Sunteți pe pagina 1din 51

Ever pondered on any of these questions?

 Why and what are the major political ideologies (such as liberalism,
socialism, etc)? A THEORY
 Why does empirical analysis suggest that there are five fundamental
dimensions to human personality? OF
 Why are there two main forms of social structure (bureaucratic and
community) and how do they arise?
SOCIAL INTERACTION
 Does social and cultural progress really happen?

 How and why did human civilisation first start?

The Lancefield Theory

DRAFT SUMMER 2010


by

Julian Hart

NEED

INTERACTION a new theory of


human development
PROCESS
which spans
5 NEEDS
DEVELOPMENT the whole of the social sciences
5 TENSIONS OF
DEVELOPMENT
EVOLUTION SHORT INTRODUCTION
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

SYNOPSIS Contents

The Lancefield Theory is a new theory of social interaction. It is a construct, which Introduction
spans and connects the whole social sciences from psychology to macro-economics. Premise: simplicity leading to complexity
The proposed theory provides a completely new way to understand human
Initial validation of the theory
development and to appreciate the natural progress and evolution of cities and
civilisations. While the theory challenges existing approaches to constructing the Social processes in operation
social sciences and the various academic silos, it ties together many of the most Chronology of city origin and development
important observations and theories which have been made over the last 200 years. Experience of individual within society
This theory of social interaction suggests that the progress of human society is driven Life of a human as a social animal
by five fundamental social processes. These social processes manifest as positive Assumptions and building blocks
feedback systems, which exist wherever there is interaction between human beings, Basic structure of the theory of social interaction
from pair interactions to nation states and beyond. The processes are a-scalar. One
way, in which we are already aware of these processes is through the political Detailed Interaction Process
ideologies of (1) liberalism, (2) socialism, (3) fundamentalism and (4) sustainability. Manifestation of the social processes in city form
Application to the modern business
The apparent social processes each drive the evolution of human societies in different
Expression of the process in natural evolution
directions, creating tensions of development: one process acts to tear a human society
apart, two of the processes create different types of social structure, a fourth helps a
human society to adapt to a changing outside social or physical world and the fifth
provides a society with the capacity to transform itself. The processes can be Author
construed to be the processes of Birth, Growth, Health (health maintenance),
Adaptation and Transformation of cities. Only when all five processes operate Julian Hart was born in 1969, a month before Man first stepped onto the Moon. He
together does human development progress in an even manner; being positive lived a sheltered, middle England, home counties life until the age of 8, when his
feedback systems, each process acting alone would (and has been seen in the past parents moved to work in Chile, South America. Soon thereafter he went to boarding
to) drive human society to inevitable self-destruction. school at Oundle, near Peterborough. Julian studied Chemistry at Bristol University
and later obtained a Masters in Environmental Science at Brunel University. His first
The five social processes are driven by each and every human being seeking to satisfy career job was with the international engineering consultancy, Ove Arup & Partners.
his or her basic Needs, his or her desire to survive and thrive and to experience Over 7 years at Arup he migrated from environmental consultancy into town planning
happiness in its various guises. This new theory for the first time creates a and sustainable design and helped to develop the organisation’s worldwide strategy on
comprehensible connection between all aspects of the human scale world, that which sustainable development. He also began doctoral research on the evolution of cities,
we experience in our daily lives, and the macroscopic society – our cultures, social became involved in the Urban Task Force and lectured at Harvard on green
structures, ideologies and large scale economic patterns of behaviour. architecture.

This theory of social interaction is not contained only to the domain of human After a year at Arup Associates, the architectural arm of Arup, Julian went ‘client side’
civilisation. It is equally applicable to the whole history of Man’s evolution and by and spent the next 6 years as development manager for Stratford City, now centre
extension to all species and the natural world. This new startling theory in fact piece for the Olympics 2012. He helped take Stratford from concept to planning
provides a template for a general theory of evolution, extending from the social permission for a new metropolitan centre for London. After that he set up Lancefield
sciences across the natural sciences and embracing the physical sciences too. This Consulting, providing advice to clients on planning and sustainability issues in the
new theory completes the picture initially drawn by Darwin, by showing how both property sector for 3½ years. With the economy changing, he joined the newly formed
competition and cooperation operate in human society and in natural systems. Homes and Communities Agency as Design Manager for London. In this capacity he
oversees the quality of design for all publicly funded housing development across
London.

Page 2 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

INTRODUCTION Civilisation has arisen because of the emergence and on-going


existence of cities.
The proposed theory of social interaction was formulated by the author because of a
perception that existing interpretations of sustainable development have little, if any,
intellectual credibility. This led the author on a journey of philosophical discovery, Cities and thence civilisations have progressed as a result of the
which first produced a new way of appreciating the evolution of cities and civilisations continuous interplay between five fundamental social processes.
and was then seen to have wider application. What began as an innocent
investigation into constructs for sustainable indicators for cities morphed into a new These processes of human development represent the processes of
theory of human development.
Birth, Growth, Health, Adaptation and Transformation of cities.
This booklet will seek to set out this new theory through the lens of the human world
and how it describes the process of societal development. Justification for the validity
The Birth Process
of the theory of social interaction will be provided. The new construct will then be
generalised to the natural world to achieve a general theory of evolution.
In civilisation, the Birth Process drives the human activity of trade. It initially arises
from our fundamental daily material needs (food and water), extending in modern
Summary
society to all our material desires. It can most readily be associated with the political
ideology of liberalism. As people are driven to interact in material exchanges, this
This theory of social interaction suggests that the growth and development of cities (as
affects in a deep way how they behave, how they see others and themselves, how
an example system within the universe) can best be described through the continuous
they perceive space and time and what they think. The Birth Process drives
interplay of five identifiable and quite distinct and observable social processes. These
individualism and desire for freedom of behaviour and a strong focus on the present.
macroscopic processes originate at the microscopic level from individual humans
The process acts to tear society apart. From tribal systems to modern bureaucracies,
interacting as they seek to satisfy their personal Needs to survive and thrive. Scaled
the Birth Process operates to atomise society, breaking apart social structures and
up, the macroscopic phenomena represent the processes of Birth, Growth, Health
erasing social boundaries. It has also been the driver behind Modernity: increasing
(health maintenance), Adaptation and Transformation of cities. All five processes are
rationality in human society. Its logical extreme is anarchy. It operates by forever
positive feedback systems. All five processes are continually operating within human
creating new possibilities, insinuating competition and opportunism, wherever
society, to greater or lesser degrees; the extent to which any particular process is
cooperation has a hold. It manifests as the process of material entropy in human
apparent at a particular point in time will strongly influence the direction of
society.
development of any particular society. The five processes create opposing tensions
within society, such that when all five are functioning in equal measure development or
The Growth Process
evolution is a progressive, fairly gradual process. If, or when, any individual process
accelerates faster than the other processes, then human societies can very quickly
The Growth Process can most easily be associated with the formation and expansion
become unbalanced in development and rapidly move down a path of self-destruction.
of bureaucratic systems, noting the tendency of the latter for inexorable growth. It
creates rigid social structure and through this provides human societies with the ability
Each social process is pure, where the real life we experience represents a complex
to build physical structures. In its pure form the Growth Process represents simple
interplay of each pure phenomenon. We experience the influence of these social
replication of structure: another brick on the wall, another identical car produced from
processes in a variety of ways, including how we are each stimulated to prioritise
the manufacturing line, another identikit role created in society. It is a process, which
fulfilment of our personal Needs (becoming materialistic, a workaholic, a religious
is driven by people seeking safety and security, to ensure that their material needs will
zealot or addicted to an iPhone) or in the choices we make to achieve a work-life
continue to be available tomorrow (in the immediate future) as well as today. Counter-
balance. For reasons, which will become apparent, our experience of these five
intuitively this process inculcates in human society a total focus on the past, seeking to
processes is only now, in modern democratic societies, becoming objectified and
extend and perpetuate agreeable trends and the status quo: extending the security
thereby more easily observable.
and predictability of the known past into the near future. The Growth Process can
most readily be associated with the ideologies of socialism and capitalism (these are
different expressions of the same underlying process). The Growth Process has also
been the driving force behind ever-increasing division of labour. When allowed to spin

Page 3 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

out of control, this process can cause a human society rapidly to coalesce into a Process enables individuals to unlink from their own inherited roles and to navigate
singular bureaucratic entity (most explicitly demonstrated in the last century in the form their own personal trajectories through social space. In this respect social space itself
of communism). becomes objectified – a new landscape to explore. As individuals within society
become mobile, society itself becomes more flexible and adaptable, changing to
The Health Process accommodate external influences. The Process relies upon and engenders respect
and inclusivity, not just between people but of all that is important and worth valuing.
The Health Process corresponds to the reproduction of city populations and all that is The process directs us to see things in balance: today, tomorrow and the future. The
required to create and nurture future generations. It is the process, which generates ideology created by the Adaptation Process is none other than Sustainability: the
much looser, more fluid social structures, commonly referred to as communities. It ideology of democratically structured societies. Physical manifestations of the
provides the basis for creating the social, cultural and physical environments, which Adaptation Process include public transport and non-lethal sports.
are conducive to the successful rearing of children and maintenance of mental and
physical health amongst the wider population. As a process it produces the moral The Transformation Process
fabric of society, historically manifest in the form of religions, and engenders a focus
on the future – beyond tomorrow. However, when allowed to run out of control, this The Transformation Process enables whole cities and their societies to be creative and
process can cause societies to layer into distinct castes (or classes) and eventually to to take control of their destinies. It is a process, which allows thinking and action to
the emergence of apartheid or even slavery. But without a functional Health Process, transcend scales in time and space. Beyond that, the author can tell you no more.
societies lose sight of their own future, stop caring for their children and the We have yet to experience the Transformation Process across wider society. And
environment they inhabit. People literally lose the ability to value their own health or may not do so for many centuries or millennia to come; even assuming we survive the
that of anyone or anything else. current crises facing humanity.

The Adaptation Process Five Social Processes – Five Tensions of Human Development

The Adaptation Process underpins both democracy and our modern information Together these five social processes drive and have always driven the progress of
economies. It is driven by people seeking autonomy and social mobility, to achieve human evolution. To this end they are simply the social, cultural, economic and
individual freedom within a society which has been vertically (Growth Process) and psychological manifestation of deeper processes, which have crafted the evolution of
horizontally (Health Process) structured, without completely destroying the underlying all life on our planet.
social fabric (as happens under the influence of the Birth Process). The Adaptation Commonly experienced expressions of the social processes

BIRTH GROWTH HEALTH ADAPTATION TRANSFORMATION


1 2 3 4 5
Capitalism / Socialism / Democracy
Liberalism Religion Creativity
Communism / Nationalism Sustainability
Economics Sociology Sociology Management Science Technological Science
Industrial / Manufacturing / Health / Education / Information / Communications
Trade / Free Market Economy Creativity Economy
Construction Economy Management Economy Economy
Social Structures
Anarchy Communities Social Mobility ?
(bureaucracies)
Modernity Division of Labour Division of Nurture* Communications Revolution Technological Development
Materialism / Consumerism Growth Agenda Value and Heritage Inclusivity / Accessibility ?
Throw Away Society Must build more society Nimby-ism “Those lying politicians” ?
Feeding the masses Housing for everyone Localism / environmentalism Respect Agenda ?
Freedom and Anonymity Trust and Regulation Faith and Ethics Consultation ?
Page 4 of 51 © Julian Hart
Extroversion Agreeableness Neuroticism Conscientiousness Openness
jal.hart@btinternet.com
Culture of the Present Culture of the Past Culture of the Future Awareness of travel of time ?
Rationality Legality Morality Inclusivity Creativity
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

PREMISE – SIMPLICITY LEADING TO COMPLEXITY INITIAL VALIDATION OF THE THEORY OF SOCIAL INTERACTION

The simple premise, on which the Lancefield Theory is built, suggests that Needs drive An initial validation of this theory can be achieved by consideration of the Five Factor
actions, which cause types of interaction. Such interactions can be cooperative Model. The latter is a construct developed within the field of psychology, which is the
(leading to mutual Need satisfaction) or competitive. The typical interactions become best solution to-date for summarising 100 years of empirical research. Results from
reinforced on repetition by participants and propagate outwards across social groups many years of psychological analysis indicate that the personality or identity of human
to become social processes. The human experience of happiness represents the beings can best be described across five dimensions: degree of extraversion, degree
feedback mechanism, confirming to an individual involved in an interaction whether he of neuroticism, etc.
or she has been successful.
Starting from a proposed adapation to Maslow’s original Hierarchy of Human Needs,
this theory of social interaction provides a theoretical prediction of exactly the same
 Need drives action. five dimensions of personality.
 Action in a social world leads to interaction.
 Each interaction is a process (see Page XX).
Adaptation of
 Interactions propagate out across social groups to give rise to Process Five Factor Model
Maslow’s Hierarchy
social processes.
 Social processes in a social group drive the development of that Level 1 Material and Energy
BIRTH Extroversion
Needs
social unit.
 There are five tensions of development – Birth, Growth, etc. Level 2 Safety and Security
GROWTH Agreeableness
Needs
An interaction between any two people (or between any two groups of people) can be Level 3 Health and Emotional Stability /
seen as a process. Inherent in any interaction are process steps, which affect HEALTH
Reproduction Needs Neuroticism
people’s behaviour, attitude, perceptions, narrative about themselves and
characterisation of others and relationship with time and space. When scaled up to Level 4 Autonomy and Mobility
the level of a social group or wider society, these influences on each individual ADAPTATION Conscientiousness
Needs
manifest in terms of different aspects of our cultures, our social structures, economic
patterns of behaviour and our ideologies. The social, economic and cultural Level 5 Control and Success
environments created by the processes further influence individuals and so give rise to TRANSFORMATION Intellect / Openness
Needs
positive feedback. Each process takes on a ‘life of its own’.

The five resultant social processes generate tensions of development in human At the macroscopic scale, validation is best achieved by the correlation between the
society. These have been experienced, for example, through the different political outcomes of the predicted social processes and the well known ideologies of modern
ideologies of liberalism, socialism, fundamentalism and sustainability (the fifth not yet society. Another piece of macroscopic evidence to support the theory is that it predicts
there to be two fundamental forms of social structure: akin to (1) bureaucracies and (2)
apparent across wider society). Each social process directs the progress of human
communities. It has been a long held belief in sociology that this is so, including the
development in a different direction. Only by being in balance does human society
assumptions underlying cultural theory.
achieve, in effect, sustainable development.

However, this new construct challenges our existing notions of sustainable Examples of different types of interaction
development. As the decisions we each have to make in life change, depending on
our age and circumstances, then so too the choices of a whole society evolve 1. hunting in a tribe or buying sweets from a shop
depending upon its current level of development and its wider economic and 2. standing guard / keeping watch for someone or employment in a company or
environmental context. The interplay between the five social processes creates the partner of a firm or building a fence together
highly complex world, which we inhabit. 3. reciprocal grooming or doctors nurturing a patient or looking after children
4. sharing information or buying a newspaper
Page 5 of 51 5. applauding a virtuoso performance or playing in the orchestra © Julian Hart
jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

SOCIAL PROCESSES IN OPERATION cooperation cannot happen (except for instantaneous interactions). However, when
sharing converts to exchange (trade), then these outer contours dissipate. The other
The best way to explain how the social processes work is by considering the social processes create different types of social boundary. For example, in the
chronology of the formation of early city development. The same processes happen in modern world contours associated with the Growth Process (Level 2) include nation
the modern day; it is simply easier to paint the picture in a less complicated past. states and businesses, each of which are clearly membership organisations. An
example of social contours associated with the Health Process (Level 3) is affiliation to
Travelling back to the human world before civilisation, we see a landscape populated a church, football club, union or political party. (Growth Process contours tend to map
by competing tribes. The identified social processes would have operated only within onto the physical world much more directly than Health Process contours do. The
each tribe, arising from cooperation between individuals and family groups (1) in the Growth Process creates more spatially structured social organisations, whereas the
sourcing of food, (2) in defence, (3) in reproduction, grooming and nurture, and so on. Health Process generates more fluid social organisations, including communities.)
Initially no cooperation could over-span tribal boundaries: the tribes competed in all
respects. For each process there would have been a social contour (each tribe The progress of civilisation has taken place by means of a gradual peeling away of
essentially wrapped by all five contours), demarcating the social unit within which these social contours, from the lowest level upwards, allowing cooperative social
cooperation took place. In tribal times these would have been entwined for each tribe processes to operate across larger and larger numbers of human beings.
to create only one apparent encasing social contour: the identity of the tribe occupying
a distinct territory.
Trade is a cooperative endeavour between trading parties.
Through occasional, and over time more frequent, encounters at tribal boundaries,
involving occasional mutual giving and receiving of peace offerings, individuals within
participating tribes would gradually become less prejudiced towards their neighbouring
Level 1 – Materials boundaries
tribe. Increasing degree of exchange between adjoining tribes would have
of tribes have become area of
incrementally dissolved the ‘outer’ (or lowest) social contour, the tribal boundary, which
common currency
is associated with Material Needs – sharing in the sourcing of food (hunting and
Level 2 – Security boundaries
gathering) from within the tribal territory (Level 1). As the tribal boundary disappeared,
manifest as nation state borders
the two tribes would have eventually merged to become a larger social group. This
most likely happened through the formation of a nascent market place or proto-city (a originating
trade centre). tribal
landscape
This represents the Birth Process in action – activity of economic exchange leading to
the dissolution of cultural and social differences to create larger, more uniform,
seamless social entities. This process is strongest within city centres, where trade
activity is greatest. In city centres we experience the cultural consequences of this
through anonymity and an associated sense of rootlessnes (known as anomie) (see
Page XX).

