Ethical Divorce Made Simple – CATWOE Model

ETHICAL DIVORCE MADE SIMPLE

CATWOE Model

By

VIKRAM KARVE

During my professional career – I implemented many management techniques at work.

I tried my best to use the same management techniques in my personal life too.

For example – I successfully used Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) to quit smoking.

I used a Project Management Technique called “Force Field Analysis” to quit drinking – and to ensure I didn’t start smoking again.

And – I have extensively used the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) “CATWOE” Model to help me understand and resolve many ethical dilemmas that I faced from time to time.

Dear Reader – let me explain the CATWOE Model in brief.

CATWOE Model

The CATWOE model adapted from Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) is a useful decision-making technique in ethical situations which helps resolve ethical dilemma and helps you take an “ethical” decision.

Ethical dilemma occurs due to mismatch in ethical perspectives of various stakeholders involved in the ethical situation.

Every person (or entity) that is likely to be affected by your decision is a “stakeholder” with a moral claim on you (the decision-maker).

Sometimes – when you take a decision in a hurry – you don’t even realise how many “stakeholders” exist – who are going to be affected by your decision.

A CATWOE analysis will help you identify all stakeholders involved in a decision and analyse their respective ethical perspectives.

CATWOE is an acronym to categorize various stakeholders:

CATWOE

C = CUSTOMERS – “CLIENTS” OF THE DECISION

A = ACTORS – “AGENTS” WHO CARRY OUT THE DECISION

T = TRANSFORMATION PROCESS – THE DECISION MAKER

W = WELTANSCHAUUNG – “WORLD VIEW” PREDOMINANTLY HELD

O = OWNERS – OWNERSHIP OF THE DECISION

E = ENVIRONMENT – ENVIRONMENTAL IMPOSITIONS

To elaborate a bit:

C:   The “customers” of the decision. In this context – ‘customers’ means those who are on the receiving end of your decision. Is it clear from your definition of “C” – as to who primarily will gain or lose from your decision…?

A:   The “actors” – meaning those who would actually carry out the activities envisaged in the implementation of the decision.

T:   The “transformation process”. What does the system do to the inputs in order to convert them into the outputs…?

W: “Weltanschauung” – The “World View” pertaining to the Ethical Situation.

O:   The “owner(s)” – those who have sufficient formal power to stop the decision.

E:   The “environmental constraints” – in which the decision is being taken.

DIVORCE – an Ethical Situation  

Any time one human being intervenes in the life of another human being directly or indirectly – an ethical situation arises.

Ethical Situations are frequently charged with emotions.

When you divorce your spouse – you “intervene” in the life your spouse – so – divorce is an “ethical situation”.

In fact – in addition to your spouse – many others are also affected by your divorce – yes – there are many “stakeholders” that may be affected by your decision to divorce your spouse.

Let us try to identify and categorize the “stakeholders” affected by a divorce.

(Dear Reader – let me add a disclaimer that I don’t have any first-hand experience of divorce – so – this is “hypothetical” – an “illustrative example” – to demonstrate how to use the CATWOE model in reaching an “ethical” decision – after considering the perspectives of various of stakeholders. Also – the “stakeholders” – and their perspectives may vary in different situations)

CATWOE – The Dramatis Personae in a Divorce and their Ethical Perspectives

CUSTOMERS

The main “customers” in a divorce are the husband and wife who want to divorce.

Are both on the same page as far the decision to divorce is concerned…?

(This may be the case in amicable divorce with mutual consent)

Or – do they have differing perspectives…?

(In which case the divorce may be contested entailing acrimonious litigation involving nasty court battles)

Are there any other “customers” who are affected by the divorce – like children, parents, relatives etc…?

Or maybe – are there any lover(s) of the husband/wife – who are interested in the divorce – since the lover(s) want to marry the husband/wife after they get divorced…?

What are the perspectives of these “customers”…?

Do the children want their parents to divorce – or – are they opposed to it…?

What about the parents of the husband and wife – and their relatives and friends…?

What are their perspectives in this divorce situation…?

In this divorce situation – you may be either the husband – or you may be the wife – but – before you make your decision – you must introspect with vicarious empathy – and try to envisage, comprehend and appreciate the perspectives of all “customers” – both “primary” (you and your spouse) – and “secondary” (children, parents, relatives, friends, lovers etc.)

