Expressed as a network of choices, we have a resource with three intersecting systems. One system is concerned with how the exchange is initiated — by the primary actor/knower or the secondary one, and if by the primary actor/knower whether the nuclear Al/Kl move is anticipated or directly enacted. Another system distinguishes between action and knowledge exchanges, and for action exchanges allows for negotiations in which goods can be proffered or services enacted immediately (in which case verbalising the A1 move is optional, and in a sense redundant) and negotiations in which some time will pass before the goods are proffered or the service enacted (in which case verbalising the A1 move as a promise is obligatory, and actually acting to fulfil the promise may not eventuate). Finally there is a system allowing for follow-up moves, first for the secondary actor/knower, and then, if they do make a move, for the primary actor/knower. These options are set out in Figure 7.2.
Blogger Comments:
To be clear, this system is inconsistent with the preceding exposition of exchange structure. For example, it presents the obligatory nuclear move (A1/K1) only as a potential option — though not even an option if the exchange is initiated by the secondary knower/actor.
Moreover, the system does not allow exchanges that include both an optional anticipatory move and an obligatory nuclear move, since only one option can be chosen.
These shortcomings are partially masked by the inclusion of structure types, after the systemic features, none of which are valid realisations of the system selections.
Even more problematically, the network unintentionally (and incongruously) allows exchange structures of just a single move, which is optional, not obligatory, such as:
- dK1 [anticipate, knowledge, no follow up], and
- K2 [secondary, knowledge, no follow up].
No comments:
Post a Comment