Only once the outer social contour, the tribal boundary, had disappeared and Many competing tribes
previously competing social factions had come to cooperate in respect of Material gradually merged over
Needs, could cooperation at a higher Level begin to occur. A modern-day example is centuries to create a
the formation of the European Union: now there is a commonly accepted currency larger cooperating
across the EU (Level 1 Cooperation), the member nations can begin to consider society
seriously a higher level cooperation in terms of common defence (Level 2). This could
eventually lead to complete dissolution of nation state boundaries.
Level 3 – Health (nurture)
We see by this example how social processes cause the creation of social contours: boundaries manifest as local
sharing the sourcing of food creates an impermeable outer contour across which communities (such as Swiss
Cantons) with local government
The
Page 6 ofgiving
51 and receiving of gifts would likely have represented the responsible for local health and © Julian Hart
education jal.hart@btinternet.com
first expression of trade in human society.
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

CHRONOLOGY OF CITY ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT


Civilisation progresses through a series of transitions as the social processes have converted humanity from a population of competing tribes into a global cooperating society. Over time the
depth of cooperation (increasing depth from Birth to Transformation) and breadth of cooperation (number of human beings cooperating across defined social groups) has increased as social
units (initially tribes) have been merged and new societies reconstituted into more civilised forms, then they in turn have connected together and merged. An example of increasing breadth is
the incremental extension and merging of monetary currencies across Europe since the Dark Ages, eventually leading to a common currency for a single trading society across the continent.
Examples of increasing depth include the creation of modern health and education systems and more recently the current communications revolution based on information exchange.

Each of the processes brings about a different type of transition. The inherent hierarchy to the social processes and the social contours created by them has meant that there has been a
natural chronology to the increasing breadth and depth of human cooperation. The Birth Process (through trade) always leads the way, followed by structure created by the Growth Process.
LEVEL
54 3 21
Level 1 : Birth Process The physical manifestation of the
Competition between social groups for the sourcing of energy and materials (originally appearance of cooperation is market
food) leads to divergence in use of materials between social units, which eventually places and trade routes, giving rise to
flips into cooperating in the sourcing of materials, manifest as trade. cities and thereafter continually driving
Competing tribes convert to cooperation in the market place. the heart of cities.
BIRTH

Level 2 : Growth Process The physical expression of the


Competition between social units in growth (equating more recently to appearance of cooperation is the
manufactured outputs) leads to divergence of product, which eventually emergence of supply chains and
flips to cooperating in manufacture of more complex outputs. The latter more complex constructed
manifests at the microscopic level as increasing division of labour. outputs, including construction of
GROWTH Competing city clans convert to cooperation in constructing the city. the city itself.

Level 3 : Health Process Physical expressions of


Competition between social groups in terms of population growth the appearance of
and nurturing future generations manifests as competition for cooperation are public
space. This leads to divergence in use of space, which eventually buildings and spaces,
flips to cooperation in the use of space. from temples to hospitals
HEALTH Competing communities learn to share space. and schools.

Level 4 : Adaptation Process


Competition between social units for autonomy and mobility leads to
divergence in “direction of travel”, which eventually gives rise to
cooperation in social and physical mobility. Physical expressions include
public transport systems, while social expressions equate to elections.
ADAPTATION Competing individuals learn to exchange information and share transport.

Level 5 : Transformation Process


This process has not yet manifest at the larger
scale of society. Examples of localised
interactions of this nature include members of a
band or orchestra working together.
TRANSFORMATION
Page 7 of 51 © Julian Hart
jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

EXPERIENCE OF THE INDIVIDUAL WITHIN SOCIETY

How the different social processes have crafted and continue to influence our experience of society in the modern world.

MATRICES SIMS
Matrices are the pan-societal Systems Inhabiting Matrices
underlying social ‘structures’, Each type of Matrix can support
which are created by the different types of systems
actions of the social processes. bureaucracy (essentially social organisms).
For example the Trust Matrix of Examples include: tribes,
a nation state, confined to the bureaucracies, unions. These
territory of that nation state, can be egalitarian or hierarchic.
manifests as the legal system,
system of property rights and 3. HEALTH PROCESS – VALUE MATRIX
associated mechanisms for Background Value Matrices created by the
enforcement and application. Health Process lie within each Trust Matrix
and are represented in modern day by
health, social services and education
systems and religious communities.
Centre of one’s world is the nuclear family, within
which material needs are shared (as opposed to Value Matrices provide the underlying
exchanged in the wider Peace Matrix) and within moral fabric to society and enable
which the core security and nurture needs are communities within that society to value
met. As material needs are shared within the value node
and maintain that which is important.
family unit, it represents the residual tribal entity
in modern civilised society. Social structures which can occupy the
Value Matrix include religious cults,
The individual works in a social structure, usually unions, charities and political parties.
a bureaucracy, which is a social organisation
which inhabits the Trust Matrix. Caste and class systems represent
overlapping Value Matrices, which occupy
Surrounding the nuclear family are close the same territory, where there is no
relations and friends, all of whom have an mutual nurture between members of the
interest in the on-going health of that family. In different castes (or classes).
this way, the nuclear family is a Value Node
within the Value Matrix.

2. GROWTH PROCESS – TRUST MATRIX


Background Trust Matrices created by Growth Process lie within Peace
1. BIRTH PROCESS – PEACE MATRIX Matrix and are represented by nation states, their legal systems and
Background Peace Matrix, created by Birth Process, police forces, etc.
represented by money and common currency: a society of
accepted individuals all able to trade with each other. Social structures, which occupy this Trust Matrix are bureaucratic entities
(businesses, government, etc), all of which rely on Just application of
Physical
Pagestructures
8 of 51 created by Birth Process are market rules and regulations across society. Physical structures © Julian Hart
represent all
places and the core of cities. Social structures occupying jal.hart@btinternet.com
that is built – infrastructure, the city, buildings, etc.
the Peace Matrix are tribes – now seen as individuals and
nuclear family units.
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

THE LIFE OF A HUMAN AS A SOCIAL ANIMAL


The dimensions of personality identified by the Five Factor Model are part nature and part nurture (circa
50:50). The theory of social interaction provides an explanation as to why this might be so.
This diagram works on the assumption that
the identified connection between the theory If the theory of social interaction is correct, then it will have operated as much in modern society as in our
of social interaction and the Five Factor tribal and deeper past. The processes would have been the evolutionary mechanisms for selecting social
Model is broadly correct. animals – those who are better able to cooperate to meet fundamental Needs. Hence this would have
influenced our genetically inherited personalities from birth. Thereafter, our experience of living in a social
world leads to adaptation of our born personalities through daily social interaction with other people.
INFANTS
Individuals, who have
partially formed
personalities, but who are
natural social animals,
CHILDHOOD ADULTHOOD
absorbing and learning how BEHAVIOUR
to operate in a social world A child is born with a natural set of The sum of all the interactions of the
through emulation of others. personality attributes, defined adult population create the social
genetically. processes, which generate the cultures,
BEHAVIOUR INFORMS ATTITUDE social structures and ideologies of social
ATTITUDE
Through immersion in society, exposure units within society and of societies as a
B to the social processes through whole. D
interactions with adults, and also in the
I modern day through the media, these Since two social processes act to create
E
SOCIALISATION
R initial template personality attributes PROCESS structure, their perpetual operation A
T become further moulded and adapted. represents a process of continual T
reinforcement of the social boundaries,
H This is the process of socialisation. Interactions social structures and associated cultures H
Some children will naturally adapt to which exist across a society. ATTITUDE INFORMS
certain cultural environments, while 1. Material BEHAVIOUR
others may find the socialisation process 2. Labour The child is born innately selfish, but
much more difficult if their innate genetic through the process of socialisation can OLD AGE
3. Nurture
temperaments are very different to the 4. Mobility be taught to become essentially altruistic,
social and cultural environment they to see the full benefit of cooperation. Individuals with very well
Five Factor Model 5. Success defined personalities, a
have been born into.
product of genetic
1. Extroversion inheritance and lifetime of
2. Agreeableness social interaction.
3. Neuroticism
4. Conscientiousness
5. Openness
Social and cultural environment created by adult population
provides context and conditions for the next generation.
Page 9 of 51 © Julian Hart
jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

THE HUMAN PERSONALITY


The Lancefield Theory suggests that the development of civilisation has depended on
According to the Lancefield Theory, the totality of an individual’s personality arises there being a slight bias within the general population towards cooperation (at least for
from: Level 1 Needs to start with). The degree of cooperation has increased over time
across the wider population and, when human development has progressed,
 how that individual learns to prioritise his or her five Needs continually enhanced at higher Need levels. For example, the current communications
 for each Need, the degree to which the individual is naturally cooperative and revolution is taking place because, at a statistical level, more people are learning to
competitive cooperate in relation to Level 4 Needs than those who continue to compete at that
Level.
Example Personality Profile
People, who exist at the extremes of the normal curve distribution, are seen by the
general population as having fairly aberrant personality types and exhibiting odd
Degree to which individual is naturally behaviours. For Level 1 Needs, most people are mild cooperators. This is evidenced
COOP COMP
a cooperator/ competitor in relation to through the Five Factor Model, where it is understood that there is a mild bias in the
Level 1 Need American population (for example) towards extraversion, compared to introversion.
Those who do exist in the centre of the spectrum can fluctuate between cooperation
and competition, depending upon circumstances and the company they are keeping.

These predictions seem to be corroborated by the Five Factor Model. In the Five
Level 3 Need is top priority Factor Model, each individual can be understood in terms of five dimensions of
personality, where each dimension represents a spectrum between extreme
personality types (for example, Surgency (equating to Lancefield Theory Level 1) is
characterised at one extreme by strong extraverts and at the other extreme by acute
Level 5 Need is low priority introverts).

LANCEFIELD THEORY AND FIVE FACTOR MODEL


The above individual is most cooperative in respect to Level 1 Needs and most
competitive in regard to Level 5 Needs. NATURAL NATURAL
He/She prioritises satisfaction of Level 1 and Level 3 Needs over desire to satisfy COOPERATORS COMPETITORS
Level 2, 4 and 5 Needs.

In relation to degree of cooperation/competition across the wider population, there extravert LEVEL 1 introvert
would most likely be normal curve distributions for each Level.
agreeable LEVEL 2 disagreeable
cooperation competition

eg: extraversion emotional wellness LEVEL 3 neurotic


eg: introversion

conscientious LEVEL 4 disrespectful

openness LEVEL 5 closedness

Page 10 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

ASSUMPTIONS

The theory of social interaction relies on three basic assumptions: if human beings have a set of fundamental Needs …
1. That cities are natural systems
2. That human beings have a limited set of fundamental needs to survive if those Needs motivate action in the real world …
3. That human beings are both social and individual simultaneously
when humans inhabit a very social, highly populated world …
Assumption 1 : Cities are Natural Systems

The assumption that cities are natural systems requires the acknowledgement that the
then actions cause interaction with other people
development processes for all cities must be the same. Further, the processes of
growth and development of cities can be expected to transcend existing academic
silos, from psychology through to economics and sociology. By way of example, each grown to sexual maturity) need to be healthy enough to be able to reproduce. And as
and every oak tree is different, but every tree grows and develops through exactly the animals, we need to be mobile (physical and mental immobility is not good for our
same set of biochemical processes. By the end of this paper, it will be seen that the long-term health and sanity). The simplest existing framework for understanding
processes, which drive city growth and evolution, are the very same as those which human needs is Maslow’s Hierarchy of Humans Needs, which was incidentally
drive the development of that great oak. developed through observation of rhesus monkeys. Maslow’s Hierarchy postulates
five Needs: (1) Material Needs, (2) Safety and Security Needs, (3) Social or Belonging
Assumption 2 : Human Beings have Needs Needs, (4) Self Respect and (5) Self-Actualisation. There are, however,
inconsistencies in Maslow’s Hierarchy: the hierarchy does not systematically or
Human beings are undoubtedly biological creatures, as any other animal, plant or consistently address the physical and mental aspects of the human condition.
other organism. To this end, they clearly have some fundamental needs in order to Furthermore Maslow notably ignored any consideration of an organism’s need to
survive. Water and food is required on a daily basis. As biological systems, they need remain healthy or driving desire to reproduce.
to be able to grow from infant to adult. For the species to survive, human beings (once
Assumption 3 : Human Beings are both social and
Maslow’s Original individual
More consistent adaptation of Maslow’s Hierarchy
Hierarchy
In the field of sociology, it is finally coming to be accepted
Hierarchy Level Biological Needs Psychological Needs Social Needs that human beings cannot be purely understood in terms of
1 Material Needs Energy / Materials Experiences Presence of Others their individuality or their sociality. To understand humans
properly, their individual nature and their social animal
Safety / Security tendencies need to be embraced simultaneously. One of the
2 Safety Security Predictability in Others
Needs best historic frameworks, which brings together this approach
Physical Health / is Karl Popper’s Objective Theory of Knowledge, in which he
Social / Belonging Mental Health / Dependability Of describes the human experience through his Three World’s
3 Biological
Needs Cultural Reproduction Others Theorem: the human as a biological animal, the human in his
Reproduction
own mind and the human in a social world.
Self-Respect / Self- Consideration by
4 Autonomy Locus of Control
Esteem Others Bringing together Maslow’s Hierarchy with the tripartite
Recognition from human, a much more consistent Needs framework can be
5 Self-Actualisation Environmental Control Success formulated.
Others

Page 11 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

BUILDING BLOCKS Building Block 2 : Tempers of Interaction – competition or cooperation

There are three basic building blocks, which underpin the theory of social interaction: The second proposition of the theory of social interaction is to suggest that human
beings can choose to cooperate or compete in the physical world in order to enable
1. Needs motivate action leading to five Ideal Types of interaction them to meet their individual needs at each level of the hierarchy: for example, human
2. Human Beings can choose to cooperate or compete with others to satisfy beings can fight over or share food. Or, another example, human beings can threaten
personal Needs each other’s safety or work together for mutual benefit (say, building a security fence).
3. Action / interaction to satisfy a Need represents a process
Looking specifically at Material Needs and how humans cooperate or compete with
Building Block 1 : The Emergence of Ideal Types of Interaction respect to food resources, it can quickly be seen that the manner of cooperation, which
takes place in modern civilised society, is very different to that which happened in our
If it is acknowledged that human beings have fundamental Needs, then it is a tribal past. This has led to the realisation that there are two fundamentally different
reasonable immediate deduction that those Needs motivate our actions in the real ways in which competition and cooperation can occur (Active or Passive). This
world. However, human beings live in highly social contexts, where any action that we enabled formulation of the Tempers of Interaction provided in the table below.
each individually initiate almost invariably leads to interaction with other human beings.
With a little further thought, it can quickly be recognised that the types of interaction,
which might arise, would be very different according to which Need is driving an action. Tempers of Interaction Passive Active
How a human interacts in modern society with another to obtain food (for example:
purchasing sweets and drink from a shop) is very different to the manner of interaction Competition Acting Individually Taking
required to raise off-spring. Buying, for example, is instantaneous, repeated regularly (Latent Competition)
and may happen with a different person each time (many shops to choose from).
Rearing children, on the other hand, is (or should be) a long process of continuous
engagement with a single other human being (mother and father). Cooperation Exchanging Sharing

Within the history of sociology, there is a


1. Material Interaction precedent for thinking of social actions in The notion of different tempers of interaction is most explicit in relation to human
2. Labour Interaction discrete ways. Max Weber developed the material needs: sharing or exchanging of the sourcing of food. However, these
3. Nurture Interaction notion of the Ideal Type of Social Action, in tempers apply equally for all the identified Ideal Types of Social Interaction. It should
which he suggested that, underlying the further be clarified that in each case the sharing and exchanging tempers apply to the
4. Mobility Interaction messiness of everyday life, every single sourcing of something. For instance, two humans sharing the source of some food (a
5. Success Interaction action can theoretically be broken down fruit tree or an animal kill, for example). In the exchange context, they would swap
into Ideal Type components. The theory of apples for pears or trade meats killed in different hunting grounds. In both tempers of
social interaction transforms this notion from social action into social interaction. The cooperation, they do not share or exchange the food itself, but the source. In the case
idea is that each interaction a human being has with another can be construed to be of two humans seeking safety and security, they can share or exchange in the source
made up from five Ideal Types of Social Interaction, where people enter into of increased safety and security, provided from some form of exerted effort: for this
interactions in order to satisfy their own Needs. In the real world, some interactions Level 2 interaction, sharing manifests as both doing the same work (using same learnt
(for example purchasing food) may be purer than others. Other social interactions skills, same past experience), whereas exchange represents division of labour
may combine several different Ideal Types at the same time, because the interacting (different experiences brought together).
parties are seeking simultaneously to satisfy several different
Needs: two people may share a pot of tea, while exchanging Weber’s Ideal Type In more detail, for two people to share in the source of a particular food, they are both
useful information or nurturing each other’s mental health. Social Actions:
relying entirely on the health and productivity of, say, a single fruit tree. For the same
- affectual
Detailed consideration of these Needs-driven-interactions, - traditional two people to exchange the sourcing of food infers that one is bringing to the
these Ideal Types of Social Interaction, will be provided later. - zweckrational exchange fruit from one tree and the other fruit from another tree. They are therefore
- wertrational not both wholly reliant on the health of a single tree. Reverting back to the comment

Page 12 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

earlier about the comparison between human tribal history and modern society, it can As with all positive feedback processes, there is the potential for these social
quickly be appreciated that all the members of a tribe shared the food from within their processes to accelerate out of control. The control mechanism, which stops each
bounded tribal territory: a single source of food. In contrast, through exchange in process from spinning society to self-destruction is the interplay between the five
modern society each of us has effectively spread our risk to many geographical areas: social processes. We experience this in our daily lives through the choices we make
many sources of food. in relation to, for example, work-life balance: how much time to dedicate to work
verses time given to family and friends. When, say, a whole society becomes
Cooperation Competition If the theory of social interaction workaholics, then a culture has become unbalanced.
were to be valid, it would be
expected that the duality of
Good Evil cooperation verses competition Needs-driven-
Light Dark would be deeply embedded in
Interaction
human cultures. It is. These
Right Wrong
Yin Yang
tempers of interaction are …
represented by human notions of
as a Process NEED
Life Death good and evil, light and dark,
yang and yin, altruism and
Altruistic Selfish selfishness.
ACTION /
When interactions become scaled up to social processes, then the tempers of
INTERACTION YES
interaction come to be expressed as modes of operation of a process. For example,
two nation states, which are terrorising each other, experience the Growth Process
(Level 2) in competitive mode between them, but in cooperative mode within each
society. A business based on all individuals doing the same work would be operating
in cooperative sharing mode, whereas a business drawing on division of labour is HAPPY?
operating in cooperative exchange mode.