Perspectives may differ among “customers” – primary and secondary.

For example – a husband may want a divorce – but the wife may not want a divorce – and – vice versa.

Even among children, parents, relatives etc. – there may be various perspectives.

You may introspect and evaluate various perspectives – and assess whether they are “justified” or not.

As far as the main “customers” (husband/wife) are concerned – there are two types of divorce:

1. “Pull” Divorce – your attraction for someone else is the reason for you wanting to divorce your spouse – in order to enable you to marry/cohabit with your “lover”.

2. “Push” Divorce – some internal issues are “pushing” you out of your marriage – incompatibility issues, infidelity/cruelty/insanity/impotence/alcoholism of spouse etc. – which are causing irretrievable breakdown of your marital relationship – and “pushing” you out of marriage.

Is your divorce – a “pull’ divorce – or – a “push” divorce…?

Are you being “pulled” out of your marriage…?

Or – are you being “pushed” out of your marriage…?

Think about it – do you really want to breakup your marriage…? 

Think about all the other “customers” and their perspectives – before you take a decision.

In one case of “amicable” divorce by mutual consent – the divorcing parents did not anticipate the extent to which their teenage daughter would get upset by their divorce – the daughter became rebellious and wayward and took to drugs and was psychologically scarred for life.

In another case – the mother (of the divorced wife) went on a guilt trip and blamed herself for the divorce of her daughter thinking that she hadn’t brought up her daughter well.

Where the marriage is an arranged one – the parents of the divorced couple may get upset.

Remember – there are a lot of “customers” who will be affected by your decision to divorce – and – there may be a lot of “collateral damage” because of your divorce.

So – you must take a soft holistic “systemic” view – before you take a final decision.

ACTORS

Actors include all the persons/agencies involved in the divorce process – counsellors, lawyers, family courts etc.

They too have their own perspectives.

For Example – a marriage counsellor may try to “save” the marriage.

Divorce Lawyers will try to “win” the case and get the best “deal and maximum “benefits” for their “client”.

The Family Court will have a “legal” perspective.

TRANSFORMATION PROCESS

This is the process which “transforms” a marriage into a divorce – the lawful procedure to split the legal bond between husband and wife.

Different countries and different religions may have different divorce procedures.

You have to consider the perspectives of the “transformation process” – under which law were you married – on what grounds are you seeking divorce – various aspects like alimony/maintenance, property distribution, children’s custody etc.

WELTANSCHAUUNG

Weltanschauung (World View) on Divorce will vary depending on the prevailing culture of the society to which you belong or the place you live in.

In “modern” societies – divorce is easily acceptable – and indeed – a part of life.

In “conservative” societies – divorce may carry a “stigma” – not only for the divorcees – but for their children, parents and siblings/relatives of the divorcees as well. 

In “dogmatic” societies – perspectives may be even more rigid, harsh and unsympathetic – maybe gender-biased too – and divorcees may even be “ostracized”.

Before you take a decision to divorce – you must consider the Weltanschauung (World View) on how divorce is perceived in your society – and introspect on the likely social ramifications of divorce – and – once you take a decision to divorce – you must be prepared for the repercussions.

(As an aside – you may be surprised to know this – but – many years ago – in the “cantonment culture” of the military – divorce was frowned upon. Maybe – this was due to the vestiges of the “Victorian” culture of the colonial days of the British Raj…)

OWNER

The “owner” is the entity who has the formal power to stop the divorce.

This depends on place to place.

Can courts stop a divorce…?

In ethnic societies – can community leaders stop a divorce…?

In some countries – can religious authorities stop a divorce…?

Well – I request experts to please throw some light on this aspect – about – who has the formal power/authority to stop a divorce.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS/IMPOSITIONS

Do you live in a modern urban metropolis or cosmopolitan city…?

Or – do you live in the “mofussil” – in a rural town or village…? 

Do you live in a Joint Family…?

Or – are you a Nuclear Family living all by yourself…?

Are you financially independent…?

Is your environment safe for a divorced “single” person…?  

Which country do you live in…?

Well – though Environment is linked to Weltanschauung (World View) – there is a slight difference.

