'Proof' of the Four Quadrants

As I have read (and 'reviewed')  Lowy and Hood's (2004) The Power of the 2 x 2 Matrix in applying a matrix, it first has to be created and the process includes identifying and naming the quadrants of concern. The final step is similar to what I see as a key function of Hodges' model: assurance. They refer to proof, being finalising the matrix asking the question are these quadrants real. Are they correct in this (business, industry and commercial) context?

For Hodges' model the quadrants are predetermined. They are 'fixed' but in a way to reassure both those on clinical ethics committees and involved in corporate governance. Although fixed -

individual

|

INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES

humanistic ----------------------------------------------- mechanistic

SOCIOLOGY : POLITICAL

|

group - population

INTERPERSONAL	SCIENCES
SOCIOLOGY	POLITICAL

 - the terms used can vary as below:

individual

|

INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES

humanistic ----------------------------------------------- mechanistic

SOCIOLOGY : POLITICAL

|

group - population

MENTAL HEALTH	PHYSICAL HEALTH
CULTURE & SOCIETY	POLITICAL

 

 'Culture and Society' was a suggestion and I've often wondered about the (meaning) scale and semantic synergy across the terms. Sociology is an academic discipline. As students 'produce' the model, I invariably have them wander about the library with Dewey. 'Politics' maybe a subject of study, but not 'Political'. The context for Hodges' model, however, is the situation in which the patient, nurse, carer, doctor, social worker, occupational therapist, physio ... find themselves. What is political about the situation. Even this is not the whole picture quadrant. What politics are evident? What political aspects should (must) be paid attention to? What is missing politically that is (further) injurious to this patient? (This patient (and carer) who is already helpless, hopeless and vulnerable?)

 In terms of proof, this is of course very important within healthcare. In mental health we often adopt a psycho-social approach and in psychological therapies from counselling to cognitive and gestalt forms in Hodges' model we can distinguish between one-to-one and individual psychology and group therapies and the psychology of a group. As soon as 'self' considers 'other' we also conjoin the model's vertical axis.

 

individual

|

INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES

humanistic ----------------------------------------------- mechanistic

SOCIOLOGY : POLITICAL

|

group - population

individual PSYCHOLOGY	SCIENCES
group PSYCHOLOGY	POLITICAL

 

When I write 'sciences' I'm looking at my school time-table (yes - really!). The sciences for me back then were biology, chemistry and physics (which had to include astronomy). Today, we refer to STEM:

individual

|

INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES

humanistic ----------------------------------------------- mechanistic

SOCIOLOGY : POLITICAL

|

group - population

INTERPERSONAL	Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics
SOCIOLOGY	POLITICAL

 

 

In the summer on twitter ComplexWales asked a question and made a suggestion (I must find and copy the tweet). This set me to task to write during lockdown: so I've a good outline of a short manual for Hodges' model.

In the last post, this is why I'm grateful to Lowy and Hood. I can now also factor this into the manual,  future presentations and workshops.

 

Real proof as an evidence-base goes far beyond this. I can see an exercise with the above components, the axes, the domains and the research subjects being invited to construct something. Amid the quest for data and theory there should be a space for pragmatics too.

Finally, I will leave it to you to reflect on -

Personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) education

 

- in relation to Hodges' model ...

 

More to follow ('care architecture' still) ...

Alex Lowy, Phil Hood (2004) The Power of the 2 x 2 Matrix: Using 2 x 2 Thinking to Solve Business Problems and Make Better Decisions, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass ISBN: 978-1-118-00879-9