Building Block 3 : Social Interaction is a Process


NO
The activity of fulfilling Needs can be construed to be a process:

 A human being senses that he or she has a Need;


 He or she acts (usually interacts) to seek to fulfil that Need;
Useful Terminology
 He or she feels a sense of accomplishment (happiness); and
 Next time the Need arises, he or she draws on the recent positive experience and Level – any reference to Level, whether to interactions or processes,
repeats. derives from the adapted Needs hierarchy.

It can immediately be seen that this is a feedback process, where if actions are Temper – interactions can be cooperative or competitive, active or passive
successful they reinforce behaviours on next recurrence of Need. A successful
interaction with another person to help meet a perceived Need will likely motivate the Mode – nature of social process, depending upon underlying social
first human to seek to repeat this particular interaction, whether with the same other or interactions
another. As the full theory of social interaction emerges, it becomes apparent that
these self-reinforcing processes at the individual level develop into full positive
feedback processes in the social context.

Page 13 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

BASIC STRUCTURE OF THEORY OF SOCIAL INTERACTION DETAILED INTERACTION PROCESS

The theory of social interaction is based on a simple framework: Drawing on the assumptions and building blocks, a detailed interaction process can be
constructed.
 Human beings have Needs (five), which require fulfilment in order to be happy
(happiness interpreted in its broadest sense).  There are (as a minimum) six detailed components involved in any interaction
from the perspective of an individual involved in an interaction: Need, Focus,
 The Needs motivate action in the physical world, thereby forcing interaction Ethos, Form, Event and Response (see next page for further definition of
with others. This gives rise to Needs-driven-interactions. components).
 Each Need leads to a different type of interaction, creating a set of five Ideal Types
of interaction. All interactions with other people can be interpreted as a
combination of Ideal Types. 1. NEED
 Needs-driven-(inter)actions are processes, where experienced happiness (in
different guises) is an indicator of success.
 Interactions can be cooperative or competitive. Only cooperative interactions
are mutually beneficial: these can manifest as sharing or exchanging.
 An interaction can be broken down into components (minimum of six), starting 6. RESPONSE 2. FOCUS
with Need and ending in happiness or sadness (details provided next).

x5
 Successful interactions become reinforcing on repetition. Experienced
happiness provides the feedback mechanism to make actions and interactions
reinforcing.
 Interactions can become self-serving, by-passing the Need stage. This generates
Wants.
 Successful interactions propagate outwards across a social unit through
processes
emulation and communication. 5. EVENT 3. ETHOS
 Social interactions also take place between social units – between families,
between businesses, between nation states.
 Once an Ideal Type of interaction has spread beyond a pair interaction to
encompass a wider group of people or social units, it can be considered to have
become a social process. Five Ideal Types of interaction generate five pure 4. FORM
Social Processes.
 A social process is inherently a positive feedback system. Each social process
generates within a social unit, or between social units, a developmental tension.
 Development of a society takes place in a progressive manner when the tensions  Being a cyclic process, the actual sequence of components is a little arbitrary
created by the social processes are in balance. When social processes become and, in fact, matters little. In certain respects, all steps could be construed to take
unbalanced, then a society can quickly become self-destructive. place simultaneously.
 An individual’s exposure to the different social processes will strongly influence
how they perceive the world, their attitudes, beliefs and the way they come to treat  For each identified component, there are different elements, each of which has a
other people and the animate and inanimate world and how they individually physical and mental aspect. The first element represents the actual physical or
prioritise satisfaction of their personal Needs. mental Experience of the individual; this may precede the interaction. For
example, a Level 2 Need may be experienced as either need for Security (mental)

Page 14 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

or need for Safety (physical) or both. As an interaction takes place, there arises a I NEED This is the felt or perceived Need by the individual, which in some
Consequence to the individual involved. The Consequence of a successful Level N way requires fulfilment or resolution. (Needs can extend into
2 interaction would be that the individual is physically safer and mentally less T Wants when the interaction process becomes self-serving.)
stressed. E
R FOCUS This is the focus of attention and physical action of the
Interaction Elements A individual while the Need still requires satisfying (for example,
C while I am hungry, I focus on obtaining food).
T ETHOS This relates to the required behaviour and attitude necessary for
Experience Consequence Social Animal I an individual to initiate and enable and complete a successful
A A A O interaction with another human being.
S physical S physical S physical N
P P P FORM This corresponds to the manner in which an interaction takes
E E E C place in time and space (is it instantaneous or does it occur over
C mental C mental C mental O a discrete timespan and does it require spatial proximity?).
T T T M EVENT Each interaction gives rise to an economic outcome in the
P physical universe (an object exchanging hands, work completed,
O health maintained or information shared), which we observe.
 The Social Animal in physical terms represents the sum total of the physical N
Experiences of and Consequences for an individual for all components of each E RESPONSE If an interaction is successful, a person feels happy: if
interaction and across all five Ideal Types of interaction. This is the Outward N unsuccessful, sad. The nature of the happiness depends upon
Expression of a Person (expressed behaviour, physical form, seen to be happy T the Ideal Type of interaction.
or sad, etc).

 The Social Animal in mental terms represents the sum total of the mental We experience the social processes in our day-to-day lives in terms of the daily choices
Experiences of and Consequences for an individual for all components of each we have to make:
interaction and across all five Ideal Types of interaction. This is the Inner Identity
of a Person (perceptions, attitudes, personal narrative, etc).  Life-work balance – how much time and effort do I spend at work or at home?

 The consequence of the exposure to interactions on who we each are (identities,  Spend or save – how much money do I spend today verses how much should I
perceptions, attitudes, personal experience of time and space, physical condition, save for a rainy day or for the more distant future?
beliefs and ideologies) begin from before we are born and first start interacting
with other human beings. We each have an initial bias, according to the Five  Rationality, Legality or Morality – which, or which combination, of these should
Factor Model (nature), which is influenced through our lives by our social inform my actions?
conditioning (nurture). By early adulthood, the outcome of this nature/nurture
interaction has taken its course and produces a human with fairly fixed attitudes, In the context of the theory of social interaction:
beliefs, etc, which strongly inform our experiences from then onwards.
 Rationality represents acting in the present for immediate, optimal benefit without
any consideration of the past or future

To be social a human must be an individual.  Legality equates to abiding by rules and regulations, which have been put in place
To become an individual, a human must be social. in the past and represent maintenance of the status quo

 Morality infers consideration of the long-term future implications of one’s actions


for one’s own and other’s future health and well-being

Page 15 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10
Generic Structure of a Social Process

Physical Expression of Inner Identity of a Person as Social Society


a Person Person Animal

Need Biological Need Psychological Need Comparison to Others Interpretation of Success


in Society

Focus Focus of Activity Focus of Attention Perception of Role of Cultural ways of thinking
Others and Self about others

Ethos Behaviour Attitude Treatment of Cultural ways of treating


Others and Self others

Form Physical and Temporal Experience of Perception of Social Structures


Form of Interaction Space and Time Space and Time

Event Physical Outcome Observation Social Identity / Self- Economic Activity


Characterisation

Response Emotional State Narrative Ethic Ideology

Happiness leads to repetition of interaction Reinforced through Reinforced through


Sadness leads to search for new type of interaction Repetition Propagation

Page 16 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

EXAMPLE – LEVEL 2 : GROWTH PROCESS ARISING FROM LABOUR INTERACTIONS

GROWTH Physical Expression of Inner Identity of a Person as Social Society


a Person Person Animal

Need Biological Need Psychological Need Comparison to Others Interpretation of Success


in Society
Unsafe Insecure Relative level of security Power and wealth

Focus Focus of Activity Focus of Attention Perception of Role of Cultural ways of thinking
Others and Self about others
Labour required Activity that needs doing Opportunity to provide skills Focus on personal history
What skills are needed? to achieve task

Ethos Behaviour Attitude Treatment of Cultural ways of treating


Others and Self others
Predictable Trusting Coded and regulated Expectation of rule abiding
Judgemental Strong codes of conduct

Form Physical and Temporal Experience of Perception of Social Structures


Form of Interaction Space and Time Space and Time
Correlated in space Space = linked / fixed Space = structured Strict / brittle membership
Time bound Time = on/off/on/off/on/off Time = defined organisations

Event Physical Outcome Observation Social Identity / Self- Economic Activity


Characterisation
Physical structures built Activity / efficiency is good Worker, labourer Growth / Expansion
Materials combined Accumulation is good Output maximisation Manufacturing economy

Response Emotional State Narrative Ethic Ideology

Re-assured / unstressed Hard working / strong Legality Socialism (structuralism)


Safer / securer Must not be weak (rules are important) Legalistic

Page 17 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10
FEEDBACK: The more that individuals have to follow rules and regulations, the more
they desire to extend rules to other people and other circumstances. Rules impel an
EXAMPLE – LEVEL 2 : GROWTH PROCESS ARISING FROM LABOUR INTERACTIONS expectation of security and predictability, which drive a desire for more rules.

EXPERIENCE CONSEQUENCE SOCIAL ANIMAL CULTURE


I sense danger and perceive a threat to I feel unsafe and insecure. I would like I compare myself to others in terms of Society sees people who are self-
NEED maintaining my safety, security and to feel more certain about the my degree of sense of security / assured, with strong sense of security
current standard of living. immediate future and be assured that I insecurity and whether they seem to be and safety, to be successful. This is
survive (maintain my standard of living) more secure than me or not. That in usually provided by position in social
into and beyond tomorrow. I want to part informs the degree to which I feel hierarchy and, in modern day, in terms
defend what I already have. secure (relative to others). of monetary wealth (or equivalent).
Improving my safety and security for For any mutual labour interaction, I am I learn to see other people in terms of Society develops a strong focus on the
FOCUS tomorrow requires action (labour) today looking for other people with similar their past, what skills and abilities they past, seeking to look for historic trends
– build a fence, repair the front door, security/safety needs, who also wish to have developed over time. I come to which support the continuation of the
work diligently to earn an income, sign secure the immediate future. Since see myself likewise. The past immediate future. The further a society
a contract to secure a workstream, etc. actions require skills, I come to look for becomes important to me; it defines looks into the past, the better it feels
This requires certain skills to achieve others with the right skills and abilities me; it provides me with a sense of able to foresee and control the near
the right actions. to contribute to satisfying my Need. security going forwards. future.
To enter into a labour interaction with When people around me, on whom I I come to be a predictable and Society becomes very predictable, with
ETHOS another human, I need that other to be am relying to help provide for my safety trustworthy person, who has the people adopting very clear and
predictable for the duration of the and security needs, prove to be capacity to trust others. I also develop understandable dress codes (uniforms)
interaction, to be trusted to contribute predictable, then I learn to trust them, the ability to trust myself (self-trusted = and adopting precise codes of conduct.
their agreed input into the contract expect them to continue to be self-assured). I behave very There is a general expectation of
(whether written or not). I too must act predictable. They are treating me predictably in all circumstances in regulated behaviour and for people to
predictably to them. likewise. which I find myself (dress code, etc). act trustworthily.
Labour interactions have precise My life is structured according to action I expect to work hard and rest – full on Society becomes very structured both
FORM beginnings and ends (building a wall or and inaction (working and time-off). My and then full off. There is no in- in time (for example, working day,
completing a contract). They are time relationships with others are strictly between. Things are clearly black and working week, holidays) and space
bound. Relationships between correlated. I therefore come to see white (trusted or not trusted, working (social bonds, social organisation and
interacting parties is strictly correlated both time and space as being clearly hard or slacking). I can push myself clearly defined property rights and
in physical space (sharing mode) or structured and well-defined. very hard because I expect to be able delineation of territory). It is a very
social space (exchange mode). to rest some time later. legalistic culture of right and wrong.
Work is done or contract is signed to I see physical activity happening and I I am a hard working individual. I focus The sum total of all contracts
EVENT ensure that individuals work together to am involved in that activity. I come to my energy on achieving outputs and represents the labour economy. The
achieve a pre-defined output or associate achieving and satisfying my maximising production, being efficient sum total of all labour activity gives rise
physical actions (eg. build a bridge). security and safety needs with activity and delivering contracted to the manufacturing, construction and
Physical actions happen and work is and with being linked into strong requirements. I must maximise my other aspects of the growth economy.
done. contractual relationships with others. activity. There is a drive for growth/expansion.
I am happy because I feel assured. My I can see that being involved in labour Working hard with other people Society needs rules and regulations to
RESPONSE sense of safety and security is interactions and delivering outputs is requires everyone to be predictable. I enable growth of that society. There is
improved through interaction with other something that makes me feel happy. therefore come to expect everyone to a pervasive culture of increasing
people. I am less stressed than I was This must mean that working hard is be law and rule abiding and myself regulation and structure to society,
at the outset. This feels good. I would good for people generally. If they feel likewise. Rules and regulations are infusing more and more of people’s
like to repeat this sensation. sad, they should work hard. good for everyone. lives.

Page 18 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

EXAMPLE – LEVEL 4 : ADAPTATION PROCESS ARISING OUT OF MOBILITY INTERACTIONS

ADAPTATION Physical Expression of Inner Identity of a Person as Social Society


a Person Person Animal

Need Biological Need Psychological Need Comparison to Others Interpretation of Success


in Society
Immobile Frustrated Relative level of influence Upwardly mobile/connected
Lack of autonomy Political influence

Focus Focus of Activity Focus of Attention Perception of Role of Cultural ways of thinking
Others and Self about others
To obtain relevant, Filtering information Sources of information Actors / role players
accurate information Independent operators

Ethos Behaviour Attitude Treatment of Cultural ways of treating


Others and Self others
Inclusive Respect Considerate, consultative Need to be consulted
Obliging, respectful Seeking opinions

Form Physical and Temporal Experience of Perception of Social Structures


Form of Interaction Space and Time Space and Time
No proximity Combined space-time Vectors – past, present, Decision-making systems
Relative mobility future all at once Elections, voting

Event Physical Outcome Observation Social Identity / Self- Economic Activity


Characterisation
Decision made Change happening Decision-maker Communications economy
Course of action taken Change is okay “mover and shaker” Information economy

Response Emotional State Narrative Ethic Ideology

Informed Being involved and involving Inclusivity Sustainability


Locus of control others is good Accessibility Democracy

Page 19 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10
FEEDBACK: As people become socially mobile, this causes the social
landscape to become a constant changing tableau, which forces all individuals
EXAMPLE – LEVEL 4 : ADAPTATION PROCESS ARISING OUT OF MOBILITY INTERACTIONS to need more information to make decisions. Change is the norm.

EXPERIENCE CONSEQUENCE SOCIAL ANIMAL CULTURE


I see that events happening around me I feel the need for greater autonomy in I compare myself to others in terms of Society sees people who are informed
NEED are not optimal for myself or my family. my decision-making. I want to make their level of knowledge and degree of and who have a strong degree of
We do not seem to be able to influence decisions for myself and my family, informed-ness. This helps me to influence as being most successful.
them. which benefit us across all our Needs. decide whether I know enough or need This drives people continually to want
I need to change my circumstances to learn and assimilate more. How to know about more and more:
and improve my prospects. much do I/they have control over information hunger.
respective destinies?
To achieve my objective to have I am looking for people with the I learn to see other people as sources Information comes to be seen as very
FOCUS greater autonomy, I need information. I necessary information to help me do of information or signposts to direct me important in society. This morphs into
need to know more to be able to decide what I want to do. Other people are to the right information. I therefore see more and more focus on the validity
what to do, what moves to make, the principal source of information. I people in terms of what they know and and veracity of information and
when. I need information about the am looking who can provide me with what mental skills they have. I come to information sources. Truth is critical.
social and physical worlds around me. the right information. see myself in a similar way. Lying is severely looked down on.
I want others to tell me what they know In acting inclusively and involving In treating others with respect, I come A culture of being more consultative
ETHOS and involve me in decision-making, to others in decisions, I come to to be more respectful to myself, to propagates across society, with an
be transparent. In order to persuade appreciate their entire needs and their recognise my entire needs. I come to increasing expectation of transparency
others to tell me the truth, I have to objectives. This forces me to develop operate in a more balanced way. I and collective decision-making, which
behave likewise – to be inclusive. I an attitude of respect towards others. extend my respect to other humans to benefits everyone, not just the few.
have to tell the truth. all things (animate and inanimate).
Information interactions are Information, transmitted over distance, I sense things in balance, seeing past, Information travels through society; its
FORM instantaneous. Sharing interactions provides me with spatial awareness present and future simultaneously. I progress represents a trajectory
require spatial proximity, but exchange and sense of the progress of time. make more balanced decisions around through time and space. It gives
interactions (reliant on being truthful) Information itself has a trajectory, all my Needs. I see the universe as people social mobility through society
can operate at a distance. which I can use to give me a trajectory. vectors and relative motion. and in physical terms.
Information is exchanged. Those involved in information I am an informed individual about my The sum total of information exchange
EVENT Communication happens, which in exchange are better able to make good social and physical environment. I am gives rise to the communications and
exchange mode can influence activities decisions about their actions and self-aware about my situation in information technology economies.
in all locations around the globe. In direction of travel in physical and social physical world and role in society. I There is a drive to increase flows of
exchange mode, accurate information space. Decisions made are more have self-respect. I rely on information. information and continuously improve
flows outwards across society respecting of all those affected. its accuracy.
I am happy because I feel I am now I see that obtaining information feels I am a consultative person, who keeps Society develops systems for collective
RESPONSE better informed. I do not feel excluded good. By extrapolation other people others in the loop and includes them in decision-making, for disseminating
from what is happening around me. In must feel good about receiving decision-making. Compromises on my information and for ensuring accuracy
fact, I feel that I can influence things accurate information. Consulting part often end up being the better of information. Society is hungry for
and have a role and part to play. people, telling the truth and keeping solution for everyone. Freedom of more information and, as it learns
them informed is a good thing. information is essential for society. about its environment, it comes to be
more respectful of that environment.

