Future Case

Crossmedia, Social, Mobile, Business Modeling, Marketing, Research and insights

IMAB sequence model version 0.1

with 8 comments

I have developed a simple version 0.1 sequential model called IMAB; Identity – Mentality – Attitude – Behaviour. I use it to explain the sequences (steps) that lead to a certain behaviour. I believe it starts with giving meaning to oneself and the world; Identity. Identity is often described as ‘sameness’. Being the same with the outside world (whatever it is: a person, an object, an experience) leads to a certain mentality (the core of my research). In my opinion, mentality can be described as habitual or characteristic mental attitude that determines how you will interpret and respond to situations. Thus mentality is about response to the situation one is in. In the core, mentality is about interpretation, based on the meanings you give to you in relation to the outside world. Perhaps re-reading ‘I’m okay, you’re okay’ may be of use. Mentality at its turn leads to a certain attitude: a mental, feeling or emotional position with/toward a fact or state. So attitude is the result of the former two sequences. It is a position taken that will lead to a certain behaviour. Behaviour is the the manner of conducting oneself and/or the response of an individual, group, or species to its environment. Thus behaviour is the acting of persons based on taken positions (or feelings or emotions). The IMAB model is no more than a visualization of this process.

Click the picture for a full size and readable jpg.

imab.jpg

About these ads

Written by Kees Winkel

February 26, 2008 at 16:03

8 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Kees,

    it looks to me that you can also interpret the model the other way around. By response of other people you may change your attitude towards a certain situation, and maybe your mentaltality would change. however your identity will not. Even if your behavior is questioned time after time, and your attitude changes so much that your mentality will change a lot, your identity won’t change. So from this point of view the overlap between identity and mentality is debatable.
    I’m not saying however that they’re not linked.

    Matthijs

    February 28, 2008 at 11:04

  2. The overlap in the model is just to visualize the relationship. You might want to translate and publish your valued additions as sent earlier via email for further discussion.

    Kees Winkel

    February 28, 2008 at 11:08

  3. Identity results from socio-demographical factors, both the time-tied and the background factors. You are formed as a person because of this. Your standards and values are formed partly by your background and surroundings, but are arisen also partly by own interpretation of your identity.
    Your identity with your standards and values ensures a certain mentality. Or: A habitual mental or characteristic mental attitude which causes a person to interpret or reacts to certain situations. From this mentality-approach you form an attitude towards a situation, person or object, as a result of which you react to a certain situation effectively. This is, in other words, your eventual behavior.

    In this model (above) it becomes clear that mentality and socio-demographical factors are really intertwined. From your socio-demographical factors you form your identity and from your identity combined with your socio-demographical factors you obtain standards and values. Thus, you can have different demographic factors, but corresponding standards and values and therefore corresponding mentalities. We believe that mentalities say much more concerning a person then the dry demographical factors.
    You form behavior from a set of mentalities. Corresponding mentalities can ensure identical behavior. In evaluating consumer behavior, this is an interesting perspective. Consumer behavior is at present still frequently segmented by socio-demographical factors, but from socio-demographical factors several types of behavior frequently come forward. We believe, thus, that segmentation to mentality will achieve better results.

    Time-tied factors:
    These are liable to change. These are factors which in each time or time segment can change.
    Background factors:
    These are the factors which you get taught by your parents or that have arisen from the society your brought up in.
    Identity:
    By identity we mean: Who you really are. Not your image but your real identity. Upbringing, and all experiences, that have formed you to whom you are. An identity gives meaning to yourself and the world around you.
    Standards:
    Standards are usually time-tied and therefore come from time-tied factors, but your identity also plays a role.
    Adopted or agreed appraisal points. Moral standards are commonly accepted (and so, in a certain way standardized) provisions, which form a main point for the appraisal of behavior in terms of right or wrong, which have a value as a main point. Our standards allow us to interpret what socially acceptable behavior is. At the same time they stimulate socially desired behavior. In religious terms you can say that they stipulate what is good and what is evil.
    Values:
    How a person stipulated matter assessed from learned ethics. Briefly said, what is right and what is wrong. These values are not easily changed, because they’re derived from background factors. Education, parents and culture are very important have a profound influence.
    Mentality:
    The habitual or characteristic mental attitude of a person, that determines how they interpret certain situations and react to certain situations.
    Attitude/attitude:
    The considered way or weighed way a person on situations pretends react.
    Behavior:
    How a person reacts effectively to situations.

    Matthijs

    February 28, 2008 at 14:19

  4. It seems to me the model easily maps unto emotional theories that work with concepts like concerns – appraisal – action readiness. We need to discuss this further, also the ‘sequentiality’ of things, I guess one of your idola is that thinking preceeds acting..

    Harry

    February 28, 2008 at 16:45

  5. Wow.
    What are the sources?

    Kees Winkel

    February 28, 2008 at 22:12

  6. sources are, brennan, winkel, bordieu, hoogervorst, rotte, veldhoen. ;-) working on a complete list including pages and titles.

    Matthijs

    February 29, 2008 at 11:06

  7. Interessting! Maybe I can use it for my lessons ;-)

    Daphne Dijkerman

    March 10, 2008 at 07:41

  8. Daphne,
    Please know that we are still working on this model. Of course you are free to use it (please mention the source). Perhaps we could discuss and refine it.
    Kees

    Kees Winkel

    March 10, 2008 at 22:15


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 502 other followers