this actor’s perspective and the movie director’s perspective, we have multiple modes of observation.
The first mode of observation is subjective observation. This is the mode of observation where we are the actor’s point of view, with our own physical senses, emotions, and judgments.
The second mode of observation is meta-perspective observation. This is a movie director’s point of view that overviews the entire event, including oneself, without one’s own physical senses, feelings, or judgments. However, it is difficult to completely separate it from our own senses, so it can be understood as “a state where we try to get as close to this state as possible.”
Up to this point, it is the same as the actor’s point of view and the movie director’s point of view mentioned earlier, but there is actually another mode of observation. Once we get a sense of this observation mode, the quality of our perception of reality changes.
The third mode of observation is pure experiential observation. Pure experience is a term given by the philosopher Kitaro Nishida.
Pure experience (as defined by Kitaro Nishida)
The state of being truly as one experiences it, without any thought or judgment.An Inquiry into the Good (Kitaro Nishida)
Translation by the author
It can be just as difficult, or even more difficult, to practice pure experience as it is to practice meta-perspectival observation. Think back to the first apple example in my last article. The moment we see that picture, we make the decision that it is an apple, don’t we? Pure experience in the apple example is the state of seeing the red light as it is, before making the judgment that it is an apple.
It is not easy to see it this way, but by withholding judgment as much as possible, I hope you will understand this pure experiential observation as “a state in which we strive to observe as purely experientially as possible.
In this way, purely experiential observation is the image of becoming the object of observation itself and perceiving it through the subjectivity of the object. If the object is a person, it means to “feel the subjective fact of the person itself. If the object is a thing, it is like “becoming the thing.”
In a previous article, when I talked about “knowing the reality of customers,” which is important when creating strategic stories, I mentioned doing ethnography, which is another form of pure experiential observation.
In addition to making subjective observations, we also have multiple modes of observation: meta-perspective observation from the movie director’s point of view, purely experiential observation of subjective facts from the point of view of others, and purely experiential observation of the event itself, suspending judgment.
The importance of having multiple observation modes
I myself had an incident that made me realize the importance of having multiple modes of observation.
As I have mentioned before, we provide an employee training service for corporate clients, but the spread of infectious diseases made it difficult to implement the service offline, so we quickly moved the service online. The speed with which we did so was good, but as the number of tasks increased and the business processes became more complex, various problems surfaced, such as fatigue in the frontline and difficulty in onboarding new employees.
From my point of view, it seems that engagement scores are dropping and new employees are taking longer to get used to our business because of the complexity of our business processes. (Subjective observation)
If I make a decision based on this subjective observation alone, I think it would be a good idea to streamline the complicated business process. And I myself have actually launched such a project.
However, as I launched that project and talked to the project members, I realized that there were things I was not seeing. What made me realize this was that when I told them that the work had become complicated and that we should make it cleaner, K-san, who was actually in charge of that work, did not react well.
I thought it was strange that K-san’s work would be easier if her business could be streamlined, and I was convinced that there must be something I was not seeing.
Then, I tried to become K-san as much as possible, and tried to get a sense of how she was doing her work, how she was coping with the increasing complexity of her work, and how she was trying to improve it. Not just me, but all the project members decided to take K’s subjective facts as they were, under the slogan, “Let’s solve K-san’s problems first.” (Purely experiential observation)
Through this process, I realized that what I had initially seen was only a part of the whole, and that there were various issues, large and small, that I had not seen, and that these issues were intertwined with each other. (Meta-perspective observation)
We are not talking about which observation mode is right or wrong. They are all facts. And through these multiple modes of observation, we can say that what comes into our view is “the elephant” in “The Blind Men and the Elephant.”
In this article, I talked about the second process of improvement/innovation, “Use of meta-consciousness and observation of phenomena. In the next article, I will discuss the third process, “Filter adjustment of observation.”
Here are the quests of the day. (If you’d like, please share your thoughts in the comments.)
・What experiences, if any, have you had that were close to purely experiential observation (i.e., becoming the other person, becoming the thing itself)?
・What are the benefits of having multiple modes of observation, such as meta-perspective observation and purely experiential observation, as well as subjective observation, in your work and life?
Bunshiro Ochiai