Page 20 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
MANIFESTATION OF THE SOCIAL PROCESSES IN CITY FORM Growth Process – Constructed City

The five social processes have determined the manner of growth and development of The emergence of cooperation in
human cities from the outset. They have defined the physical expression of human growth across an entire city arises
societies in terms of population distribution across the geographic landscape, as when labour type activities have
patterns of human activity and through the physical form and structure of our towns become sufficiently differentiated within
and cities. They have led to critical changes in city form, which have thereafter been a local economy that erstwhile
continually reinforced through operation of the social processes to produce the cities competition can morph into
around the world that we know today. Whilst every town and city is different in cooperation. For example, previously
physical form, economic character and social constitution, every town and city has competing manufacturer’s products
been affected and developed in the same way. Just as every human being is different, diverge and then can come together to
we all experience the same biological processes as we grow and mature. create more complex products with
greater added value.
The development of all cities has manifest as a sequence of symmetry breaks.
This cooperation is facilitated by a Symmetry break = circumferential cooperation and
Birth Process – Trading City radial slow cultural transition to a
roads associated physical structures (eg chord roads,
common set of rules across a city city walls, definition of city state territory, etc)
Cities originated from a transition society. This allows previously
in the geographic landscape, market competing family units and urban clans (think, for example, in terms of large Mafiosi
whereby latent or active place families) to begin to cooperate for the benefit of the entire city. The consequence is
competition between human tribes that a city can begin to act as a coherent system to defend itself from danger (human
for the sourcing of material or natural) and grow itself. The physical expression of this is that the city society can
switched over to instant now cooperate in the construction of the entire city – to build city infrastructure, city
cooperation, expressed as trade. walls, etc.
This changed the human condition
from a landscape of competing This manifests in city form as the emergence of circumferential cooperation
Symmetry breaks:
tribes to a landscape of nodal (orthogonal to the radial cooperation under the Birth Process). Operating together, it
1) exchange node within landscape
centres of trading activity between can be seen that the Birth Process and Growth Process create the spiderweb city
2) central exchange node within city arising
rural populations of tribal origin. structure, where at increasing distance from the centre such structure more and more
from radial cooperation (inner / outer city)
approximates the classic gridiron structure.
The Birth Process revolves around the activity of trade. To this end it is not surprising
that it represents the driver behind the creation of all market places, where the majority Anecdotally, the gridiron structure of many American cities arose because this was the
of goods are exchanged between the city and the wider world, before onward simplest structural form to enable rapid growth. In space syntax terms, the spiderweb
dissemination into and through the city. The physical expression of this Process is and gridiron represent the most accessible and permeable urban structures, allowing
consequently market places themselves, nodes of exchange activity, from historic maximum level of internal cooperation across the city society in terms of combined
market centres for cities to modern retail malls. Automatically associated with market trading and manufacturing activity.
places are the radial road networks into and out of the city and the patterning of trade
routes to connect the city to its hinterland and other cities. In the city, these radial Health Process – Public City
routes represent cooperation in trading activity between the inner and outer parts of
the city. Before the Health Process becomes expressed at a city-wide level, while cooperation
with respect to health and nurture is contained within the extended family and localised
The Birth Process is the living force, which keeps a successful city thriving, making it racial community, then the physical expression is a need for enclosed space. This can
act like a centre of gravitation within the human landscape. most easily be understood in terms of the space required by extended families for the
nurturing and rearing of off-spring and for health, recreation and relaxation of the adult
population. Typically such space must provide privacy and be ‘made safe’ for children.
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

It should in some way be contained. As a city Process has begun to influence the whole of society, there develop innumerable
population grows, then nurture competition different social hierarchies up which people can climb (countless numbers of
becomes expressed as direct competition for businesses, charitable organisations, government bodies and departments, etc).
physical space. When there are so many different ways in which people can gain social mobility, then
they can begin to cooperate in their real, physical autonomy. This cooperation is
Divergence of nurturing activities (for expressed in terms of the emergence of public transport systems.
example, smaller family units where use of
space varies significantly over time as With the Adaptation Process driving a proliferation of separately operating
children grow and mature and leave the organisational structures within society, this manifests in city form in terms of the
household) leads to the potential for reinforcement and accentuation of nodes of activity. As the autonomy interaction of
cooperation in use of space. The transition to exchange allows cooperative interactions to take place at a distance, the result is that
Symmetry break = the emergence of a city-wide (or part of the city-wide) intra and city centres can split leading to the polycentric city now observed in some of the
public buildings and public space (other inter community cooperation is expressed in largest metropolis (for example, the City and Canary Wharf in London). These multiple
than road network) terms of the emergence of communal use of centres then become competing entities with respect to the Transformation Process.
space, other than roads. This includes public
buildings, such as churches, hospitals and schools, as well as open space itself Transformation Process – Sustainable City
(communal gardens, public squares and public parks). Naturally, as is now known in
urban design theory, there will be a hierarchy of different types of public space, from The following is a little tentative. It is possible that the polycentres of the advanced
the intimate shared garden to the city-wide public park, or local community hall, democratic metropolis diverge in their activities until such a time that they can begin to
doctors surgery and nursery school to cathedral, major hospital and university. cooperate. The result would be the emergence of the polyfunctional city, which has
many sub-centres, each of which manifests a different function and purpose for the
The cultural transition, which facilitates the appearance of cooperation in nurture, is the benefit of the whole city. The analogy is that the city is turning into a genuine
emergence of a common moral fabric to society. This was historically seen through organism, with different organs and spatially separated specialist components.
religion, but more recently can be understood in terms of a loosely defined morality
spanning the whole of society and the formation of associated society-wide health, Progress to the
education and social support systems. sustainable city, in
which the
Adaptation Process – Transformation
Connected City Process is
operating in
Competition in autonomy is cooperative
expressed within society in exchange mode
terms of individuals across the entire
competing to improve city, is still a
themselves and to climb the distant prospect
ladders of the various from where we are
hierarchies within society. In now.
simpler social systems, such
as autocracies and
communist states, there are
relatively few social
the poly-functional
hierarchies to climb, so there
city
is intense competition. But
in advance economies, Symmetry break = the emergence of
where the Adaptation internally competing nodal centres and
Page 22 of 51 public transport systems © Julian Hart
jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

APPLICATION TO THE MODERN BUSINESS rules being broken. Whilst the future of the company may be assured, it may fail to
keep its essential cash flow going and meet its short-term expenditure.
BIRTH PROCESS

This Process creates the life-spirit of the company, its thirst to survive through each
day and night, taking each 24 hours as it comes. It provides that burning focus on ADAPTATION PROCESS
daily cash flow, drawing in an income and paying essential expenses. But if the
culture associated with this process comes to dominate then rules (internal and This Process provides the organisation with its senses, seeing beyond its immediate
external) will be broken, values ignored and customers will be fleeced, all for the sake relationships, its existing customers and stakeholders, to observe the currents and
of immediate income and foregoing long-term relationships and the future health fluctuations in its own wider market place and the economy as a whole. It gives
of the business. the organisation the ability to take in and digest data and correctly
interpret what that information means and how best to react. It
enables the organisation to take decisions as a singular,
operating entity, bringing all staff along with those decisions
GROWTH PROCESS made. But if this process becomes overly dominant, the
organisation will find itself making too many decisions,
This Process forms the bureaucratic back-bone of the reacting to the slightest change in the wider world,
business, providing it with the structural integrity to adapting itself so often that it loses its ability to drive
withstand day-to-day fluctuations in cash flow and forwards and deliver outputs and services. It may
resilience to a constantly changing social and even become indecisive, paralysed from information
economic environment. It provides the The overload.
organisational hierarchy, down which instructions
are passed, and enables creation of both the Modern
internal rules of the company and the ability to
follow and abide by externally generated rules in
Business TRANSFORMATION PROCESS
society. It gives the organisation its own unique
codes of conduct. But if the culture of this process This Process provides the organisation with the ability
becomes too dominant, then the company will to be creative and to take advantage of such creativity.
become bogged down in its own internally generated It allows the business, as an entity, to see and to realise
bureaucratic red-tape. It will lose its ability to adapt to transformative products and services, which will change
change and to grasp new opportunities. It will become the whole market place to its own benefit.
stuck in its own past, oblivious to a changing world.
There exist at present creative individuals within companies, but
the truly creative organisation is a rarity. In these few businesses
everyone contributes to the creative endeavour and everyone benefits
HEALTH PROCESS from the subsequent and consequent successes.

This Process provides the organisation with its long-term outlook, its vision which As to what happens, if this process comes to dominate, we have little collective
transcends day-to-day and month-to-month trials and tribulations. It gives the experience. It may give rise to an organisation, which is so full of new and
organisation the ability to focus on those details, which ensure that products and transformative ideas that it is unable to capitalise on any one of them, to push them
services are of a high quality, delivering exactly what the customer really needs. It through and make them happen. Or, alternatively, if too much success is shared out
gives the organisation the capacity to really focus on the customer and to build up amongst the staff, they might each gain freedom beyond the business and choose to
long-term relationships. But if this Process comes to dominate, the company may fail leave, causing the business entity to dissipate, while its erstwhile employees leave to
to maintain its own cash flow and might lose its own structural integrity: ends may explore new avenues.
become seen to justify the means, leading to new opportunities being missed and
Page 23 of 51 © Julian Hart
jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

EXPRESSION OF THE FIVE PROCESSES IN NATURAL EVOLUTION most important for the lion is to be able to cooperate with fellow lions in the activity of
obtaining food: hunting. Failure to cooperate pits lone lion against cheetah, where the
Application of the theory of social interaction to the biological world suggests that the lion’s chances are not high. Competition between lions then moves up to higher
development of all natural systems is driven by these five underlying processes of levels, to growth (for males) and reproduction (for females). The division of labour that
Birth, Growth, Health, Adaptation and Transformation. Evolution takes place through a female lions express in hunting indicates that they have learnt to cooperate to a
continual interplay between cooperation and competition in the survival needs of all degree at Level 2.
living systems. Charles Darwin saw a world of natural selection; but he only identified
the competition ‘side of the equation’. This new framework suggests that there is also The conclusion from this way of thinking is that species drive their own evolution. Yes,
natural selection for the best cooperators. natural selection and environmental conditions have a strong part in the process. But
the strongest driver for any individual species to progress is the internal factors of
The cooperative aspect to evolution only makes sense, however, once it has been cooperation and competition between members of the same species. Taking these
appreciated that both competition and cooperation are ‘banded’ into survival needs. observations on-board and drawing from the theory of social interaction framework, the
following predictions can be made:
Level 1 cooperation or competition for access to food, material resources and daily
energy requirements  evolutionary spikes are anticipated, where some species appear to ‘sprint
Level 2 cooperation or competition in growth of systems and ability to withstand ahead’ of others in terms of development (as observed for human beings);
fluctuations in energy availability (safety and security)  competition in one ‘band’ (at one Level) can become dominant, leading to
Level 3 cooperation or competition to maintain health in order to be able seeming evolutionary oddities (for example, the dinosaurs arose out of a
successfully to replicate or reproduce domination of competition and cooperation in relation to growth);
Level 4 cooperation or competition in terms of adaptation, including ability to be  because operation of the Growth and Health Processes represent continual
mobile (to adapt location) reinforcement of different types of structure, it can be expected that both
Level 5 cooperation or competition in terms of (essentially) technological species and ecosystems would generally undergo very slow change;
development or innovation, finding new survival strategies  periods of slow change would be interspersed with events of rapid change,
when structural stability broke down (this entirely concords with Stephen
This leads to changes in our understanding of how evolution operates. It becomes Gould’s concept of punctuated equilibrium); and
apparent that the typically conceived competition, say cheetahs verses gazelles, is  this new framework provides a better way to appreciate the difference
actually only a mild driver of development. The cheetah/gazelle scenario is in fact between ecosystems and organisms (organisms arise from internal
Fourth Order competition. However competition between cheetahs is First Order cooperation, whereas ecosystems are the landscape of competition).
(Level 1) competition, whereas the competition between gazelles to use speed as a
defence mechanism is Second Order (Level 2) competition. Gazelles do not directly This new framework also shines light on a topical debate: the organism verses gene
compete at Level 1 as they have evolved to eat in a herd, sourcing food as a group. relationship. Day-to-day natural selection takes place between organisms seeking to
obtain sufficient energy and nutrients to survive (Level 1 or First Order
This new framework makes it quickly apparent that intra-(within)-species competition is competition/cooperation). Competition in terms of reproduction and continuation of the
a far more powerful driver of evolution than inter-(between)-species competition. For genetic lineage represents “Third Order” competition. As seen for human
the cheetah, the real competition is between cheetahs: who can accelerate and run development, these different “Orders” of competition (or cooperation) create
fastest to obtain dinner? The cheetah is no more competing with the gazelle than are developmental or evolutionary tensions within the overall system. If either come to
you with the potato you dig up for your supper. The most intense form of competition dominate, then a species is likely eventually doomed. A balanced tension is good.
(Level 1) is to obtain daily food. The fiercest competitor to any individual organism
(animal or plant) is others of the same species, who require exactly the same energy The theory of social interaction can be extended further into the physical sciences,
sources from the environment. In the right circumstances that competition can flip into where the Birth Process is seen to correspond directly with the concept of entropy.
cooperation: lone cheetah compared to lion pride. Once cooperation emerges, such However, this requires a subtle reinterpretation of entropy, to become understood as a
as the lions, then evolutionary forces change. The cheetah competes against measure for (or proxy of) competition within a system. The Second Law of
everything, including its own off-spring, who are fairly quickly sent off to fend for Thermodynamics can then be seen to be a process by which systems naturally
themselves. In contrast, for the lion there arise a different set of selection forces. The progress to a state of competitive equilibrium. However, this reinterpretation of
entropy has far reaching consequences to our understanding of the universe.
Page 24 of 51 © Julian Hart
jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

SUMMARY : EVOLUTION OF HUMAN CIVILISATION

SIM
Tribe
Original Tribal SIM
Landscape Bureaurcracy
MATRIX SIM
Peace Community

MATRIX SIM
Trust Modern Business

MATRIX
Value
Market Places MATRIX
Truth
Trading City with Supply Chains
central core
Constructed City Supply Cycles

