Has it taken me nearly two years to bring you a sequel? It sure has. But, like my Pops evangelized: always finish what you start and in my case my finisher came in bottom of the 9th.

Learning & Development and Anthropology share a lot of similarities: endless subfields, thought provoking research, and plenty of drama between different theoretical camps. Hell hath no fury like an academic about to spit the clapback of the century in a publication.

As I Robert Frost my way (took the road less traveled) through the Learning and Development field, I find that time and time again, my deliverables and design practice are inspired by Anthropology theories of the man responsible for this long-awaited sequel: Clifford Geertz.

Call me Geertz Gal, cause do I love some thick…. description.

And by thick description I mean I love that Geertz developed a theory that gives me an excuse to describe something professional like an onion: the layers of what we are observing people do in the workplace, or anywhere, must be peeled carefully with no scrap wasted.

Geertz describes these layers using the difference between eye twitches and a wink:

The winker is communicating, and indeed communicating in a quite precise and special way: (1) deliberately, (2) to some one in particular, (3) to impact a particular message, (4) according to a socially established code, and (5) without cognizance of the rest of the company. As Ryle points out, the winker has done two things, contracted his eyelids and winked, while the twitcher has done only one, contracted his eyelids. Contracting your eyelids on purpose when there exists a public code in which so doing counts as a conspiratorial signal is winking. That’s all there is to it: a speck of behavior, a fleck of culture, and –viola!- a gesture.

Geertz, 1973, p. 6

Developing learning, in many ways, is like being the individual behind the wink and here’s why:

(1) Deliberate Communication
Designing learning is our systemic and systematic approach to intentionally communicating information for measurable outcomes. Instructional designers should be deliberate and methodical in how we analyze giving a precise wink.

(2) To a Particular Person
Without a doubt, one of the most important aspects of projects is analysis of who needs to receive the wink. Without the designation of the particular person we are winking at, we risk delivering effective change as our wink may, unfortunately, be mistaken for a twitch.

(3) To Impact a Particular Message
Instructional design is, for all intents and purposes, the definition of impacting particular messages: designing measured winks to particular people consistently and effectively.

(4) According to a Socially Established Code
I have yet to work with an organization that doesn’t have an explicit mission, goal(s), and vision. These artifacts of business are the shared set of (implicit and explicit) values, ideas, concepts, and rules of behaviour that allow a social group to function and perpetuate itself (Hudleson, 2004) that I mentioned in the first episode of this series. Instructional designers use these artifacts to develop wink design.

(5) Without Cognizance of the Rest of the Company
Organizations are busy entities. Work moves quick. Instructional Designers are tasked with implementing seamless winks without interruption to the particular people working together to create the organization…. and then evaluating (or measuring) the success of said wink.

Geertz theory of thick culture is, by no means, perfect. He, like many other anthropologists, operated under some amount of subjectivity. We run into this regularly in instructional design: our experiences, in some way or another, impacts deliverables. To counter subjective subconscious, I recommend regular reviews with stakeholders (something you already know, but seriously, it’s important) and embracing feedback that you might not enjoy hearing.

One (and probably the only with merit at this point in my career) piece of advice I have for anyone who pursues instructional design/learning design/learning engineering: do not be afraid to search for answers outside of our field. Making the strange familiar makes all the difference in practice. Approach Instructional Design for organizations the same way Geertz approached his work with other cultures: one gesture at a time.

References

Geertz, Clifford. 2017. The Interpretation of Cultures. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Patricia M. Hudelson, Culture and quality: an anthropological perspective, International Journal for Quality in Health Care, Volume 16, Issue 5, October 2004, Pages 345–346, https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzh076