Imagination as the crank of problem solving

Ditte Kolbæk

Abstract

The aim for this study is to provide a deeper understanding learning from experience and problem solving in the context of work. I would like to explore imagination as a process of creating knowing from experience in teams that have solved a task together. My theoretical foundation is practice theory as it fits well to the study of learning in the context of work (Engeström, Gherardi, Wenger). But I wonder how this theoretical point of departure fits with the theories presented in the winter school, and I would need support to grasp the different theoretical positions.

Bidragets oversatte titel	Forestillingsevne som knastaksel for problemløsning
Originalsprog	Engelsk
Publikationsdato	18 feb. 2016
Antal sider	2
Status	Udgivet - 18 feb. 2016
Begivenhed	Winther School: Imagination - Klitgården, Skagen, Danmark Varighed: 18 feb. 2016 → 21 feb. 2016

Kursus

Kursus	Winther School
Lokation	Klitgården
Land/Område	Danmark
By	Skagen
Periode	18/02/2016 → 21/02/2016

Emneord

proactive review
imagnation
problem solving
Practice theory

AUB Link

Søg efter materialet i Aalborg Universitetsbiblioteks søgemaskine

Citationsformater

@conference{ffd47e4a9f3045ea9ecf3cbaea5805ff,

title = "Imagination as the crank of problem solving",

abstract = "The most important part of PR is the problem solving in which the participants create abstractions that need to be elaborated to reifications in order to be treated as real things. In this study the context frames social, cultural and historical dimensions of learning from experience and the imagination of the preferred present or future. Imagination is the foundation of problem solving, in this case the problems identified in the PR. The role of imagination cannot be underestimated in this collaborative process in which the interface between the individual and the collective dimensions merge. Proactive Review consists of seven open questions asked in a specific sequence and conducted by a trained facilitator who stays neutral throughout the process. Hence Proactive Reviews create spaces for dialogues and discussions about alternative ways of doing, and I am interested in ways to inspire and encourage the participants{\textquoteright} imagination to flow freely in order to redefine reality at work. I see different paths for this exploration: I could look into cultural practices and values concerning relations and interactions among colleagues who have solved a task together (Branco & lopes). Or I could dig into who “says” or “decides” what is preferred or favored in the sense of who seems to get the power in the team (Latour, Dunne & Raby). Or I could concentrate on the term “dialogue” (Bakhtin, Bohm, Oliveira). I hope the winterschool will add more view angles to this study.My premature research question is: How to study the phenomenon “inspire to imagination” in the context of work?",

keywords = "proactive review, imagnation, problem solving, Practice theory, Imagination, Organisational Learning",

author = "Ditte Kolb{\ae}k",

year = "2016",

month = feb,

day = "18",

language = "English",

note = "Winther School : Imagination ; Conference date: 18-02-2016 Through 21-02-2016",

}

TY - ABST

T1 - Imagination as the crank of problem solving

AU - Kolbæk, Ditte

PY - 2016/2/18

Y1 - 2016/2/18

N2 - The most important part of PR is the problem solving in which the participants create abstractions that need to be elaborated to reifications in order to be treated as real things. In this study the context frames social, cultural and historical dimensions of learning from experience and the imagination of the preferred present or future. Imagination is the foundation of problem solving, in this case the problems identified in the PR. The role of imagination cannot be underestimated in this collaborative process in which the interface between the individual and the collective dimensions merge. Proactive Review consists of seven open questions asked in a specific sequence and conducted by a trained facilitator who stays neutral throughout the process. Hence Proactive Reviews create spaces for dialogues and discussions about alternative ways of doing, and I am interested in ways to inspire and encourage the participants’ imagination to flow freely in order to redefine reality at work. I see different paths for this exploration: I could look into cultural practices and values concerning relations and interactions among colleagues who have solved a task together (Branco & lopes). Or I could dig into who “says” or “decides” what is preferred or favored in the sense of who seems to get the power in the team (Latour, Dunne & Raby). Or I could concentrate on the term “dialogue” (Bakhtin, Bohm, Oliveira). I hope the winterschool will add more view angles to this study.My premature research question is: How to study the phenomenon “inspire to imagination” in the context of work?

AB - The most important part of PR is the problem solving in which the participants create abstractions that need to be elaborated to reifications in order to be treated as real things. In this study the context frames social, cultural and historical dimensions of learning from experience and the imagination of the preferred present or future. Imagination is the foundation of problem solving, in this case the problems identified in the PR. The role of imagination cannot be underestimated in this collaborative process in which the interface between the individual and the collective dimensions merge. Proactive Review consists of seven open questions asked in a specific sequence and conducted by a trained facilitator who stays neutral throughout the process. Hence Proactive Reviews create spaces for dialogues and discussions about alternative ways of doing, and I am interested in ways to inspire and encourage the participants’ imagination to flow freely in order to redefine reality at work. I see different paths for this exploration: I could look into cultural practices and values concerning relations and interactions among colleagues who have solved a task together (Branco & lopes). Or I could dig into who “says” or “decides” what is preferred or favored in the sense of who seems to get the power in the team (Latour, Dunne & Raby). Or I could concentrate on the term “dialogue” (Bakhtin, Bohm, Oliveira). I hope the winterschool will add more view angles to this study.My premature research question is: How to study the phenomenon “inspire to imagination” in the context of work?

KW - proactive review

KW - imagnation

KW - problem solving

KW - Practice theory

KW - Imagination

KW - Organisational Learning

M3 - Conference abstract for conference

T2 - Winther School

Y2 - 18 February 2016 through 21 February 2016

ER -