Public City Decision Systems

Connected City

Page 25 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

APPENDICES

Page 26 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

BIRTH PROCESS cooperative and participative in these instantaneous interactions as being most
successful. They become rewarded accordingly through financial success.
The Birth Process is driven by human daily material and experiential needs. As with
all the processes it manifests in two modes: (1) Sharing Temper and (2) Exchanging For both modes of the Birth Process, the behaviours and emergent attitudes are the
Temper. A modern day example of these two modes in operation is that within the same. To facilitate either sharing or exchanging interactions, an individual must act
nuclear family we share material needs (food and money), but outside of the family peacefully (non-threateningly) towards others. This develops within the individual an
unit we exchange material needs (money for food in market place or shops). Tracing attitude of acceptance towards those others with whom he or she has shared or
back to before the origin of civilisation, only the sharing mode existed within human exchanged sourcing of material needs: those others have in some way helped that
tribes; there was no (or absolutely minimal) exchange activity. The logic of the theory individual to survive and in this respect earned, in the eyes of the first individual, the
of social interaction then suggests that civilisation occurred because of the emergence right to exist and continue to exist as potential competitors for food. In the sharing
of exchange interactions between neighbouring tribes, presumably first expressed as context, where there is no exchanging activity taking place, then prejudice (as opposed
mutually given and received peace gifts (exchanges). The Sharing Temper leads the to acceptance) is experienced towards all others outside the tribal unit. When direct,
Birth Process to create very inward focussed, highly bounded, closed and identifiably head-to-head competition for food resources arises, then such non-accepting attitude
differentiated social units: tribes. In contrast, the Exchanging Temper leads to the can become one of extreme prejudice: eliminate the competition. Where interactions
formation of uniform, unbounded, open, accepting societies; it breaks down all tribal of exchanging of sourcing of material needs exist, then there is no ‘outside’ tribal
differentiation. boundary; rather acceptance becomes extended to all others who are willing to
participate in trade. Over time this comes to be expressed in physical terms through
The Sharing Temper of interactions acts to bind a group of humans together under a the appearance of a commonly accepted currency (money) spanning all those who are
singular tribal identity. This happens because sharing interactions, with respect to most intensely interacting in trading activity.
material needs, represent half interactions on each event: “I share with you now and
later you reciprocate and share with me”: the incomplete nature of each sharing event For both modes of operation, the form of the social interactions, which create the Birth
means that the temporal form of this interaction is indefinite, potentially infinite in time Process, are instantaneous and require spatial proximity. In the tribal context, whilst
span. Essentially all members of the tribe are forever indebted to each other for their the physical action of sharing fruit from a single tree takes place over time, the initial
personal survival: in this respect continuing survival of the tribe and of the individual decision of whether to accept another’s desire to be shared with is instantaneous.
are indivisible or indistinguishable. In contrast the exchange temper of sourcing of Thereafter sharing simply requires that both parties remain peaceful and non-
materials interactions are complete, instantaneous interactions. The consequence of a threatening; but an indebtedness arises for reciprocation on another occasion or by
switch to the Exchange Temper of these interactions is to reverse the tribal identity another means. Exchange of sourcing of material needs (trades or purchases of
bonding process and create individual humans with their own unique identities within a material items) are manifestly complete and instantaneous, leaving behind no
wider unbound society. Instead of a closed tribe, there occurs a breakdown of all tribal indebtedness, and until recently always required physical proximity (a change
identification, all social bonding, all social barriers, until a new society arises instigated by the Level 4 (Adaptation) Process). This instantaneity of interactions
consisting, in its logical extreme, of a completely atomised population (at its extreme instils a sense of superficiality: given the focus of attention is on the object to be
not even a nuclear family can exist – complete anarchy). As tribes merge to create a obtained, in the instant of the interaction people only see the outward appearance and
wider, more uniform population, the other processes kick-in to form a more civilised characteristics of the other cooperating party. People come to see no depth (no time
society. past or future) in others, only the immediate present situation. Culturally this comes to
be expressed in terms of being shallow towards everything, animate or inanimate, and
In the Sharing Temper, the group acts as a unit to source material needs, focusing on engenders within society the senses of anomie and anonymity. The whole cultural
where in the physical landscape the group can obtain food today. In the Exchanging perception of a society collapses onto the present, time past and future becoming
Temper, the individual acts alone within a society to source his or her material needs irrelevant.
from other people within society: looking to participate in transactions with others. In
this respect other people come to be seen, not as collaborative partners in survival, but The Outcome of sourcing of material needs interactions is that each party to an
rather as cooperating sources of food (the fruit shop, the sweet shop, etc). This instils interaction, whether a sharing or exchanging transaction, obtains essential (or in
a culture of treating other people merely as opportunities for the individual to obtain modern society unessential but wanted) material items to help each of them to survive
essential food (and in due course wanted, less needed, material and experiential and thrive another day. As already noted above, in the sharing context this leads all
items). The pan-societal culture emerging from this process sees those who are most members of a tribe to become permanently indebted to each other, as they day-to-day
engage in sharing (indefinite / infinite) interactions. In the context of exchange
Page 27 of 51 © Julian Hart
jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

interactions, this has developed over time into the trading economy, which has
progressed from essential food requirements to the modern world where all manner of
goods are exchanged on a daily basis. The process arising from all those individual
exchange transactions is the driver behind our modern material economies.

Within each of the steps of the overall process described so far, there are feedback
elements which help to perpetuate the process in either temper – sharing or exchange:
for example, behaviour informs attitude, which influences future behaviour. A major
part of the positive feedback, which helps to drive forwards this process in the way we
experience the unrelenting nature of the Birth Process in modern society, is through
the narrative that we each develop surrounding such interactions. The instantaneous
sourcing of material needs interactions provide us with a sense of elation: that we have
secured necessary food (or money or material item substitute) to survive another day.
This represents short-term happiness (happy in the way it is most normally interpreted
within modern society), a sensation which we learn to desire to repeat. The process
thereby becomes self-serving as we seek to repeat this sense of elation before the real
need for food returns. We essentially become addicted to instantaneous trading
interactions. Through this we come to interpret our own day-to-day standard of living,
as compared to others around us, in terms of the flow of materials through our
possession or household. It is not the accumulated quantity of materials or money
which becomes important, but the flow – earn and spend, earn and spend and so on.
These individual narratives build to form a collective pan-societal ideology associated
with material consumption and linked to a perception of society best functioning in its
atomised form, where each and every person can act entirely freely and rationally
without any legal or moral constraints, and where societal success is determined
according to total levels of consumption. The named ideology, which most closely
matches the collective thinking and cultural influences that we experience from the
Birth Process, is that of Liberalism, accompanied by the science of Economics (in
particular microeconomics and macro-market economics).

Page 28 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

BIRTH Physical Expression of Inner Identity of a Person as Social Society


a Person Person Animal

Need Biological Need Psychological Need Comparison to Others Interpretation of Success


in Society
Hunger Boredom Relative standard of living / Rate of material
level of consumption consumption

Focus Focus of Activity Focus of Attention Perception of Role of Cultural ways of thinking
Others and Self about others
Hunting/Looking for Material What materials/experience Opportunity to provide Superficial
Items will satisfy sensed Need? materials / experiences

Ethos Behaviour Attitude Treatment of Cultural ways of treating


Others and Self others
Peaceful Accepting Unprejudiced and uncritical Anonymous
Sense of anomie

Form Physical and Temporal Experience of Perception of Social Structures


Form of Interaction Space and Time Space and Time
Proximity Closeness Space = here, unstructured Atomised
Instantaneous Present Time = now Free

Event Physical Outcome Observation Social Identity / Self- Economic Activity


Characterisation
Trade Trade is seen as good Trader, shopper Free market economy
Unlimited resources

Response Emotional State Narrative Ethic Ideology

Elated Identity enhanced Rationality Liberalism


Materialistic Freedom

Page 29 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

FEEDBACK: The more that people are able to satisfy their ‘hunger’ through
instantaneous gratification, the more they come to expect to be able to do as they
LEVEL 1 : BIRTH PROCESS ARISING FROM MATERIAL INTERACTIONS please and get what they want, without limitation. It is an addition to materialism.

EXPERIENCE CONSEQUENCE SOCIAL ANIMAL CULTURE


I am hungry or thirsty. Or I really, really I won’t feel satisfied until I have that Other people have these, experience Standard of living and high levels of
NEED want to have or play with that object. I object. I perceive that my whole these, consume these objects, material consumption or experiential
want to experience it. identity would be improved by having materials or experiences. I feel less consumption are deemed to be
or experiencing that thing. successful if I can’t too. attributes of being successful.

I spend my time and energy actively I associate myself with this object. I Other people are simply a means by Society only sees the superficial,
FOCUS looking for these objects that I feel that dream what it will be like to have it, which I can get the objects and external attributes of people. There is
I need. I spend time and energy own it, use it and how my identity will experiences that I want. In return, I no depth. People are all merely
analysing and assessing these objects benefit. But I realise that I also need realise that others are only after my opportunities for others to obtain
/ experiences to see which would suit something to exchange for it – money money or whatever objects I can offer objects and experiences that they
me best. or other, in order to get it. so that they can get what they want. want.
To obtain what I want from another I I don’t care who this other person is, so I am a peaceful, accepting person, who Society is open and accepting to all.
ETHOS need to behave peacefully towards long as he is willing to do business, so operates without any prejudices Individuals in such society will be
them. I need to make them feel at that I can get what I want. I just accept towards others. I have an expectation completely anonymous. No one really
ease. I need to help them feel their him or her for the fact that he or she that others will operate in an cares what or how they look or
own hunger. has something which I want. His or her unprejudiced way too. anything about their past. People may
past or future is irrelevant. experience a sense of anomie.
Interactions require proximity in order The individual’s experience of other A person who lives in the present, Society is entirely oriented around the
FORM to be able to exchange goods and people is that of many repeated, short seeking numerous, fleeting interactions present. Past and future are seen as
inspect/view those goods during the interactions, in which they do not learn with others. There is no expectation of irrelevant. Existing relationships
exchange. All interactions are anything of those others apart from the any enduring relationships. Time weaken and dissolve. Society
essentially instantaneous. superficial. Crowded environments, between interactions is perceived as becomes entirely atomised, unable to
being in close proximity to others, void time. This is a very extrovert maintain any social structure in time or
becomes accepted, even desirable. person. space.
Objects are exchanged or purchased. I see trade taking place and money I am an opportunistic individual always The trading economy is the sum total of
EVENT changing hands. I come to associated on the look out for objects/experiences all the things being exchanged. The
achieving and satisfying my needs with to experience. I flit from one person to process gives rise to material entropy
shopping and market places and being the next, forever seeking new through society. Trading locations
involved in material exchange activity. experiences from or through others. I seem very chaotic, with each person
bore quickly. focussed on their own purpose.
My hunger is satisfied for now. I have I can see that being involved in I am a rational person. In each and Society believes in individual freedom
RESPONSE what I want and I feel elated. material exchanges feels really good. every situation I find myself< I look for in all respects – expression, speech,
It makes me very and immediately what will give me greatest, immediate action, etc. The individual’s right to do
But wait, what is that? I want that …. happy. I assume it must be a good happiness. I am free to do whatever I as he or she sees fit, to express his or
thing for me and for everyone. Trading want and merrily do so with no concern her own choices, must take
must therefore be a good thing for for historic or future consequences. precedence. This is associated with
society. free trade and the market economy.

Page 30 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
GROWTH PROCESS benefit of both. For example, in the business world, everyone is seen through the lens
of their curriculum vitae; people then learn to see themselves through their own
The Growth Process is driven by human need to be safe and to maintain security and personal history, their capabilities and skills and what they have historically learnt to
consistency in the supply of essential needs – food and, in the modern context, do.
money. It is a need to feel assured that food, while obtained now, today, will also be
forthcoming tomorrow. As with the Birth Process, the cooperative temper of this Whether looking to share or exchange effort, the behaviour which two people need to
process manifest as either sharing or exchanging. Modern day examples of the two exhibit towards each other to enable an interaction to take place is that of
tempers might be: for sharing, the cooperating individuals within a single company, say predictability. They simply need to be very predictable, including being predictably
partners in a law firm, and for exchanging, the cooperating companies or individuals peaceful and non-threatening. In the working world, proof of such predictability is
within a supply chain/supply web. sought through references. Beyond that, people build up a perception of other’s levels
of predictability and reliability: “Can I rely on so-and-so to complete that task? How
The manner in which humans cooperate to secure the immediate future is through predictable were they last time?”. Clearly this can only relate to known contexts,
exerted effort to effect physical change in the environment. Such physical change known historic situations. This represents part of the inherent focus of the Growth
could be anything from manufacturing knives and arrowheads for hunting, building a Process: to perpetuate the immediate past to secure the immediate future.
defensive or retaining fence or wall, or constructing an aqueduct or building buildings, Predictability and reliability of another can only be known from the past and therefore
bridges and infrastructure or manufacturing anything (today) which can be exchanged only predicted for same situations in the future. Arising from this behaviour, there
to earn an income (tomorrow). Whether by means of sharing or exchanging effort, the develops an attitude of trust. Extending outwards into wider society, this becomes
logic of the theory of social interaction is that to cooperate to secure their collective culturally expressed through people becoming predictable and thereby trustworthy
future through manufactured or constructed objects, human beings have first to build towards each other generally. This becomes expressed in our cultures through our
social structure. trust in the inanimate world as well; for example, defining the ‘laws’ of nature.

So, the Level 2 Need is to improve safety for the individual and secure the immediate All sourcing of safety and security interactions are time bounded, whether sharing or
future. Both these requirements necessitate physical exertion today to improve exchanging. In the simplest terms, the interactions are limited to the time period
survival chances tomorrow. Success gives rise to a more self-assured individual, who required to achieve the agreed task: say, build a fence. When task is completed,
is not stressing about what will happen tomorrow, what danger will surface or where formal interaction ceases. When tasks become repetitive and unlimited, for example
essential food (or money and other desired things) will come from. Interpretation of instead of building arrowheads for own use, a human converts to fashioning
success in this respect in modern society is in the form of the working or busy person arrowheads for sale in a market place, then this time-boundedness has been adopted
who is seen to be employing themselves to useful effect to secure the immediate by human societies into constructs such as the working day and/or the contract period.
future and in terms of the individual who has amassed capital and resources (become For two people to cooperate to build, say, a fence, then they can choose two ways to
powerful within human hierarchies or financially rich) to secure their own future within work together. In the sharing sense they would each do exactly the same set of tasks,
our very social world. each building half the fence. This is a simple division of activity, representing a
straightforward division of space. It is easy to observe that each party is ‘pulling their
The perception developed of others through the process of sourcing safety and weight’ and fulfilling their half of the necessary exerted effort. In the exchanging
security derives from a question of whether another is seen to be a potential context, they would achieve a more complex division of space by specialising: say,
competitor or collaborator. This can be experienced in current society in the form of one person prepares the wood while the other digs holes and fixes the wood into
collaborator’s being all those working within a single company and competitors being place. This is a classic division of labour. In both instances, the degree of exerted
those who are working within a competing firm within the same market area. Under effort by each individual should be about the same, albeit less easy to compare in the
the Birth Process, competition turns to cooperation by sourcing from different exchanging situation other than through time taken to achieve the sub-divided tasks.
geographical locations or food types, under the Growth Process competition turns to This reinforces the focus on time spent contributing to a particular task or contract.
cooperation through division of labour and different individuals contributing very
different inputs to a whole task. This represents sourcing from different experiences The combination of the emergence of trust between two individuals and the need to
and backgrounds, different histories: “I have this background and experience, while undertake specified linked tasks gives rise to a social bond between those two people.
you have a different background and experience; together we can construct something Such social bond is by definition time limited or time bounded to the period of time
which neither of us can alone”. Through this interaction, people come to see each necessary to complete the defined task: contract to complete a task or contract of
other in terms of their lived history and the abilities that they can bring to bear for the employment to carry out an undefined quantum of repeated identical tasks until such
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

time that either party seeks to terminate the contract. Social bonds give rise to social productive employment. In modern society lack of such security, expressed as
structure. But the emergent social structures arising from sharing and exchanging insecurity, fear or stress, is more noticeable than self-assuredness, indicating that our
interactions are very different. In the sharing situation, the identical nature of the tasks modern (Western) societies are very effective at providing a majority of people with
and the simple division of space means that the social structure directly maps onto good safety and security. As with the Birth Process, the interaction can become self-
physical space: the classic factory floor with a hundred weavers weaving identical serving: an individual who likes the sense of security arising from amassing more
outputs or the classic army in history with regimented foot-soldiers lined up in battle. money or just from being productively employed can become a workaholic, dedicating
In the exchanging context, because of the more subtle division of space and complex more and more time and energy to sourcing of safety and security interactions, well
nature of tasks, it is necessary for humans to create a social space, termed a Trust beyond what might be really necessary to secure that individuals immediate future.
Matrix: for example an organisational structural chart with defined roles, which cannot The pan-societal ideologies, which most closely match the culture and thinking arising
be directly mapped onto real physical space. Another physical expression of the Trust from the Growth Process, are those of communism, capitalism, socialism and
Matrix is the emergence of codes of conduct, which help people both to know each nationalism. These are all different characterisations of the same underlying influence
other’s place within organisational hierarchies and also to know who can be trusted on society: the Growth Process.
(who else is a member of the organisation) and who not.

Since the interaction revolves around a division of space, it is inherent to social


organisations based on contractual bonds (which includes all bureaucratic
organisations) that individuals within organisations become territorial (either in physical
space or within social space (within the Trust Matrix)) and that the organisations
themselves become exclusionary within space. Such exclusivity within space can be
seen to be expressed in the modern context through countries occupying a defined
territory or through businesses seeking to capture a defined market share. The
businesses themselves exclusively occupy office space for their operations. Property
rights at all levels, from individual and family to organisation to nation, are a natural
consequence of the appearance of a stable Trust Matrix. The strength of the Trust
Matrix in a society in turn defines the maximum durable size of social structures (e.g.
bureaucracies), which can exist in that society.

The most obvious physical consequence of sourcing of safety and security interactions
is exerted effort to build physical structures. But there are many other direct physical
manifestations of this process. In particular there is the creation of a robust legal
system: rules and regulations and ways of interpreting them to ensure the integrity of
the Trust Matrix. The legal system represents the amalgam of underlying rules
required for the society to support rigid and durable social structures (a formalisation of
the codes of conduct required to support the underlying Trust Matrix) and all the
contracts between individuals within society. As would be expected, the legal system
is inherently focussed on the past, using history to define, interpret and steer the
present and near future. Where the macroscopic economic outcome of the Birth
Process is our trading economy, the outcome of the Growth Process is all formal social
structures and our manufacturing and construction economies/industries.

The individual participating in sourcing of safety and security interactions, achieving a


greater sense of safety and security, will be less stressed about the immediate future
and feel more self-assured. This is happiness, but not the elated happiness arising
from instantaneous interactions; it is a more durable happiness, which persists while
security is felt either through having amassed sufficient power or capital or through
Page 32 of 51 © Julian Hart
jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

GROWTH Physical Expression of Inner Identity of a Person as Social Society


a Person Person Animal

Need Biological Need Psychological Need Comparison to Others Interpretation of Success


in Society
Unsafe Insecure Relative level of security Power and wealth

Focus Focus of Activity Focus of Attention Perception of Role of Cultural ways of thinking
Others and Self about others
Labour required Activity that needs doing Opportunity to provide skills Focus on personal history
What skills are needed? to achieve task

Ethos Behaviour Attitude Treatment of Cultural ways of treating


Others and Self others
Predictable Trusting Coded and regulated Expectation of rule abiding
Judgemental Strong codes of conduct

Form Physical and Temporal Experience of Perception of Social Structures


Form of Interaction Space and Time Space and Time
Correlated in space Space = linked / fixed Space = structured Strict / brittle membership
Time bound Time = on/off/on/off/on/off Time = defined organisations

Event Physical Outcome Observation Social Identity / Self- Economic Activity


Characterisation
Physical structures built Activity / efficiency is good Worker, labourer Growth / Expansion
Materials combined Accumulation is good Output maximisation Manufacturing economy

Response Emotional State Narrative Ethic Ideology

Re-assured / unstressed Hard working / strong Legality Socialism (structuralism)


Safer / securer Must not be weak (rules are important) Legalistic

Page 33 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

FEEDBACK: The more that individuals have to follow rules and regulations, the more
they desire to extend rules to other people and other circumstances. Rules impel an
LEVEL 2 : GROWTH PROCESS ARISING FROM LABOUR INTERACTIONS
expectation of security and predictability, which drive a desire for more rules.

EXPERIENCE CONSEQUENCE SOCIAL ANIMAL CULTURE


I sense danger and perceive a threat to I feel unsafe and insecure. I would like I compare myself to others in terms of Society sees people who are self-
NEED maintaining my safety, security and to feel more certain about the my degree of sense of security / assured, with strong sense of security
current standard of living. immediate future and be assured that I insecurity and whether they seem to be and safety, to be successful. This is
survive (maintain my standard of living) more secure than me or not. That in usually provided by position in social
into and beyond tomorrow. I want to part informs the degree to which I feel hierarchy and, in modern day, in terms
defend what I already have. secure (relative to others). of monetary wealth (or equivalent).
Improving my safety and security for For any mutual labour interaction, I am I learn to see other people in terms of Society develops a strong focus on the
FOCUS tomorrow requires action (labour) today looking for other people with similar their past, what skills and abilities they past, seeking to look for historic trends
– build a fence, repair the front door, security/safety needs, who also wish to have developed over time. I come to which support the continuation of the
work diligently to earn an income, sign secure the immediate future. Since see myself likewise. The past immediate future. The further a society
a contract to secure a workstream, etc. actions require skills, I come to look for becomes important to me; it defines looks into the past, the better it feels
This requires certain skills to achieve others with the right skills and abilities me; it provides me with a sense of able to foresee and control the near
the right actions. to contribute to satisfying my Need. security going forwards. future.
To enter into a labour interaction with When people around me, on whom I I come to be a predictable and Society becomes very predictable, with
ETHOS another human, I need that other to be am relying to help provide for my safety trustworthy person, who has the people adopting very clear and
predictable for the duration of the and security needs, prove to be capacity to trust others. I also develop understandable dress codes (uniforms)
interaction, to be trusted to contribute predictable, then I learn to trust them, the ability to trust myself (self-trusted = and adopting precise codes of conduct.
their agreed input into the contract expect them to continue to be self-assured). I behave very There is a general expectation of
(whether written or not). I too must act predictable. They are treating me predictably in all circumstances in regulated behaviour and for people to
predictably to them. likewise. which I find myself (dress code, etc). act trustworthily.
Labour interactions have precise My life is structured according to action I expect to work hard and rest – full on Society becomes very structured both
FORM beginnings and ends (building a wall or and inaction (working and time-off). My and then full off. There is no in- in time (for example, working day,
completing a contract). They are time relationships with others are strictly between. Things are clearly black and working week, holidays) and space
bound. Relationships between correlated. I therefore come to see white (trusted or not trusted, working (social bonds, social organisation and
interacting parties is strictly correlated both time and space as being clearly hard or slacking). I can push myself clearly defined property rights and
in physical space (sharing mode) or structured and well-defined. very hard because I expect to be able delineation of territory). It is a very
social space (exchange mode). to rest some time later. legalistic culture of right and wrong.
Work is done or contract is signed to I see physical activity happening and I I am a hard working individual. I focus The sum total of all contracts
EVENT ensure that individuals work together to am involved in that activity. I come to my energy on achieving outputs and represents the labour economy. The
achieve a pre-defined output or associate achieving and satisfying my maximising production, being efficient sum total of all labour activity gives rise
physical actions (eg. build a bridge). security and safety needs with activity and delivering contracted to the manufacturing, construction and
Physical actions happen and work is and with being linked into strong requirements. I must maximise my other aspects of the growth economy.
done. contractual relationships with others. activity. There is a drive for growth/expansion.
I am happy because I feel assured. My I can see that being involved in labour Working hard with other people Society needs rules and regulations to
RESPONSE sense of safety and security is interactions and delivering outputs is requires everyone to be predictable. I enable growth of that society. There is
improved through interaction with other something that makes me feel happy. therefore come to expect everyone to a pervasive culture of increasing
people. I am less stressed than I was This must mean that working hard is be law and rule abiding and myself regulation and structure to society,
at the outset. This feels good. I would good for people generally. If they feel likewise. Rules and regulations are infusing more and more of people’s
like to repeat this sensation. sad, they should work hard. good for everyone. lives.

Page 34 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
HEALTH PROCESS interactions with many others to ascertain whether both people are consistent in their
behaviour in the present.
The long-term Need, which drives the interactions which underpin the Health Process,
is the desire to reproduce, successfully. Clearly this aspect of the Need is not For the Growth Process, people look for predictability in the past, enacted over time.
particularly felt in our younger years, while we are still growing, nor especially apparent For the Health Process, people look for consistency across physical and social space,
in much of day-to-day life (until, of course, one has responsibility for rearing children). demonstrated in the present. The latter, for example, leads to a great deal of
Rather the manner in which people experience this Need in everyday life is through socialising, especially amongst individuals in their early adult life looking for long-term
the requirement to remain healthy. To be eventually successful in reproduction and partners. It is for the reason of this expression of the Health Process that Maslow
the rearing of mentally and physically able healthy off-spring, people need themselves originally misconstrued his Level 3 Need as a Social or Belonging Need.
to maintain their mental and physical health. Much of the interaction associated with
this Need therefore revolves around cooperation or competition amongst humans to Given the inherent reciprocal nature of health related interactions, the Behaviour
maintain health, initially of themselves and ultimately of their off-spring and genetic required to enter into a successful interaction is not predictability but dependability:
lineage. that regardless of all else changing, someone can still be depended upon to
reciprocate. This converts into an attitude of being principled or faithful and engenders
For a human to maintain his or her health, he or she must carry out activities today for a general cultural environment of people being faithful and dependable towards each
the longer-term personal benefit. As with the Growth Process, it involves action today other and acting with principles (or moral or ethically).
for tomorrow, but in the case of the Health Process tomorrow may be much further into
the future. Such physical (or mental) exertion may be anything from brushing teeth, to The Form of the interactions underlying the Health Process are very different to those
repairing the roof of the house, to removing head lice, to repairing a dam, to physical associated with the Growth Process, where the latter as already discussed are time
care of a baby or mental nurture of a young child. These are all a very different set of bounded and, certainly in the Sharing context, give rise to precise spatial correlations.
tasks to those associated with the Growth Process and to this end have been labelled Health related interactions are instead not time bound; they are inherently indefinite,
Nurture Tasks as opposed to Labour Tasks. but intermittent. To build a wall (growth) you have to focus your efforts on the task in
hand for a discrete time period; any time taken doing something else will delay
In entering into an interaction with another human, an individual is seeking to completion. Thereafter, to maintain that wall requires occasional attention into
participate in a reciprocal arrangement: “I will remove your head lice and then you will perpetuity, or for so long as the wall is deemed useful. The more attention given, the
remove mine.” It can immediately be seen from this example that, at its most simplistic better the state that wall will remain in; but it by no means requires continuous
level, inherent to the interaction around health there is a division of time instead of a maintenance, just intermittent checks and reparations. Similarly, the relationship
division of space. This fundamentally differentiates the entirety of the Health Process between two people involved in a health interaction does not need to be continuous,
from the Growth Process. but rather continual – regular (at a frequency dependant upon the person or object
being cared for) intermittent interactions to help nurture and maintain physical and
Good health can be a fickle state; we never quite know what will be ‘round the corner’ mental health. This leads to a much more spatially fluid social bond than the very rigid
and consequently what our personal health needs will be: as in what an individual, or growth related bond. The Health bond is instead much more rigid in time, leading to a
another, will need to be doing to look after the former. To this end, when entering into human culture, which is associated with keeping consistent and repetitive that which
an interaction with another person, knowing whether they will be able or willing to help, we can control, leaving that which is outside of our control to its own devices. It
and in turn whether the first person will continue to desire to help in return, requires manifests through enclosure of space, looking inwards, in contrast to the Growth
something more than just knowledge of past history. It is not a matter of seeking to Process which gives rise to a mindset of control and structuring space, looking
maintain trends and the status quo, but rather knowing how to respond in the right way outwards (amongst other things being territorial).
to previously unknown and unforeseen eventualities: ‘maintaining an even keel in
rough seas’. The perceptions we consequently build up of others is not just a question Social structures arising from the Health Process are exclusionary in time, not space.
of history and attained abilities, but of their capacity and desire to exert effort in order This is expressed, for instance, through communities of different faiths being able to
to participate in and to continue to participate in a reciprocal and mutual health peacefully mix within space (consider many modern cities); but each religious
maintaining interaction. Deducing another’s capacity and desire on this matter is community lives by different routines, different holidays and festivals, different prayer
achieved by two simultaneous means: by directly through conversation fathoming out times, and so on. Furthermore, whilst the Growth Process gives rise to vertical
whether both parties futures are aligned and through observing each other’s structure in society, manifest as hierarchic bureaucratic organisations, the Health
Process produces strong horizontal links across communities: for example, unionism.
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

In the absence of the Growth Process, such strong horizontal links can give rise to a
layering of society, producing classes and castes, or in the extreme apartheid and
slavery.

The economy, which emerges from the Health Process, are all those aspects of
society associated with health, of ourselves and our environment, and the nurturing of
future generations. It includes our schools and health systems, the economy relating
to management and maintenance of our built environment and infrastructure, and any
other aspect of human society associated with the care for and looking after of other
people, animals, the environment and inanimate objects.

The happiness that we feel from participating in health related interactions is more akin
to the notion of contentment or perhaps serenity or just a sense of feeling healthy and
satisfied with our exertions. When you tend the garden or clean the house, you feel
good about having looked after your immediate environment. The more that someone
attends to something or someone, the more they are treating that object as something
to be valued. Out of this, we gain the ability to value. Furthermore, when a child is
treated accordingly, by being treated as someone who is valuable, they gain a sense
of self-value or self-worth. The ideologies that arise at a societal level are all
associated with notions of valuing both the self and others and other things.
Historically this has been most readily expressed through religions and religious belief.
In the modern Western world the narrative of religions seems to be waning, but the
ability to value lives on through the third economy, charities and other institutions.
Whilst democratic election systems are a manifestation of the fourth social process,
the Adaptation Process, political parties themselves build upon the Health Process,
seeking to become valued in society by expressing the principles and morals of those
they seek to represent.

Page 36 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

HEALTH Physical Expression of Inner Identity of a Person as Social Society


a Person Person Animal

Need Biological Need Psychological Need Prioritisation of Need Interpretation of Success


in Society
Feeling unhealthy Desire for cultural Relative level of health and Leaders, exemplars,
Need to reproduce continuation / legacy reproductive success celebrities

Focus Focus of Activity Focus of Attention Perception of Role of Cultural ways of thinking
Others and Self about others
Nurture activity required Skills needed Alignment of paths Future focus
Mutuality of Interests Personal destiny

Ethos Behaviour Attitude Treatment of Cultural ways of treating


Others and Self others
Dependable Faith Reliable Expectation of principles
Importance of reciprocation Strong customs

Form Physical and Temporal Experience of Perception of Social Structures


Form of Interaction Space and Time Space and Time
Loose correlation Centred on self Privacy / enclosure Affiliation organisations
Time unbounded Cyclic Repetitive / flexible Unstructured

Event Physical Outcome Observation Social Identity / Self- Economic Activity


Characterisation
Quality enhanced Long-term performance Attention to detail Nurture economies (third
Improved function improved / effective Neurotic sector, health, education)

Response Emotional State Narrative Ethic Ideology

Relaxed Virtuous Morality Religion, Charity


Contented Value Oriented Meaning Localism

Page 37 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

FEEDBACK:

LEVEL 3 : HEALTH PROCESS ARISING FROM NURTURE INTERACTIONS

EXPERIENCE CONSEQUENCE SOCIAL ANIMAL CULTURE


I feel that things are not quite right. My I worry about my future health and well- I look to see whether others are Society sees people who have a high
NEED senses in combination tell me that being and that of those closest and concerned about the more distant level of self-worth / self-value to be
something is wrong or something is dearest to me. I intuit that our future too. Have they also sensed successful. This is expressed in
going wrong. unknown future is in some way at risk. problems on the horizon? Or are they modern society through celebrity
unconcerned? How sure are they culture: success understood in terms of
about the future? level of social attention by others.
I must act to correct things. This will There is much about the future which I I look for others who have similar Society develops a strong focus on the
FOCUS require work to be done to make sure cannot control. So I focus on those concerns and worries to me, who have future, seeking to manipulate as much
everything is functioning properly and things over which I do have control. I similar perspectives on the future. I in the present as possible to be able to
that I and my family remain healthy and think about the long-term effect of feel a sense of camaraderie with them. influence the future. The more people
live in a healthy and positive things that I and others do and the I sense that if our futures are aligned, focussed on some aspect of life in the
environment. implications of actions and events we can help each other to influence it. present, the more influence we all have
(especially those which repeat). on that issue into the future.
To enter into a nurture interaction with To deduce dependability in others, I I come to be a very consistently Society comes to expect people to
ETHOS another human, I need to be sure that look for consistency in their behaviours, principled person, who operates have and follow strong principles and
they will be dependable and will to identify what principles they according to a clear morality, which can morals. There is a focus on
reciprocate goods deeds on my part. I genuinely adhere to, what morals they be depended upon by others. In a demonstrating such consistency and to
too must be dependable to them. follow and what values they have (as changeable world, I steer a clear and give people faith in each others
opposed to just expressed). They are true path. I expect the same of others. dependability.
looking at me likewise.
Nurture interactions are indefinite into My life is rhythmic and repetitious. I expect to be constantly active, Society is very fluid and flexible,
FORM the future. They are not time bound. Activity may speed up or slow down, attending to my own needs or those of responding to needs of individuals and
Relationships between interacting but does not cease. I see space others. There is always something to communities as they arise. Society is
parties correlate strictly in time, but centred around myself or others, do. I see the physical world as shades strongly structured in time with much
loosely in space. (Sharing mode – whoever is the centre of attention at a and colours and highly variable. It repetitious behaviour expressed
correlation in real time. Exchange particular moment in time. Space is would be short-sighted to over exert through rituals (from religious
mode – correlation in social time.*) therefore fluid and unstructured. because I might have no break. ceremonies to birthdays parties).
Work is done in terms of reciprocal I observe myself involved with others I work continuously, but not too hard at The nurture economy is that part of the
EVENT actions to help nurture children, to keep trying to maintain, manage and any one moment. I have a neurotic whole economy focussed on nurture
the environment clean and healthy and influence things in a way which will focus on detail, improving and and education of children, managing
to aid mutual grooming and looking benefit our long-term future. I maintaining that which I can control. and maintaining people’s health and
after each other’s well being (mental associate satisfying my health needs Work should be pleasurable because I looking after the built and natural
and physical). with such activity. do not expect to take time off. environments.
I am happy because I feel contented. I I see that being involved in long-term, I am a highly dependable person with a Society operates by a strong set of
RESPONSE sense that my health and long-term reciprocal relationships of mutual strong sense of morality and believe moral principles. These are reinforced
future and that of those close to me is benefit is some thing that makes me vehemently in long-term reciprocal by regular involvement in reciprocal
being attended to and looked after. I happy. By deduction it must be a good relationships and that good deeds by activities and encouraged through
like this feeling of contentment. thing for all. me will be rewarded and reciprocated stories and fables about those who do
by others. and don’t cooperatively participate.

