Introducing MIKS: a methodology for the utilization of indigenous knowledge

How can indigenous knowledge best be used to benefit the people who possess it?

Lars Christian Smith

Indigenous knowledge should be approached in exactly the same way a management consultant approaches the indigenous or expert knowledge in a business organization. This knowledge is largely ephemeral, context-specific, and the property of the business organization. The task of the management consultant is not to record this knowledge just to use it as input for a future project. His role is not that of an archivist, nor is he an 'equal partner in the development process'. The partnership is not equal. In fact, the client is the boss, and the job of the management consultant is to serve his client.
Once this is clear, the big question is how a management consultant can assist his or her clients in using their knowledge? A methodology has been developed to do exactly that. I call it MIKS (methodology for the utilization of indigenous knowledge systems). It is a methodology of analytic reasoning that uses the client's expert knowledge to assist him or her in reaching specific goals. This approach has already proved successful in a large number of cases, mainly in business organizations in Europe and North America. It has been used to bring about change within organizations, change in business strategies, change in the way companies do business, and in conflict resolution.

No magic
When MIKS works well, the client is often surprised: 'It worked like magic!' or: 'It was like a miracle!' How can this be? Allow me to point to Arthur C. Clarke's Third Law: 'Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.' (Clarke 1984). MIKS is not magic, but it is certainly an advanced methodology, specific, well-defined and widely applicable.
Having worked with many consultants, I know them inside out. One of their most common failings is the fact that they are like a child with a new hammer who discovers that everything needs hammering. If you call in a computer consultant, you get a computer solution, and if you call in an organizational development consultant, you get lots of training programs, no matter what the problem is. MIKS, by contrast, uses the client's expert knowledge to design or discover the kind of intervention needed. Solutions are not served up on a platter. We do not ask the client: 'How would you like your solution? Rare, medium, or well-done? With mashed potatoes, baked potatoes, or French fries?' It is not a cafeteria approach, but a joint effort.
How is it done? The theory behind MIKS is based on the observation that one cannot explain the behaviour of a person or any other living system in terms of cause and effect. As Gregory Bateson pointed out (1972), if you kick a stone, the result is predictable; in principle, one can calculate the trajectory of the stone before actually kicking it. Kicking a dog, however, is a different matter.
What a living system does depends not just on what happens to it, but also on the intended purpose. As William James observed in Principles of psychology (1983), human beings employ variable means to obtain regular ends. If you accept James's observation, and if you accept that people are autonomous and that they control their own lives, you can start building a theoretical foundation for your model. The concept that control is not a metaphor but the essence of the way people function is crucial to that theory.
The following example will illustrate the concept. A thermostat is an example of a simple control system. For a thermostat to work there must be:

i) a reference value: the desired temperature;
ii) a perceptual function: the measurement of the actual temperature;
iii) a mechanism for making comparisons: measuring the difference between the reference and the actual value;
iv) the means to increase the temperature from the actual to the desired temperature.

In other words, we can define control as the production of intended perceptual results. Restating this insight so that we can discuss the concept of how people control their own lives, what is needed is:

i) a reference value: an image of the desired state;
ii) a perceptual function: the ability to observe the existing state;
iii) a mechanism for making comparisons: the ability to compare the existing state and the desired state for differences;
iv) the ability to act to bring the existing state closer to the desired state.

The process of getting from an actual state to a desired state can break down anywhere in this circular process. But experience shows--at least in organizations in Europe and the USA--that it is most often either the definition of the desired state or the definition of the intervention that causes problems. Let us consider these two crucial stages.

Mental models
In attempting to get from the existing state to the desired state, people define a mental model of each one, a kind of construction in the mind. People use these models to provide order, so that they can take action, in the belief that their action will be effective. Some models are adequate, in that they represent reality sufficiently well for the purpose of the intended action. Other models provide misleading or insufficient representations of reality, and are therefore inadequate.
One way of thinking of a mental model is to see it as a map of reality. For example, you are about to visit Berlin for the first time, and you bring along a guidebook which happens to be a Baedecker published in 1914. Depending on your purposes, that guidebook may or may not provide you with an adequate model. Reality has changed, but the map has not. Two related characteristics determine how useful a map is: the scale of the map and the features it includes. Maps should not have too many features, but neither should they be too abstract. If you need a map to understand the map, it will not be very useful.
From the client's point of view, the problem with most research reports is that both the scale of the map and the features included are wrong. The map produced by the researcher is at the wrong level of abstraction and does not tell the client where to go from where he is now. It also has the wrong features, and most people are not able to use it without a map of the map (e.g., higher education).
In order to be effective, consultants must get rid of--or modify--the client's inadequate map of the desired state and the existing state, by decontextualizing it, filtering out the client's tacit assumptions, in order to get an objective, observable description of the problem and the solution. This is not in fact very complicated, and there are various techniques which can be used. To mention just one: ask what James Wilke calls the miracle question. 'Suppose a miracle happened, and your problem was suddenly solved. What would you see, hear or feel that would make you sure that your problem was solved?' (O'Hanlon & Wilk 1987). Once the desired state is defined objectively, in terms of actual physical observations, we can start working on a set of interventions
that will bring about the desired change.

Interventions
The second stage at which problems can occur is in defining the intervention. An intervention is a purposeful action based on a mental map. What is a good intervention? One that fits and is natural. The aim is not utopian social engineering or a radical redesign of traditional social structures. The aim is to find adaptive interventions. If the client says: 'This is so simple, why didn't I think of it myself?', then you probably have a good intervention. The intervention must be small but catalytic. That is, the effect must be much larger than the effort. So, is it the smallest possible intervention that will bring about the desired change? Minimalism has not typically been a characteristic of projects financed by donor organizations. But doesn't change evoke resistance, you will ask. In truth, there is no such thing as resistance to change, there are only badly designed interventions.

Miracles happen
To get back to magic and miracles: Clarke's Third Law is not really a new idea. Saint Augustine expressed the same idea a millenium and a half before when he said: 'Miracles happen not in contradiction to nature, but in contradiction to our understanding of nature.'
If we change our understanding of nature, we will be able to produce results that may seem surprising to those who do not share our understanding of human nature. MIKS enables us to perform small miracles in the spirit of Saint Augustine. For those who understand MIKS, there is absolutely nothing miraculous about it. It is simply an effective, collaborative methodology for making increasingly accurate models of reality, relative to a specific purpose. The basic principles of MIKS are simple and can be taught in a few days. Unfortunately, like most worthwhile activities, they take years to master.

Lars Christian Smith
CERAM ESC, MBA Program
BP 085 Rue Dostoievski
06902 Sophia Antipolis
France
Tel.: +352 67287
Fax: +352 660484
E-mail: lars.smith@ci.educ.lu and lars.smith@ceram.fr

References
Bateson, Gregory (1972) Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine Books.

Clarke, Arthur C. (1985) Profiles of the future. New York: Warner Books.

James, William (1983) Principles of psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

O'Hanlon, Bill, and James Wilk (1987) Shifting contexts: the generation of effective psychotherapy. London: Guilford Press.

Back to: top of the page | Contents IK Monitor 5(2) | IK Homepage
Suggestions to: ikdm@nuffic.nl
(c) copyright Nuffic-CIRAN and contributors 1997.