Weltanschauung (World View) is connected with “culture” – whereas – Environmental Constraints encompass other “administrative” aspects and support systems for day-to-day “ease of living” - especially for divorcees and single parent families.

ETHICAL DIVORCE

Once you have identified and categorized all “stakeholders” affected by your decision to divorce – and analyzed their perspectives – you will now be better equipped to take an ethical and informed decision to divorce or not to divorce. 

Dear Reader – I would love to hear your views and feedback. Please comment here or on Social Media (Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn) 

VIKRAM KARVE

Copyright © Vikram Karve 

1. If you share this post, please give due credit to the author Vikram Karve
2. Please DO NOT PLAGIARIZE. Please DO NOT Cut/Copy/Paste this post
© vikram karve., all rights reserved.

Disclaimer:

1. This is a fictional spoof, satire, just for fun and humor, no offence is meant to anyone, so take it with a pinch of salt and have a laugh.

2. All stories in this blog are a work of fiction. Events, Places, Settings and Incidents narrated in the stories are a figment of my imagination. The characters do not exist and are purely imaginary. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Copyright Notice:

No part of this Blog may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Blog Author Vikram Karve who holds the copyright.

Copyright © Vikram Karve (All Rights Reserved)

© vikram karve., all rights reserved.

Ethics of Technology

Around 25-30 years ago, in the early 1990’s, I wrote a series of articles on TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT

Here is an abridged version of an article on the Ethical aspect of Technology Management – How Technology affects Human Life – the pros and the cons...

HOW TECHNOLOGY AFFECTS HUMAN LIFE

An Essay

By

VIKRAM KARVE 

DEFINITION OF TECHNOLOGY

In our everyday lives, most of us use a number of words that we assume have a universal, agreed-upon, and accepted meaning for all people in all contexts.

Often, the more frequently the word is used, the more we take for granted that our usage is the only possible usage of the term.

One such popular word freely bandied about and very much in-vogue jargon now-a-days is “technology”.

Let us explore the meaning of the word “technology”.

The word “technology” comprises two parts – “technikos” & “ology”

The historical derivation of the term technology comes from the Greek word technikos, meaning “of art, skillful, practical”

The portion of the word ology indicates“knowledge of” or a “systematic treatment of.”

Thus, the literal verbatim derivation of the term technology is literally“knowledge of the skillful and practical”

However, this definition is too general in nature and we have to transcend this narrow view of technology since every technology starts from a human purpose, from the intention to satisfy some human need or behaviour.

Indeed, technology is the manipulation of nature for human purpose – yes, manipulation of nature, so let us use a slightly different definition of technology.

We will define technology as the knowledge of the manipulation of nature for human purposes.

This definition retains the notions of both knowledge and practicality (human purposes) but adds the new concept of manipulation of nature.

This implies that all practical or technical skills ultimately derive from alterations or manipulation of nature.

Technology depends on a base in the natural world (Science) but extends the natural world through the phenomenon of manipulation (Engineering).

Since we want to manipulate nature, the ability to predict what nature will do when manipulated is most useful, indeed imperative.

ETHICS OF TECHNOLOGY

By our very definition, technology manipulates nature for human purposes.

Technology manipulates nature.

Man is a part of nature.

By manipulating nature, man manipulates himself.

Thus, technology manipulates man, influences, even governs human behaviour, and in turn impinges on societal behaviour, traditions and culture.

Technology is an entity that intervenes in the life of human beings in multifarious ways, directly or indirectly, trying to alter behaviours.

Thus, Technology has an Ethical Dimension.

The very raison d’etre of technology is human purpose.

What is the fundamental purpose of human life?

Is it to increase standard of living?

Is it to improve quality of life?

Or is it to have greater satisfaction in life?

We can distill all these various aspects into a single holistic concept:

“VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE”

Thus, the cardinal aim of technology is to enhance the value of human life.

TECHNOLOGY and the VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE

Let us define the value of human life as the balance or ratio between satisfaction or happiness and pain or suffering.

VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE = HAPPINESS/SUFFERING

In the context of this definition, the ultimate purpose of technology is to enhance the value of human life, with a long-term perspective, by maximization of happiness and satisfaction and a concomitant reduction or minimization of pain and suffering (physical, mental and emotional).

