Hoofdstuk 1 - Joop Vorst

page 67
Chapter 2 - Literature study
will usually be brought across digitally and the relational aspect will usually be analogue in
nature (Watzlawick et al. 2001).
In practice, there are a number of problems with analogue and digital communication. The
background of these problems is that “the performance, accuracy, and versatility”
(Watzlawick et al. 2001) of digital and analogue communication differ hugely one from the
other. It also turns out that transposing information from one form of communication to the
other is not only difficult, but also always incomplete. Digital information has a highly complex
and logical structure (syntax), which makes it possible to communicate with high degrees of
complexity, versatility, and abstraction. What‟s missing from digital communication is
adequate assignment of meaning (semantics), because it assumes the presence of generally
accepted conventions about the value and meaning of the things it is trying to communicate.
Language is ambiguous and often the cause of misunderstandings and abuse (Ramondt
2004) and “words turn out to be tools with considerable limitations” (Boonstra and De Caluwé
2006). Weggeman and Lammers (2006) refer to Gagliardi (1996), who says that our
experience of reality is at its core a sensory experience which, because of its subconscious
nature, cannot be (fully) expressed in words. Digitally, for instance, the word „beautiful‟
expresses a certain condition of something, like a painting. But how beautiful is „beautiful‟? In
the case of the painting, are we describing the image, the detail, the interplay of colours, or
the size of the painting? Are we describing the frame, too? There are as many opinions as
there are people, and consequently there are as many meanings of „beautiful‟. When an
interim manager‟s assignment includes the phrase: “end employee self-government”, that
can be interpreted digitally to mean either: “fire all rebels”, or: “create a situation in which
people take the responsibilities that are appropriate to their positions”. Two very different
interpretations of a digital communication with, to put it delicately, rather different
consequences. Context is another factor in determining meaning: “The context in which the
concept is used should indicate meaning” (Strauss and Corbin 1998). Kensen (1996) offers
another example of two meanings that can be assigned to the same statement: The social
renewal of a town. Social renewal to the sector director of welfare could mean creating
interrelations between different policy areas. To an elderly resident, on the other hand, social
renewal could mean a long-awaited end to her loneliness! The sector director interprets the
statement from a policy perspective, whereas the elderly resident thinks first of her
neighbours. Analogue communication, as compared to digital communication, has more
facilities for expressing meaning, but lacks sufficient logic and nuance to distinguish between
contradictory meanings. The analogue communication of disinterest can be accomplished by
looking out a window, which is an illogical thing to do during an important conversation. Also,
people can disagree about the meaning (or nuances) of looking out of the window, just as