A second-order cybernetics approach to the relationship between the intern and the workplace in a Work Integrated Learning (WIL) experience Engela van der Klashorst Tshwane University of Technology Philip van der Klashorst Tshwane University of Technology Work Integrated Learning (WIL) programmes involve partnerships between diverse groups of individuals. This paper provides an alternative perspective on the relationship between the intern and the workplace, framing it in a second-order cybernetics system. Being inherently transdisciplinary, cybernetic reasoning can be applied to understand and provide a different approach to successfully integrate the intern into a work place system. The paper provides an overview of the cybernetics approach, with reference to learning and experience and includes a discussion the cognitive open loop in Luhman’s conceptual pairings. The paper concludes by suggesting that a second-order cybernetics system may be beneficial for the transfer of tacit knowledge in a workplace system, however research on the relationship between the intern and the workplace is needed to confirm a positive relation. Introduction Socialisation in western society takes place in a world where it is assumed that a linear cause/effect approach is appropriate. In a linear causal relationship it is believed that event A causes event B, in a linear, unidirectional fashion. A is responsible for B and consequently can be seen as causing B. A work integrated learning (WIL) program (A) will therefore cause work experience (B). Reality is seen as separate from people, existing outside of their control. Meaning thus comes from external experience. Distinguishing a WIL program as a cause/effect relation, will position the intern as a merely a recipient of reality; a recipient of experience. As a result, the interns react to the reality of the workplace rather than being active participants in the construction of the experience. Cybernetic theory, in contrast to a causal relationship, regards the construction of reality as a non-linear concept. Cybernetics is concerned not so much with what systems consist of, but how they function (Becvar & Becvar, 2000). Although an extensive explanation of cybernetic
References Becvar, D.S. & Becvar, R.J. (2000). Family Therapy: a Systemic Integration. Allyn and Bacon: Boston. Dubberly, H. & Pangaro, P. (2007). Cybernetics and Service-Craft: language for design. Kybernetes, 9: pp.1-23. Gibson, E., Brodie, S., Sharpe, S., Wong, D.K.Y., Deane., E. & Fraser, S. (2002) Towards the development of a work integrated learning unit. Celebrating teaching at Macquarie, Macquarie University, NSW, 28-29 November, 2002. North Ryde, NSW.: Macquarie University. Grund, J.; Hennestad, B.; Johannesen, J.; Karlsson, A. & Olaisen, J. (1999). Innovation as knowledge management in corporations. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 15(1): Heylighen, F. & Joslyn, C. (2001). Cybernetics and Second-order Cybernetics. In R.A. Meyers (ed), Encyclopaedia of Physical Science & Technology (3rd edition): pp.1-24. Academic Press, New York. Huber, G. (1991). Organisational learning: the contributing processes and literature. Organisational Science, 2: pp.88-115. Johannessen, J. (1998). Organisations as social systems: the search for a systemic theory of organisational innovation processes. Kybernetes,27(4): pp.359-387. Krippendorff, K. (1996). A Cybernetics of Otherness. Systems Research, 13(3): pp.311-328. Orrell, J. (2004). Work Integrated Learning Programmes: Management and Educational Quality. Proceedings of the Australian Universities Quality Forum 2004.