String theory, psychometrics and all that!

Today The Times published extracts from Stephen Hawking’s new book. The headline is that God did not create the universe, but rather we/it/everything are the inevitable consequence of the Law of Gravity, leaving no room and no need for God.

Luckily for you , the reader, I don’t plan to discuss that aspect of it, but rather something that cropped up towards the end of the article. Hawking predicts that physics is close to writing:

“a theory of everything, a single framework that can entirely explain the properties of Nature. Such a theory has been the holy grail for physicists since the time of Einstein, but until now it has been impossible to reconcile quantum theory, which explains the sub-atomic world, with gravity, which explains how objects interact on the cosmological scale.”

He expects that M-Theory, a form of string theory, will achieve this goal. Luckily I do not profess to understand or be able to explain string theory, but would pick out the following

“Rather than being a single master equation, Professor Hawking, suggests that M-theory will be a “whole family” of theories existing within a consistent theoretical framework. Much like the way different maps — political, geographical, topological — can map a single region without contradicting each other, M-theory will map different aspects of the material world.”

This resonates deeply with something else that has been on my mind ie the many frameworks and tools we, as managers and modern workers, are faced with in trying to explain human relations and motivations in the search for ultimate personal and corporate performance.

Over the years, through MBA study and corporate training I have come across a multitude of theories, frameworks, assessment tools and approaches (see below for a representative, but not exhaustive list). Most recently, as reported before, while on holiday I took up and read “Neuro Linguistic Programming for Dummies”. What struck me was how much of it seemed to either draw upon or feed other things I have come across, so much so that I was left not sure what is the root and what the derivative and craving some unified/unifying framework that would help me understand it all and make use of it.

I realise that various elements come from psychometrics, psychology and even philosophy, and I have often witnessed competitive streaks and discord between different practitioners, but yet it seems that they all attempt to explain the workings of human beings and how to influence them. As a physicist myself (albeit way back) I look for simplicity and elegance and intuitively feel that it should exist here too. Instead I feel I am left to pick the jewels from each and try and create my own tool kit.

The question I have is, is anyone trying to unify this? Or instead is it easier for each to ply their own theory/tool/trade and leave the consumers divided and confused?


Various tools/frameworks I can recall using or being trained in:

Dale Carnegie
Meyers-Briggs

DISC
Belbin

Judgement
Index Maslow

Neuro Linguistic Programming
LIFO

Deep Democracy