IN HIS now-classic Foundation science fiction series, Isaac Asimov introduced the "science" of "psychohistory" -- the mathematical modelling of social dynamics. The objective of "psychohistory" was to evolve a method of managing societal change in such a way that the probability of chaos, intrinsic to any dynamic system, is minimised.

Author Will McWhinney's quest is not very different: it is to understand the causes of conflict which inevitably occur in the process of change and to devise appropriate mechanisms for their resolution.

McWhinney's fundamental thesis is that conflict arises out of differences in the ways in which each individual constructs reality. Even when the objectives of all the protagonists involved are congruent, the various paths leading to a specific goal will differ depending upon subjective perceptions of the existing reality. From this thesis arises the redemptive concept of meta-praxis -- designing strategies of conflict resolution based on a recognition that human beings do not share a common ontology (praxis: "the practising of an art or skill").

It is important to note that McWhinney confines himself to a particular class of conflicts -- those which arise when the ultimate objective of the change process itself is not in dispute. His analysis is not meant to cover situations where conflict arises out of irreconciliable differences in objectives. To this extent, McWhinney's concept of meta-praxis is more relevant to the manager than to the statesman or politician.

McWhinney defines four types of "pure" realities -- the Sensory, the Social, the Unitary, and the Mythic. Each originates from a discernably different source: the Sensory from Nature or, more proximately, the environment; the Social from interpersonal relationships (society); the Unitary from a culture-specific received "Truth"; and the Mythic from the Self, or the individual person. Each provides a prismatic frame of reference through which change processes are seen and evaluated. If the proposed change does violence to this frame of reference, it will be resisted.

Of course, no person or group operates entirely out of a monolithic reality. Everybody is influenced, to a greater or lesser extent, by each form of reality. The substantive differences are, therefore, only relative. What really complicates the problem is that one person's perception of the nature of another's reality is conditioned not only by the objective attributes of the latter but also by the former's own subjective reality. This realisation forms the basis of meta-praxis.

The fundamental attribute of meta-praxis is that pure reason or logic has only a limited role to play in evolving a common path of change, since logic itself is conditioned by custom-made worldviews. Apparently illogical structures which arise from differences in the way people construct realities must be accepted and incorporated in full. This is an important message which has doubtless been always known to practising demagogues, but has not influenced management practices at large.

The remarkable combination of scholarly rigour and anecdotal colour which characterises this book drives home the thesis in no uncertain manner. Nobody who prides himself on having an open mind should miss it.

Pronab Sen is Economic Adviser, Government of India