Page 38 of 51 *Real time is externally defined (clock ticking), © Julian Hart


whereas social time is internally defined between jal.hart@btinternet.com
interacting parties (think operation of an orchestra).
ADAPTATION PROCESS
Behaving in an inclusive way has consequences for the individuals involved in either
Where the Birth Process continuously acts to tear society apart in every respect, information sharing or exchanging interactions. Involving others in decision-making
culturally, structurally and ideologically, the Growth and Health Processes act forces the individual to become aware of the Needs of others – their entire Needs. In
simultaneously to reconstitute society by providing vertical and horizontal structure. lower level interactions there arises awareness of the equivalent Need (Level 1 “I need
Such structure binds individual people into roles within civilised society. Historically food, he needs money”, Level 2 “I need a job, he needs some work done”, Level 3
individuals were pegged to roles, unrelentingly and unwaveringly – women could do “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours”). But at Level 4, under the Adaptation
little other than fulfil a social expectation to give birth and raise children, men filled the Process, people become more aware of each other’s entire set of Needs – material,
shoes of their fathers. What you were born into, you remained for life … unless you security, health and informational. This awareness of other’s Needs engenders an
were very, very lucky. attitude of respect, which propagates outwards through society as a culture of
inclusiveness, respect, accessibility (in its broadest sense), being consultative,
Within the context of a highly structured society, the interaction driver, which underpins expecting others to speak the truth and so on.
the Adaptation Process, is for people to regain a degree of autonomy and social
mobility – to follow their own dreams and aspirations instead of just filling a fixed role, To understand the form of this informational interaction requires reversion to first
bequeathed to them at birth. Without destroying the already generated social principles. Just as the material interaction is more accurately an interaction of sharing
structure. To obtain mobility within either physical or social spaces (matrices), a or exchanging of the sourcing of materials, so the Level 4 interaction represents an
human needs information about his or her environmental context. This need for interaction of sharing or exchanging of the source of information (not the information
correct information is what ultimately drives the Adaptation Process. And when human itself). In the sharing mode two people from different parts of society share information
beings start to learn to communicate truthfully between themselves at a societal level, by observing an event together – same place, same time (think relativity). In
the positive feedback quickly kicks-in, leading to rapid exponential growth of flows of exchanging mode, events can be ‘observed’ indirectly through reportage, because the
information through that society. We are currently in the midst of such an economic same two people believe what each other is saying. At this point of societal
revolution, albeit it took many hundreds of years of cultural change to reach the tipping development, people no longer all have to trek to the same event to believe; they are
point for the positive feedback to take off. willing to rely on other people’s description or portrayal of the object, experience,
events, etc.
So, the Need from an individual perspective is for accurate knowledge and information. Drawing on this appreciation, it can be realised that the temporal form of the
This is the principal focus of attention. Whereas in the Birth Process other people informational interaction is affectively instantaneous – more akin to purchasing food
come to be seen merely as sources of material goods, under the Adaptation Process than the time duration of employment or nurturing children. But, contrasted to the Birth
others are seen as potential sources of information or knowledge. This gives rise to a Process, in which the switch from sharing to exchanging causes a collapse of time to
consequential perception of ourselves in terms of our personal degree of knowledge – the present, not affecting perceptions of space, the Adaptation Process switch from
generally and on particular subject matter. Where, under the Growth Process the sharing to exchanging does not affect the temporal form of the interaction. Instead it
perception of others concerns their history and physical skill and ability, this transforms affects the spatial form. It allows each and every person to ‘see’ from afar: for
in the context of the Adaptation Process into the mental sphere – mental skill, mental example, you no longer have to visit a shop to inspect goods directly before purchase;
capacity, intelligence, knowledge, decision-making abilities, etc. instead you can buy from afar over the internet. This change has far reaching
repercussions for every (every!) aspect of society from family life, to the way trade can
The behaviour required to enter successfully into an information exchange interaction be done, to how businesses operate and can be run, to the way religions function, how
is whatever is required to convince another that you will be honest and truthful and, in communities of friends no longer need to be co-located and so on and so forth. We
return, that information received from another will not be used against the provider of have only just begun this fantastic revolution in social organisation.
information. Given that the underlying purpose in obtaining any information is to
facilitate decision-making, where the better the information the more effective will be As the Adaptation Process begins to make its mark by enabling individuals to start to
resultant decisions, the behaviour required is to be inclusive. Only by including others be autonomous and, in due course, socially mobile, a part of its positive feedback
within the decision-making process, showing that you are also relying on the begins to take effect. When individuals begin to become mobile in society, they effect
information, can another be adequately persuaded that the information is correct. change to society. They are the social landscape of others and, by becoming mobile,
Furthermore, by involvement they can influence the subsequent decision to help they are causing that landscape to modify. When change takes place in the social
ensure that information which they provide will not unduly inhibit or be of detriment to world, people need information about their social environment to be up-dated. Existing
their own aspirations, objectives and desired autonomy and social mobility. information becomes quickly out-dated: “Oh, no, so and so has left that role; he is
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

doing this now”. As this process takes its course, we see the whole social landscape, respect for others and concern about the state of the world – the entire needs of our
that social structure created by the Trust and Value Matrices of the Growth and Health host planet.
Processes, becoming objectified. Social space becomes a landscape, as real as the
physical world, which we can all travel across through our lives. Roles and
destinations in that social landscape are no longer places to inhabit for life, but just
temporary places to visit and occupy, hotel rooms, as we each seek to navigate our
own personal trajectories. And, of course, people express their social mobility through
actual mobility in the real physical world: travel. But further than this, competition in
social space manifests as physical competition: sport. It was no accident that the
nascent democracy in Ancient Greece was accompanied by a flourishing interest in
sport: the Olympiad. Democracy and sport are intimately related, both created and
motivated by the same underlying social process.

Rather obviously the economic aspect of this interaction, the exchange of information,
has driven the exponential growth in our knowledge and communication economies
and helped to transform manufacturing industries into a burgeoning information
technology industry. But the change does not stop there. Inherent to the emergence
of the Adaptation Process in exchange mode across society is a new way, in which we
treat information. Prior to this era, say 200 or more years ago, experts had to be
polymaths. No one could fully believe and rely on the mental competency of another
unless they had seen or done it for themselves: sharing sourcing of information. For
example scientific experiments had to be replicable by others for those others
genuinely to believe the conclusions, to see the results for themselves. Now that the
Adaptation Process has switched into exchange mode, we see a growing division of
competence across society (the mental equivalent to division of labour). This is taking
human society from a state, where its total body of known knowledge could not extend
beyond that which could be held within the head of a single intelligent polymath,
towards that same amount times six or so billion, or probably much more: compare
early encyclopedias to wikipedia. The economic revolution created by the Adaptation
Process is immense.

The happiness that people sense when participating in exchange of sourcing of


information interactions is a known modern phenomenon. It is a feeling of being
informed and connected; this can be contrasted with the sense of powerlessness,
disconnectedness and ignorance that people feel when they accidentally lose their
mobile phone, blackberry or iphone. The narrative, which people develop to explain
these emotions, revolves around the need to be in touch and an expectation to be kept
in touch, to be told the truth, to be respected and included. There develops a social
expectation that there should be no secrets, certainly none which might affect people’s
circumstances. In turn we all come to believe that respect should be extended
outwards to that wider world, which we hear about and now know about and watch
believingly on our televisions – that animate and inanimate existence outside our
personal sphere experienced directly with our own success. It is for the above
reasons why the emerging ideology of sustainability seems to represent an odd mix of

Page 40 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

ADAPTATION Physical Expression of Inner Identity of a Person as Social Society


a Person Person Animal

Need Biological Need Psychological Need Comparison to Others Interpretation of Success


in Society
Immobile Frustrated Relative level of influence Upwardly mobile/connected
Lack of autonomy Political influence

Focus Focus of Activity Focus of Attention Perception of Role of Cultural ways of thinking
Others and Self about others
To obtain relevant, Filtering information Sources of information Actors / role players
accurate information Independent operators

Ethos Behaviour Attitude Treatment of Cultural ways of treating


Others and Self others
Inclusive Respect Considerate, consultative Need to be consulted
Obliging, respectful Seeking opinions

Form Physical and Temporal Experience of Perception of Social Structures


Form of Interaction Space and Time Space and Time
No proximity Combined space-time Vectors – past, present, Decision-making systems
Relative mobility future all at once Elections, voting

Event Physical Outcome Observation Social Identity / Self- Economic Activity


Characterisation
Decision made Change happening Decision-maker Communications economy
Course of action taken Change is okay “mover and shaker” Information economy

Response Emotional State Narrative Ethic Ideology

Informed Being involved and involving Inclusivity Sustainability


Locus of control others is good Accessibility Democracy

Page 41 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

FEEDBACK: As people become socially mobile, this causes the social


landscape to become a constant changing tableau, which forces all individuals
LEVEL 4 : ADAPTATION PROCESS ARISING OUT OF MOBILITY INTERACTIONS to need more information to make decisions. Change is the norm.
EXPERIENCE CONSEQUENCE SOCIAL ANIMAL CULTURE
I see that events happening around me I feel the need for greater autonomy in I compare myself to others in terms of Society sees people who are informed
NEED are not optimal for myself or my family. my decision-making. I want to make their level of knowledge and degree of and who have a strong degree of self-
We do not seem to be able to influence decisions for myself and my family, informed-ness. This helps me to respect (see below) as being most
them. which benefit us across all our Needs. decide whether I know enough or need successful. This drives people
I need to change my circumstances to learn and assimilate more. How continually to want to know about more
and improve my prospects. much do I/they have control over and more: information hunger.
respective destinies?
To achieve my objective to have I am looking for people with the I learn to see other people as sources Information comes to be seen as very
FOCUS greater autonomy, I need information. I necessary information to help me do of information or signposts to direct me important in society. This morphs into
need to know more to be able to decide what I want to do. Other people are to the right information. I therefore see more and more focus on the validity
what to do, what moves to make, the principal source of information. I people in terms of what they know and and veracity of information and
when. I need information about the am looking who can provide me with what mental skills they have. I come to information sources. Truth is critical.
social and physical worlds around me. the right information. see myself in a similar way. Lying is severely looked down on.
I want others to tell me what they know In acting inclusively and involving In treating others with respect, I come A culture of being more consultative
ETHOS and involve me in decision-making, to others in decisions, I come to to be more respectful to myself, to propagates across society, with an
be transparent. In order to persuade appreciate their entire needs and their recognise my entire needs. I come to increasing expectation of transparency
others to tell me the truth, I have to objectives. This forces me to develop operate in a more balanced way. I and collective decision-making, which
behave likewise – to be inclusive. I an attitude of respect towards others. extend my respect to other humans to benefits everyone, not just the few.
have to tell the truth. all things (animate and inanimate).
Information interactions are Information, transmitted over distance, I sense things in balance, seeing past, Information travels through society; its
FORM instantaneous. Sharing interactions provides me with spatial awareness present and future simultaneously. I progress represents a trajectory
require spatial proximity, but exchange and sense of the progress of time. make more balanced decisions around through time and space. It gives
interactions (reliant on being truthful) Information itself has a trajectory, all my Needs. I see the universe as people social mobility through society
can operate at a distance. which I can use to give me a trajectory. vectors and relative motion. and in physical terms.
Information is exchanged. Those involved in information I am an informed individual about my The sum total of information exchange
EVENT Communication happens, which in exchange are better able to make good social and physical environment. I am gives rise to the communications and
exchange mode can influence activities decisions about their actions and self-aware about my situation in information technology economies.
in all locations around the globe. In direction of travel in physical and social physical world and role in society. I There is a drive to increase flows of
exchange mode, accurate information space. Decisions made are more have self-respect. I rely on information. information and continuously improve
flows outwards across society respecting of all those affected. its accuracy.
I am happy because I feel I am now I see that obtaining information feels I am a consultative person, who keeps Society develops systems for collective
RESPONSE better informed. I do not feel excluded good. By extrapolation other people others in the loop and includes them in decision-making, for disseminating
from what is happening around me. In must feel good about receiving decision-making. Compromises on my information and for ensuring accuracy
fact, I feel that I can influence things accurate information. Consulting part often end up being the better of information. Society is hungry for
and have a role and part to play. people, telling the truth and keeping solution for everyone. Freedom of more information and, as it learns
them informed is a good thing. information is essential for society. about its environment, it comes to be
more respectful of that environment.

Page 42 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

TRANSFORMATION Physical Expression of Inner Identity of a Person as Social Society


a Person Person Animal

Need Biological Need Psychological Need Prioritisation of Need Interpretation of Success


in Society

Focus Focus of Activity Focus of Attention Perception of Role of Cultural ways of thinking
Others and Self about others

Ethos Behaviour Attitude Treatment of Cultural ways of treating


Others and Self others

Form Physical and Temporal Experience of Perception of Social Structures


Form of Interaction Space and Time Space and Time

Event Physical Outcome Observation Social Identity / Self- Economic Activity


Characterisation

Response Emotional State Narrative Ethic Ideology

Page 43 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10
INTERACTION COMPONENTS INTERACTION EXPERIENCE INTERACTION CONSEQUENCE

1. NEED: This is the felt or perceived PRIORITISATION OF NEED: Each person perceives all five DEFINITION OF SUCCESS IN SELF OR OTHERS: Successful
Need by the individual, which in needs to greater or lesser degrees all the time. At any moment in fulfilment of a Need gives rise to an individual who is not ‘Needy”.
some way requires fulfilment or time a person will prioritise a particular Need for acting upon. From the perspective of a person who feels a Need, someone
resolution. (Needs can extend into Either because of social conditioning or personal circumstances, else whose equivalent Need is satisfied is perceived as someone
Wants when the interaction process a particular Need can come to dominate over the others. who is more successful.
becomes self-serving.)

2. FOCUS: This is the focus of DIRECTION OF FOCUS OF PERSONAL ENERGY AND PERCEPTION OF ROLE PLAYED BY OTHER PEOPLE: In
attention and physical action of the INTEREST: What is it that needs to happen in the physical or seeking to interact with other people to satisfy a Need, a person
individual while the Need still social worlds to enable a Need to be satiated? This will depend is looking for that other person to provide or do something. This
requires satisfying. entirely upon the Need in question. For so long as the Need leads to the individual developing a perception of others in terms
requires fulfilling, the individual’s mental attention and physical of how they can assist the former individual to satisfy his or her
actions will be his or her focus. Needs (eg . seen merely as a source of food or material goods).

3. ETHOS: This relates to the BEHAVIOUR: To initiate and then enable an interaction to take ATTITUDE: When a person behaves in a particular way, this
required behaviour and attitude place, an individual must behave in a particular way. Each Ideal influences what attitude he or she develops towards other
necessary for an individual to initiate Type of interaction relies upon a particular Behaviour Type. people. For example, someone behaving peacefully towards
and enable and complete a These are: Peaceful, Predictable, Dependable, Inclusive and others develops an attitude of acceptance of others. This
successful interaction with another Admiring. becomes extended as a general attitude towards other people
human being. and projected onto the animate and inanimate world.

4. FORM: This corresponds to the EXPERIENCE OF TIME AND SPACE: An interaction PERCEPTION OF TIME AND SPACE: Involvement in
manner in which an interaction takes necessarily represents an event in physical space. The event interactions with particular Forms influences a person’s
place in time and space (is it may require direct physical proximity between two people or perspective of time and space. For example, someone who only
instantaneous or does it occur over a might be able to take place at a distance. Events may be experiences instantaneous interactions will come to see life in the
discrete timespan and does it require relatively instantaneous or take place over a defined or undefined present only and lose sight of past and future. This will strongly
spatial proximity?). time duration. determine the nature of relationships built up with other people.

5. EVENT: Each interaction gives DIRECT PHYSICAL CONSEQUENCES OF INTERACTION: An LONG-TERM PHYSICAL CONSEQUENCES ON MIND AND
rise to an economic event in the interaction gives rise to a physical event in the universe. This BODY: Repeated involvement in interactions will have an effect
physical universe: an object may be an object changing hands or work done to change the on an individual’s physical and mental condition, including their
exchanging hands, work completed, physical environment or an action to help maintain a person’s personal wealth, property ownership and so on.
health maintained or information health.
shared.

6. RESPONSE: If an interaction is EMOTIONAL RESPONSE (HAPPY OR SAD): Human beings NARRATIVE: When human beings feel happy or sad, they
successful, a person feels happy: if are programmed to experience a psycho-physical-emotional interpret and explain their circumstances: “I feel happy because
unsuccessful, sad. The nature of the response to interactions. The notion of ‘happiness’ is most …”. This influences how they next seek to satisfy a felt Need,
happiness depends upon the Ideal normally associated with instantaneous gratification. But there remembering when and why they felt happy and seeking to
Type of interaction. are other states of happiness associated with longer-term repeat the same sequence of events.
interactions.

Page 44 of 51
SOCIAL ANIMAL = sum of Experiences and Consequences across Five© Needs
Julian Hart
jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

INTERACTION DIAGRAM Generic Structure of a Social Interaction

Physical Expression of Inner Identity of a Person as Social


x 5 Ideal a Person Person Animal

Types of Need Biological Need Psychological Need Prioritisation of Need

Social
Interaction Focus Focus of Activity Focus of Attention Perception of
Others and Self

1. Material
Interactions
Ethos Behaviour Attitude Treatment of
Others and Self
2. Labour
Interactions
Form Physical and Temporal Experience of Perception of
3. Nurture Form of Interaction Space and Time Space and Time

Interactions

4. Mobility Outcome Physical Event Social / Economic Event Relative degree of


fulfilment of Need
Interactions

5. Success Response Emotional State Narrative Characterisation of


Interactions Others and Self

Happiness leads to repetition of interaction Reinforced through


Sadness leads to search for new type of interaction Repetition
Page 45 of 51 © Julian Hart
jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

INTERACTION TEMPERS SOCIAL PROCESS MODES

When an individual seeks to act to fulfil a Need, there are four ways they can do this Only when a sizeable proportion of the people within a social group (family, business,
(the set of four Interaction Tempers): community, society, nation state) are all interacting in a similar way do discrete
interactions combine together to create a positive feedback driven social process.
Acting Individually: This can be construed as latent (passive) competition and
represents seeking to act without interacting with another human being. An analogy Sharing interactions writ-large across a social group will tend to bind a group together
from the animal kingdom is the tiger hunting alone. Competition is latent, because if in a particular way dependent upon the Ideal Type of interactions. The consequence
resources were to reduce it would automatically become active. of this is to create “membership” (using the word in its broadest sense) social
structures (disparate examples include tribes, nuclear families, discrete businesses,
Taking: This is very clearly active competition: to take from another. It represents religious communities, nation states), which have clear social boundaries around them
denying another of fulfilment of their own Needs. It is most obvious in the context of (see below for further discussion on social boundaries).
Material Needs, but applies equally for all Needs. For example, terrorising another
corresponds to denying that other of their security. An identified social process will operate inside the social boundary it creates; it will not
extend directly over that boundary. This creates social units which can then interact
Sharing: This has been interpreted as active cooperation either corresponding to with each other. For example, members of a family share food, whereas family units
giving another the opportunity to satisfy their Need without expecting immediate operate on an exchange basis between each other.
compensation or representing direct simple cooperation. In the latter context, this
might manifest as cooperating on a task but without any division of labour. Exchanging interactions, in contrast, will tend to open up a social group, reducing
social boundaries and interlacing an initially discrete and identifiable group into a wider
Exchanging: This corresponds to passive cooperation, where two people cooperate society. For example, through connection to cities over generations original tribes
and both benefit, which allows them to continue in many respects to operate eventually merge into a wider amorphous society.
individually. The most obvious example is that of exchanging equivalent goods or
purchasing goods for an agreed sum of money. Other examples include direct division The Mode of Operation of a Social Process is driven by the underlying Tempers of
of labour. Interaction which dominate within a social group.