As a generalization, people want a better life.

A better life may usually mean things like freedom from want, access to and possession of at least some of the “nonessentials”, comforts or luxuries, good health, a reasonable life expectancy, the absence of emotional stress, satisfying human relations (resulting from gratifying work experience and meaningful interpersonal relationships), intellectual stimulation, and personally rewarding leisure activities.

HUMAN NEEDS and VALUES

Human needs and values change through time as technology advances.

Man tends to accept the fruits of new technology more readily (satisfaction, pleasure, happiness, comfort) whereas he is reluctant to accept changes in his personal life.

Thus, social and cultural changes always lag behind technology causing a mismatch and disconnect which consequently leads to unhappiness, dissatisfaction, pain and suffering (emotional) and concomitant lowering of the value of human life.

A crude but practical way of classifying human values is to divide needs into those that are essentially physiological and those that are psychological.

Most new technologies cater to the physiological aspect by performing Dangerous, Dirty, or Difficult jobs (the 3 D’s) thereby enhancing the value of human life.

As regards the psychological aspect, an example pertaining to Information Technology (IT) may be in order.

Information Technology (IT) caters to two unique categories of psychological needs of humans:

 

Cognitive Needs – which refer to the human need for information so as to be ready to act or make decisions that may be required, and

Affective Needs – which refer to the emotional requirements of human, such as their need to do challenging work, to know their work has value, to feel personally secure, and to be in control.

Undue emphasis on cognitive needs and consequent neglect of affective needs may cause emotional pain that counterbalances the gains from technology and this may be detrimental to the “value of human life” as a whole.

 

TECHNOLOGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Effects and Consequences of Technology

In our haste to milk technology for immediate economic advantage, we often lose sight of the long-term consequences: the higher order and indirect effects, especially the delayed and unintended effects of technology.

The Sorenson multiple effect network methodology is a useful technique for an analyzing the impact and consequences of technology.

Let us introduce the term malefit to represent harmful effects and consequences of a technology in contrast with benefit as a useful output.

We may categorize the consequences of a technology (Effects versus Consequences) as:

EFFECTS versus CONSEQUENCES

(i)         First Order : Benefits

(ii)        Second Order : Direct Malefits

(iii)       Third Order : Indirect Malefits

(iv)       Fourth Order : Unintended Malefits

(v)        Fifth Order : Delayed Malefits

Such analyses definitely help in assessing the impact of various consequences of a technology on the value of human life in the long-term perspective in holistic manner.

Early identification of factors detrimental to the value of human life may prove useful in technology impact assessment to reduce mismatches and smoothen out incongruities.

CONCLUSION

We must not lose sight of our basic premise that the cardinal aim of technology is to increase the value of human life by maximizing happiness and minimizing suffering.

 

Ethical Technology Management comprises a harmonious blend of rational thinking and empathetic understanding wherein one studies, analyses and mitigates the conflicting interplay between human cognitive and affective processes.

It may be apt to conclude with a comment by RM Pirsig, who states that:

“The way to solve the conflict between human values and technological needs is not to run away from technology. That is impossible. The way to resolve the conflict is to break down the barriers of dualistic thought that prevent a real understanding of what technology is…not an exploitation of nature, but a fusion of nature and the human spirit into a new kind of creation that transcends both”.

VIKRAM KARVE

Copyright © Vikram Karve 
1. If you share this post, please give due credit to the author Vikram Karve
2. Please DO NOT PLAGIARIZE. Please DO NOT Cut/Copy/Paste this post
© vikram karve., all rights reserved.

Disclaimer:

All Stories in this Blog are a work of fiction. Events, Places, Settings and Incidents narrated in the stories are a figment of my imagination. The characters do not exist and are purely imaginary. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Copyright Notice:

No part of this Blog may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Blog Author Vikram Karve who holds the copyright.

Copyright © Vikram Karve (all rights reserved)

 

Earlier Posted by me Vikram Karve at 1/08/2014 08:24:00 PM at url:  https://karvediat.blogspot.com/2014/12/does-technology-affect-human-life.html and  http://karvediat.blogspot.in/2014/01/how-technology-affects-human-life.html