The Dialectic of Weick – Free Workshops

Most of the scholars and philosophers that inform the work of SPoR hold to a sense of dialectic in knowledge and experience. Karl E. Weick is no exception.

The idea of dialectic can be simply understood as dialogue between two things, persons or concepts.

The concept of dialect was used by Socrates, but since then has taken on different meanings by various philosophers, depending on their worldview. In Hegel, dialectic was a method to come to certainty and synthesis. For Kierkegaard it was the opposite, dialectic demonstrated there was no synthesis or certainty.

One can also understand dialectic mythologically, metaphysically, naturally, biologically or materially (Marx). So, there is no simple answer to the question, what is dialectic?

In dialectic, one can either tolerate contradictions/ambiguity or like Popper (https://www.vordenker.de/ggphilosophy/popper_what-is-dialectic.pdf) seek to eliminate them.

In SPoR, we understand that there is no resolution of opposites and that dialectic is continuous and unresolved. This tension between opposites is understood as a strength, not a weakness and is supported by the likes of: Ellul, Kierkegaard, Ricoeur, Lotman, Fuchs, Damasio, Brueggemann, Johnson etc.

In Weick, the idea of dialectic is about the coexistence in tension of opposites eg. tight and loosely coupled systems. All of Weick’s key concepts accept the idea of no resolution and continuous tension between all aspects of organising; in Enactment, Collective Mindfulness and Organisational Sensemaking.

This is why Weick doesn’t support the idea of a static endpoint called a ‘HRO’. Indeed, there is only HROing, the continuous unresolved activity of organising.

Those in safety who use Weick to endorse a static endpoint, do not understand Weick’s philosophy or his understanding of dialectic. In dialectic, we understand ambiguity, paradox, wickedity and risk as always unresolved. The purpose of holding to this understanding in dialectic is to develop wisdom, resilience and acceptance of fallibility (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/fallibility-risk-living-uncertainty/).

This is why any philosophy/ideology that demands an endpoint or an absolute such as Zero, is rejected by SPoR.

If you want to understand more about the work of Weick, and implications for risk and safety, you can register for the free workshops in June (https://safetyrisk.net/free-workshops-june-weick-and-hroing/) by registering here: admin@spor.com.au

• Bio
• Latest Posts
• More about Rob

Prof. Robert Long

Expert in Social Psychology, Principal & Trainer at Human Dymensions

Latest posts by Prof. Robert Long (see all)

• Weick’s Expectations of the Unexpected - May 13, 2026
• The Non-Revolution in Safety - May 12, 2026
• Suspending Your Agenda to Begin Learning in Risk - May 11, 2026
• The De-Ethicization of the Object in Safety - May 9, 2026
• Weick’s Organising as ‘Consensually Validated Grammar’ - May 9, 2026

PhD., MEd., MOH., BEd., BTh., Dip T., Dip Min., Cert IV TAA, MRMIA Rob is the founder of Human Dymensions and has extensive experience, qualifications and expertise across a range of sectors including government, education, corporate, industry and community sectors over 30 years. Rob has worked at all levels of the education and training sector including serving on various post graduate executive, post graduate supervision, post graduate course design and implementation programs.