[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: Intrinsic motivation?



Andy,

what I like of the theory of activiy is that it provides something on which
we can anchor the collective material activity: its object.
We cannot deny that in an industrial production someone has started a
business and defined the strategy of production and its consequent
organization of work. This is a 'true' object in the sense that it has
concrete consequences for the workers. And it is not a personal motive (the
motive of the employer) because the motive behind an industrial production
has to respond to some cultural-historical need (need of shoes, of cars, of
good Italian wine and not only French wine :-))) ).

What I tried to show with my research is exactly what you say: you talks
about the multiple interests in an organization, I talk of different
personal senses of the motive/object of the enterprise. As I tried to
explain, I have my theoretical reasons to prefer to use the concept of
motives instead of the concept of motivation or interests.


Cristina


2014-08-07 17:38 GMT+02:00 Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>:

> Perhaps Greg. I am not familiar with Leight Starr's work.
> The only boundary objects I know are Engestrom's, and in his case it is a
> step in a good direction, but it is a bit like putting a lightweight into a
> heavyweight fight but giving him bigger gloves to compensate.
>
>
> Andy
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
>
>
> greg.a.thompson@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Andy,
>> I wonder if you would be warmer to Leigh Starrs idea of boundary objects?
>> I do believe a special issue of MCA on Starrs work is in the works. Rumor
>> has it.
>> Greg
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 6:15 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, I understand that, Cristina. That is Leontyev's approach. You have
>>> correctly represented it.
>>> It's just that I don't agree with it.
>>> As I suggested, to privilege one point of view as the true point of view
>>> and all other points of view as "personal"
>>> (1) Sets up a bad dualism, actually far worse than any dualism Descartes
>>> was guilty of.
>>> (2) Reflects the world ANL lived in: the PolitBuro's view was the
>>> "objective" and "true" aim of all activities in the USSR.  Everyone
>>> fulfilled their targets, exceptr of course for dissidents and saboteurs,
>>> but in fact it was all mostly a fiction. Since the 1940s, sociologists have
>>> shown that multiple interests are at play in any business enterprise. A
>>> binary relation is quite inadequate to represent the relations active
>>> within a business or any activity, far less a modern capitalist country.
>>> (3) Vygotsky's approach is in my opinion far superior, in that instead
>>> of having an unproblematic, objective or true object, it relies on how each
>>> of the participants in the activity conceive of its object. This was not in
>>> itself sufficient for an Activity Theory, but it is a much better start
>>> than Leontyev's which is inferior to sociological theories of 60 years ago,
>>> as I see it.
>>>
>>> Andy
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
>>>
>>>
>>> Maria Cristina Migliore wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Andy,
>>>>
>>>> I intend objective motive as the motive of the activity. Objective does
>>>> not
>>>> refer to objectivity, objectiveness and judging objectively here.
>>>> Objective
>>>> motive refers to the idea that "the object of an activity is its true
>>>> motive."
>>>> This is the terminology proposed by Leontiev in Activity, Consciousness,
>>>> and Personality, section 3.5 The General Structure of Activity, page 62
>>>> However, I tend to not use the locution 'objective motive'. But
>>>> motive/object.
>>>>
>>>> H
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>


-- 

Maria Cristina Migliore, Ph.D.

Senior Researcher


IRES Istituto Ricerche Economico Sociali del Piemonte

Via Nizza, 18

10125 Torino – Italia

Tel. +39 011 6666463

cell. 348 0454272

Fax.  +39 011 6696012

e-mail   migliore@ires.piemonte.it

skype mariacristinamigliore

IRES web www.ires.piemonte.it

LinkedIn Maria Cristina Migliore

personal web www.mariacristinamigliore.it (Italiano)

personal web www.mariacristinamigliore.it/index_e.htm (English)



*Con il tuo 5 per mille all’IRES Piemonte contribuisci a migliorare la vita
nella tua regione.*

*Info: www.ires.piemonte.it/5xmille.html
<http://www.ires.piemonte.it/5xmille.html>*

*P* Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing this
e-mail

Nota di riservatezza: Il presente messaggio, corredato dei relativi
allegati, contiene informazioni da considerarsi strettamente riservate ed è
destinato esclusivamente alla persona destinataria sopra indicata, la quale
è l'unica autorizzata ad usarlo, copiarlo e, sotto la propria
responsabilità, diffonderlo. Chiunque ricevesse questo messaggio per errore
o comunque lo leggesse senza esserne legittimata è pregata di rinviarlo
alla mittente distruggendone l'originale. Grazie. Si prega inoltre di
tenere conto che la trasmissione non può essere garantita senza errori e in
sicurezza.

This message and any files or documents attached are confidential and may
also be legally privileged or protected by other legal rules. It is
intended only for the individual or entity named. If you have received this
email in error, please inform the sender, delete it from your system and do
not copy or disclose it or its contents or use it for any purpose. Thank
you. Please also note that transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure
or error-free.