Selecting the necessary system levels
When it is clear what to describe and for whom, technical questions arise about how to describe. Essentially, this answers the question of "how detailed the description should be", but not only that. Another guiding question here is at what level it becomes unimportant how the function of smaller subsystems is executed, and we stop wanting to delve into it. Here is where the boundary of the level of detail that interests us is located.
It is appropriate to consider the metaphor of the black and white box. When we look at something as a black box, we can see only the input and output, but not the mechanisms of operation. A white box, on the other hand, is accessible in all its mechanisms. The system levels that interest us are transparent (or at least those in which we would like transparency).
How to estimate useful system levels:
First, we will define a system level that is useful for you in your work, and then you will be able to perform the same operation for the recipient of your descriptions.
We will take the objects you work with most, one level up and one level down. If your activity involves working directly with clients, there may be more levels (since you have to keep in mind not only your objects but also the objects of your clients; accordingly, when you create descriptions for someone who works directly with clients, you will also have to take this into account).
- Think about your professional activities. Now take the objects that come to mind first and consider their physical embodiment. Now you need to take their true parts (try not to skip levels). And the same in the other direction - take a larger object in which your object would be a part of.
Example:
Object - door handle. Going up: door handle - door mechanism - door - wall - house. Going down: door handle - the handle itself - iron atoms, for instance.
These are your different levels of detail. By performing this operation with your object of interest, you will know what levels are available to you. Then you will want to know at what level something interesting ends from above and below.
- Now try to talk about your work, mentioning the objects at the smallest level you found. If you can do this well and coherently, and the phrases sound meaningful to you, then this smallest level is still within your interest. If not, then the level is not interesting to you and does not hold value.
Example:
I am a conflictologist, my object of interest is human communication. I come into a team where people have gathered to discuss their conflicts. The physical expression of the objects that would interest me are the people. Going down the levels - ultimately there are hormones that influence behavior and make people express certain emotions.
This level is not very interesting or useful to me because I cannot clearly describe my work on that level. My work does not happen there - I do not work with hormones. So, I cut off that level in my picture and consider those above - for example, the speech units people use in conflict.
And if I were a neurobiologist? My object of interest is primates and their internal physiological processes related to behavioral traits. I would like to analyze a level of something in the blood of conflicting individuals and see how it affects their behavior. And I am interested in how they are doing with their hormones there. But I would not be very interested in talking to conflicting parties and delving into their psyche verbally.
- Perform the same actions, but with the most significant level.
In the example with me as a conflictologist: at a higher level, I am considering not the behavior of conflicting individuals within one team, but the behavior of two conflicting teams (where the reasons for mutual animosity are more significant and weightier). Most likely, I cannot handle a level even higher, so it is not of interest to me.
Now you can imagine the level of detail needed for your recipient based on their role in the activity, by performing the same operation based on the objects of attention that are usually characteristic of their role.