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES AND NESTING OF PROCESSES

Examples of interactions in different social contexts: Maslow originally suggested that Needs sit in a hierarchy, where by necessity daily
Material Needs will become prioritised on a day-to-day basis over higher Needs.
In our tribal past, tribes operated on the basis of Level 1 (Material Needs) Social conditioning and the cultural environment can change this, driving some
cooperation within the tribe. Members of tribes interacted to share food resources individuals to prioritise Needs in a different order (for example, the religious zealot
from within a single tribal territory. Between tribes there existed passive competition, prioritising his afterlife over current standard of living). But, by and large, the hierarchy
leading to active competition during times of scarcity. holds. Certainly on a statistical basis, lower Needs will be treated with priority over
higher Needs.
In modern society, the nuclear family acts as a sharing unit (members of the family
pooling their financial resources to pay for food, shelter and material goods). This degree of hierarchy has the effect of causing processes to ‘nest’. For example, in
Between family units, there exists exchange relationships – giving and receiving gifts tribal situations the Birth Process (Level 1 Need) in Sharing Mode causes a tribe to knit
and purchasing food and goods. together under a singular identity forming an impenetrable social boundary around the
tribe. No cooperation can take place across this social divide at any level – only
A legal partnership of, say, two solicitors working together without any significant competition. Inside the tribal boundary, different tribes may have been structured in
division of labour would represent a sharing interaction, providing each of them with different ways. The resultant social structure can be likened to layers of an onion.
greater security of income by working together instead of competing separately.
Social boundaries cannot be crossed to enable any higher level of cooperation, only
Page 46 of 51 © Julian Hart
jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

Alternative Nested Tribal Structures sharing interactions within tribes. The outer layer of tribal differentiation, arising from
sharing interactions within tribes with respect to material needs, consequently
dissipated. Direct, physical competition between the descendants of the initial tribal
Five Layers. Level 1 Tribal Boundary on the outside groups then moved up a Level to competition for security needs.

But competition for materials needs was not entirely eradicated. Rather it was tamed
and transferred from physical space into social space. Competition was no longer
direct head-to-head competition for food to eat, but for money to obtain to enable the
purchasing of food to eat. Money is a social construction allowing cooperating
exchange interactions to propagate across a society. In civilized society, we compete
for money (proxy for energy) in order to cooperate in exchange of energy (food).

As development of civilised society has progressed, competition has been tamed and
transferred from the physical realm to the social world. Step-by-step through a series
of cultural bifurcations extending further and further across larger and larger swathes
lower level cooperation. For instance, cooperation in security cannot cross a divide of civilisation. A great example of the taming of competition is the emergence of non-
created by competition for material goods. Cooperation in health and reproduction lethal sports in combination with the rise of democratic societies.
does not normally or naturally cross a divide created by competition in security (where
the latter is often expressed through mutual terror). Contrastingly, trade may continue Cultural bifurcations are characterised by a long, slow process of cultural change as
to take place between to social groups, say neighbouring states, which are acting more and more people across a society begin to alter the way they interact with each
competitively in respect of security needs. other. This can take hundreds of years. At a critical point a social phase change
happens (the cultural bifurcation itself) and positive feedback kicks-in, directly leading
CULTURAL BIFURCATIONS to very rapid economic and structural changes to a society. Classic examples in
history of such events include:
Cultural bifurcations represent none other than grandiose Tipping Points. Examples of
cultural bifurcations in our history include the appearance of money (a common  the appearance of Christianity and Islam, both of which were in gestation for many
currency) within various societies, the emergence of property rights, the arrival of centuries before suddenly taking the ancient world by storm
 the current information and communications revolution, which is the result of many
centuries of development of notions in and around the concept of democracy and
COOPERATION people learning to tell each other the truth
(Level) 1 2 3 4 5
COMPETITION AND DIVERGENCE
COMPETITION
A fundamental concept embedded within the theory of social interaction is the notion
monotheistic religions and the creation of democratic election processes. that cooperation can emerge out of divergence. We see this in our everyday lives in
the context of division of labour. Two brick layers, for instance, might be able to
The evolution of human society has taken place through the gradual removal of social cooperate together in a Sharing Temper interaction, where there is sufficient work load
boundaries and the step-by-step switching of social processes from sharing to to employ both of them. In this context, they would be simply splitting the overall task
exchanging modes. Originating tribes, with social boundaries relating to all Needs between them. But if there were a contraction in the economy, then the two brick
(say five layers) have gradually had those boundaries stripped away and merged into layers would naturally become competitors for employment. However, if one of them
broader societies. This started from the lower Needs. Original tribes, competing for diverges into, say, plastering, then they can continue to cooperate, albeit now on an
material needs, began incrementally to cooperate through exchanging peace offerings, exchange basis – classic division of labour.
which in due course developed into early trade. At a critical point, early in our history,
a cultural bifurcation took place whence trade came to dominate social interactions
across the population (mostly between nuclear family units), replacing the initial

Page 47 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

The idea of divergence runs throughout the theory of social interaction, applying to all Many interactions between people are not directly egalitarian, but comprise uneven or
Levels of the Needs hierarchy and giving rise to the following: unequal interactions. A classic example is the prostitute (or just escort or paid for
mistress), offering sex (or simply good, interested, nurturing company) in return for
1. Division of the Sourcing of Materials – divergence in trading economy money and other material Needs. The paying party to such an interaction has his or
2. Division of Labour – divergence in the manufacturing / construction economy her material Needs currently satisfied (adequate amount of money or income) and is
3. Division of Nurture – divergence in nurture related activities (for example new looking for a higher Need to be met. The prostitute or escort or mistress is seeking a
divergent specialisms in health care) basic income to survive – money for today’s material needs or to secure an on-going
4. Division of Competence – divergence in the knowledge economy income, but with no expectation of having any higher Needs met, whether health,
5. Division of Technology – divergence in areas of creativity respect or recognition.

The concept of increasing division over time, driven by natural competition, becomes If you look around society, then it is quickly apparent that a very large proportion of
particularly important when considering the long-term evolution of a society or city. At interactions are unequal. Most paid employment is a Level 1 (Material Needs) to Level
critical points, potentially giving rise to Tipping Points of major change, division of 2 (Security) interaction: owner of a company employs staff, who through their work
activity across a society can enable a new degree of cooperation to emerge. This may increase the owner’s security (say, production of goods for sale) and in return receive
be gradual or quite sudden. Examples which are less obvious than straightforward a regular stipend (daily, weekly, monthly). The regular income received meets an
division of labour include the emergence of public space and public buildings, which employees daily material needs, but provides little in the way of security. This is the
are dedicated to particular needs of a community, and the appearance of public basis of capitalism. It is also, to all intents and purposes, the basis of communism
transport, which arises when people are no longer in direct competition for travel. (real communism as opposed to idealistic communism/Marxism).

POWER RELATIONSHIPS MATRICES AND SIMS

The implicit hierarchy of the Needs gives rise to a very familiar, long discussed, but The entire cultural and social environment arising from the social interactions taking
erstwhile still unexplained, phenomenon within human societies: power and why do place within a group create a Social Matrix. These are all the cultural and social
some people end up with power over others? elements arising from the interactions – perceptions of others, perceptions of success,
behaviours and attitudes, comprehension of time and space, narratives and ideologies.
Social Process Social Matrix Examples of physical and structure Each Ideal Type of interaction, when manifest as a pure social process within a social
manifestations of Social Matrices (when group, creates a social Matrix. Labels have been suggested for these in the table
Social Processes are operating in below. There are therefore five social matrices, which aggregated together represent
Exchange Mode) the entire social consciousness of a society – that is the entire Social World according
Level 1 Peace Matrix Money (common currency) to Popper’s Three Worlds Theorem.
Birth Process Market places
Level 2 Trust Matrix Legal system When a Cultural Bifurcation occurs, such that the majority of interactions associated
Growth Process Property rights with a particular Ideal Type across a society (for instance between individuals or
Constructed cities between families or between businesses) have converted to exchange interactions,
Level 3 Value Matrix Monotheistic religions then this manifests by a fundamental change in the relevant social matrix.
Health Process Health service
Education system Social Matrices become apparent through physical manifestations. For example, the
Public space in cities Level 1 (Birth Process) Social Matrix (here referred to as the Peace Matrix) gives rise
Level 4 Decision Matrix Election systems to a commonly accepted currency (money) across a society. The European Union has
Adaptation Structured sporting competitions recently undergone a Cultural Bifurcation between nation states, most of them
Process Formal consultation systems adopting a common currency in the Euro.
Public transport
Level 5 ?? Matrix Award ceremonies SIMS stands for Systems Inhabiting Matrices. SIMS can be either hierarchic or
Transformation New Technology egalitarian and represent bounded social systems operating within a matrix. Examples
Process of SIMS include: tribes, nuclear family units, market places, bureaucratic
Page 48 of 51 © Julian Hart
jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

organisations, armies, towns and cities, cults, modern businesses, unions, nation
states, etc.

One of the easiest examples to draw on to explain SIMS is the concept of the
hierarchic bureaucracy. Most bureaucracies, as already alluded, are built up from
unequal Level 1 to Level 2 relationships, where the higher up the bureaucracy the
better served an individual’s Safety and Security Needs will be. The lower the rank of
an individual in a bureaucracy the more an individual is sacrificing his Safety and
Security Needs in order to obtain essential daily Material Needs. This is most obvious
in history in the context of armies: the king leading his army, which he pays to protect
him: the foot soldiers receive a daily hand out, but their lives are most at risk. The
maximum size to which a bureaucracy can grow is dependent upon the culture of trust
and predictability which pervades a society. This ultimately derives from the strength
of the underlying Trust Matrix across a society.

Cults represent a very different form of hierarchic social organisation involving a single
central figure, elevated in some way above a mass of supporters. The size to which a
cult can grow is not dependent on the Trust Matrix (albeit it may have a part to play)
but rather is most reliant on a strong underlying Value Matrix.

Social Process Social Matrix Systems Inhabiting Matrices (SIMS)


Sharing Mode Exchanging Mode
Level 1
Peace Matrix Tribes Market Places
Birth Process
Level 2 Bureaucratic
Trust Matrix Supply Chains
Growth Process Organisations
Level 3
Value Matrix Cults Communities
Health Process
Level 4 Group Decision-
Adaptation Decision Matrix Modern Businesses making Systems /
Process Election Systems
Level 5
Creative / Learning
Transformation ?? Matrix Award Ceremonies
Organisations
Process

Page 49 of 51 © Julian Hart


jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

DECONSTRUCTION OF THE MODERN BUSINESS social space within the organisation, but, when sufficiently differentiated, can overlap in
physical space. When hierarchies are not sufficiently differentiated, then internal
Material Boundary conflict will arise.

This outer boundary is an identity boundary, which manifests in the modern context as All hierarchies will express an innate tendency to keep growing. Within each hierarchy
a brand identity. The modern brand is a competitive entity within social space – the there is a cultural defensiveness of the area of social space occupied and an intense
Peace Matrix. It occupies social space (a discrete part of the wider economic market focus on maintaining status quo and continuation of the hierarchy for its own purposes.
place) as a tribe occupied physical space. The hierarchies in combination translate this into defense of the market share of the
outer brand(s), for the organisation as a whole to do what is necessary to maintain
This outer material boundary demarcates that Material revenue into tomorrow and to grow capital reserves. Whilst there is an expressed
all those people operating within this brand Boundary focus on maximising productivity, efficiency and cost savings, these are counter-
identity are reliant on a very specific, played by the innate drive for growth of each hierarchy.
(outer layer =
identifiable source of materials (energy /
income): sale of the products or services brand identity)
under the brand.
Nurture Boundary
Some big modern businesses, for example Unilever, have (tertiary layer =
created many specific brands. This is only possible when the common set of
market place is large enough that individual brands do not organisational values
compete within social space. Here the direct analogy to – not evident in many
tribe occupying two-dimensional physical space (the The organisations)
geographic landscape) falls down; social space is multi- Modern
dimensional, so the organisational structure connecting the Business
different brands together actually lies inside all brand Health / Nurture Boundary
identity boundaries simultaneously.
Relatively few modern businesses have culturally developed
The most important economic aspect of brand identity is the to the point of operating according to a unified set of values
case flow generated by daily sale of products and services. across the organisation. Exceptions to this rule include
charitable organisations (see below) and enlightened companies
such as John Lewis. Collective values derived through the Health
Security Boundary Process can only emerge from the bottom up. They can not be
Security Boundary (secondary layer = dictated from the top of a business, like rules and regulations under the
organisational Growth Process. Where many organisations claim to have a set of values, these
The Growth Process operating inside the outer are false as they have been decided at the top and not derived from the bottom. To
membership and
brand/identity boundary creates the this end, with most modern bureaucracies there is no unifying set of values within the
organisational structure of the business. It delimitation of defined organisation. Rather each individual, while following the rules and regulations of the
enables the social organisation to grow, which codes of conduct) business structure, operates independently according to his or her own morality.
allows work to be done to create products or
services for sale. Organisational structures based on common values do, however, exist within and
across modern businesses: these are unions and other similar social structures. In
Most modern organisations operate in mixed-mode: a combination of sharing and organisations such as John Lewis then the union has essentially been embraced as an
exchanging of labour interactions. The sharing mode of the Growth Process creates intrinsic and instrumental part of the overall operation of the business. Where in other
the structural hierarchies. The exchange mode leads to division of labour, allowing the organisations management and unions come into conflict, this represents the top of
emergence of different parallel structural hierarchies (eg. finance, production, the business and the bottom of the business coming into competition over the long-
marketing, etc). Each structural hierarchy exclusively occupies a discrete area of
Page 50 of 51 © Julian Hart
jal.hart@btinternet.com
Lancefield Theory – a new theory of social interaction DRAFT 7/9/10

term future of the organisation. This is expressed during such conflict in terms of a company. The top-down and the bottom-up come together through decision-making
different set of expressed values and divergent morality. processes within the organisation. If they operate successfully, then an organisation
as a whole will make fast, accurate decisions and take effective courses of action.
Profit oriented businesses develop from the top down, with unions emerging as layers
within the structure, arising out of the common situations that different levels of the But accuracy of information passed up the system relies on respect being passed
hierarchy experience (shop floor workers, middle management, senior management, down, including fair application of rules and recognition of values (i.e. long-term
etc). Charitable organisations, in contrast, originate from a common set of values and aspirations of staff). The effectiveness of any decisions made by a business thereby
by necessity develop an organisational structure, under the Growth Process, to enable depends upon the way that it embraces and recognises all its staff and their entire
them to operate. To this end, charities are far more likely to incorporate a common set personal needs and life aspirations. Modern companies are highly reliant on staff
of values than a common set of rules. telling the truth to each other and upwards to management. This becomes critical
when the organisation is reliant on multiple sources of information and multiple types
Where individuals within an organisation are all operating according to their own of information (i.e. different technical skills and advice). The information boundary can
morality, then organisational structures, such as unions, can exist within society, which therefore be conceived as the system of individuals (company staff) within which truth
span different bureaucracies. But when an organisation develops in a way that it is told.
draws on, and instigates the processes to maintain, a common set of values across
the organisation, which are genuinely derived from the bottom up, then the resultant Few modern businesses operate in a way that information remains entirely accurate
staff community (staff council, dedicated union or other) will become contained within through the organisation and as it is escalated up the structural hierarchies. A lack of
the bureaucratic structure. If this became generalised, unions spanning across respect of staff and their values has a strong tendency to lead to information being
different organisations would no longer be able to exist. In its place, however, corrupted (a process of Chinese whispers as information is passed up through each
businesses would generally be much more moral and value oriented, focussing layer of management hierarchy). As a consequence most organisations operate
on a much longer time horizon than is the norm at present. significantly below optimal levels in terms of decision-making. This gives
smaller businesses a significant advantage over large companies,
where the latter are slow to make decisions and inevitably rely on
less accurate information about the outside world.

Information Boundary Information Boundary Creative Boundary


(quaternary
The information boundary organisational layer – No large modern businesses truly operate in cooperative
demarcates the system which must The exchange mode at this level of organisational development.
structure within which
take decisions to follow a defined
truth needs to be told Modern
course of action. In the biological
context, this is the animal deciding for effective operation Business
which direction to move and how fast of business)
within the physical world, based on
information received and digested. In the social world, this
Materials Boundary Peace Matrix
Creative Boundary
represents an organisation with the capacity to make its own (inner layer – within Security Boundary Trust Matrix
decisions and act on them.
which creative Health Boundary Value Matrix
A business might rely on multiple sources of information, but must success of the
bring all these together to make a definite decision on a course of action organisation is fully Information Boundary Truth Matrix
from one moment to the next. Information of the outside world and of the shared)
Creative Boundary ??
business’s context is, however, received at the bottom of the business and fed
upwards through the organisational hierarchy. This feeding upwards of information
happens in conjunction with the values of the staff. The top of the organisation sets
the company’s objectives and targets and defines the rules and regulations of the
Page 51 of 51 © Julian Hart
jal.hart@btinternet.com