In organisation theory, bridging the gap between „micro“ and „macro ...

Talking Structure
3.2. Analysis
One of the most interesting findings of linguistic studies on conversation in con-
sulting and therapy (e.g. Nothdurft 1984; Roderburg 1998) is the observation that
consultants, as a rule, do not simply deal with 'the problem' as it is defined by
their clients. Consultants and clients rather have to come to an understanding
about the problem through interaction, thereby often changing (or even denying)
the initial problem as conceptualized in the clients' view.
In the perspective of the systemic consultants, the reduction and adequate repre-
sentation of complexity is assumed to be a crucial point for organizations in gen-
eral. Thus, the task of systemic consulting is to find with each client a construc-
tion of reality that is both comprehensible and – from a higher point of view –
coordinated with the other perspectives, so that they are, altogether, adequate to
complexity (Schmid/ Hipp 1997). Therefore, the solutions suggested by systemic
consultants cannot be of a merely 'technical' kind but have to include the 'theoreti-
cal' concept of a 'second order observation' which has to be established on the
level of organization itself (Luhmann 1989).
One step in the changing of the clients' reality through consulting communication
is the examination of their perspective. A typical method for this are questions
about previous attempts to solve the problem. In the following part of a consulting
conversation the client (K1) answers this question; he presents the problem as the
task to place topics and projects of several departments concerned with human
ressources within a 'logical chain':
Datum 1: 'logical chain'
01 K1 – (.) wir
habm
04 (.) in dem / dem kreis äh ich sach mal de:r
14