Welcome to this second week. Last week we have demonstrated the importance of organizations trying to understand our social world. We have seen that individuals are entertaining constant relation with organizations, whether as part of their organization themselves or as clients, users of the solutions that organization propose. This week we'll examine the relationships that we all have with the respective organizations that form our own world. We will explain why it is that we need organizations to make sense of our lives. We'll talk about notions like public space and logics of action. At the end of this course, we'll be ready to understand why we find the world around us sometimes absurd, often pointless, almost always disorganized. And therefore, how we can reorganize our lives and the world around us. But this is for later. Today we question the first principle in most of the studies of the social reality out there. That individuals are center stage. Indeed the individual is the smallest unit of social reality. But our position as orgologists so as to speak is that individuals are not the most important in explaining a number of phenomena including that is the organization of the world. Individuals are, to a certain extent, insignificant. As a metaphor, let's take this bottle of sparkling water. What would appear to us as being the main element in it, is the water itself. If we zoom in, into the smallest level we would end up looking at the molecules that constitute the water. Yet doing this, would give us absolutely no information of why we may or may not appreciate the water. The sparkling water is good for us because it contains mineral salts. It is appealing because as the children are keen to point out, it contains bubble that stings our palate upon drinking. Thereby trying to study the water's molecules does not even start to explain why we have chosen this bottle. Why it tastes so good to us. We have to consider water and the packaging as a whole to take into account all the elements before being able to judge on its beneficial and impending qualities. While the study of the individual actions, thoughts, patterns and ideals, that is to say, what motivates humans, does matter a lot, it is insufficient to explain why and how we make sense of the world around us. As is the sole study of water molecules in a bottle, is insufficient to explain why we chose it over others. Society is in a way like this bottle, but again it would be misleading to focus only on the shape of the bottle or its properties to explain the beverage flavor and qualities. This is in a way what the sociologists of the social does when he sees the social structure as a mass constraining individuals. His analysis leads to the recommendation, that they, the individuals ought to recover their dignity, to return to what form the essence of human nature, equality if we will etc.. In a sense, the sociologists of the social ignores many of the organizations surrounding individuals. Meanwhile, the sociology of their associations consider the individuals as actors crossed by a network of subjects meanings and other actors. Getting back to a bottle of water, it would mean to try and study how molecules of water mingle with the ones of gas, mineral salts and bottle components. Doing so, means lending too strong a weight on the ability of a given individual to express his freedom out of any constraint. For instance, let's not forget that if I shake the bottle of water, the end result is that when I open the bottle, the content spills out, molecules of water are ejected. And yet, as we all know, they are nowhere responsible for this reaction. So, as it is somewhat vain to consider the bottle only as a constraint imposed on the water molecules, it is inappropriate to look at the water molecules to try understand the benefits and appeal to the drinkers of this sparkling water. What matters is the interaction between the two. The fact that without the bottle which could have been different, had we picked another from the fridge or the shelf, we could not have drank or quenched our thirst. Let's go back to our discussion keeping this metaphor in mind. Individuals need organizations to take action in this world. Organizational choice in terms of collecting resources implementing strategy and creating a universe of meaning are more dependent on the organization's own characteristics, culture, operating divisions, decision making structures than the basic human dimensions that metaphysically or legally comprise an individual. A single individual material capacity to impact the world is nothing compared with that same individual capacity with or within one or more organizations. Individuals are thereby, as much constrained by the organizational context, the values, structures and procedures, as they benefit from organizations in their capacity to act in the world, on the world. We must think twice therefore, when we consider the individuals as the central figures of the organized world in which they evolve. We should always think of individuals in relation to their organizations. Without organization around us, without our engagement in organizations we are powerless and almost insignificant. Hence the importance of orgology. Let's take this quiz. At which scale is it best to study the generation of meaning in our world? When looking at the individuals, their actions and sentiments? When considering how organizations constrain and enhance our capacity to act? When observing the society and social forces at play in our environment? Well, if you followed me so far, the right answer should be the second one. If organization matters so much, let's study where we can look in them and exchange wisdom and this will be next time.