From a Distance: 4Ps, Nursing Process & Socio-Tech I

In the 4Ps post last year each 'P' (purpose, process, policy and practise) sat in its own domain. I made no effort to differentiate them; each 'P' was left to stand for itself - so here's a question for you...

Assuming you agree with this 4P formulation, which 'P', if any, do you think is primary?

For me the mainstay is PROCESS because chronological and pathological TIME ticks in the SCIENCES domain. Plans and actions are situated (see Hodges' model) in time and besides pathologically speaking I only have one pair of hands tied to a finite metabolism and hence limited information processing capacity.

Now, casting my vote to PROCESS within the SCIENCES domain, may seem something of a sell out to advocates of the humanities and me a mental health professional to boot... Where is the warm-touchy-feely essence of care? So, as we look to the HUMANISTIC hemisphere for quality assurance the next query is yours:

Without a sense of PURPOSE tasks x, y, and z will not be done properly, if even initiated?

Very true. PROCESS like PURPOSE has its micro-macro dimensions. PROCESS in particular is notorious in the extent to which it can be reduced to ever finer detail.

Looking at h2cm, the antipodes must not be ignored. Sometimes people believe they are on solid ground, secure (smug even) literally in the knowledge where PROCESSES abound; but the need to take in other perspectives can prove a wake-up call in the form of a sudden dousing.

Balancing POLITICAL need, encapsulated coherently in POLICY, must constantly be weighed against actual PRACTICE in the SOCIOLOGICAL domain and the constraints that operate there.

Just because you have TI:ME and individuals allotted on the Gant and PERT charts, subjective ti:me can literally slap us in the face if the mood is judged wrongly. PROCESS may be primary, but its ramifications are and must be constantly transformed-translated and enacted in personal and social form.