Explanation of enquiry types: CHOICE

An updated version of this appears on my wiki

Explanation of enquiry types in CHOICE

There are several motivations for dividing the enquiry space into different areas of life.

Some kinds of questions have legal regulations. This is particularly true of recruitment/employment enquiries, where several questions will typically be prohibited, depending on jurisdiction.
Different default questions are appropriate for different enquiry types.
The different kinds of relationship that are central to user understanding need to be made very clear.

Different perspectives

So, trying to see this system from a user's point of view, we can outline various dimensions of a possible enquiry.

The kinds of actors involved, and how they want to relate

two individual peers — with no assumed power, relate symmetrically
one individual helps another by offering knowledge, time, or other resource — asymmetrical
a group of peers, relating to an outside individual
a company or other legal entity, and an individual

Value exchange

by legal contract, for extended value exchange
commerce: buying or selling goods or services
mutual fulfillment or pleasure

Engagement: the aspect of time and commitment

immediate, with no commitment or foreseen continuing engagement
intermittent: engagement may recur; no fixed commitment
continuous: commitment for a period of time, definite or indefinite
lifelong deliberate commitment

Areas of life touched on

close personal relationship
learning, education, training
living together
valued work; employment
enjoyment: sports, hobbies, pastimes

These could potentially mix together in various ways.

The six types of enquiry

There are many possible combinations of the distinction made above, but we want to keep the number to a minimum, for simplicity. It is vital, if possible, to avoid confusion between two kinds of enquiry. Here are the six types that appear to be the minimum number to separate enquiries that need to be kept separate.

Sharing: interests, activities, personal relationships: This is likely to be a common enquiry type for many people.; The assumption is that both parties have equal status in the friendship, relationship, activity, or interest. There are many motives and reasons why people should want to relate with someone else, and many different kinds of relationship. This is an open enquiry type that does not assume the presence or absence of any feature of a personal relationship, and therefore is well suited for the very common “would like to meet” kind of enquiry. It covers shared interests, activities and learning as well, as equal partners.; In some cases, a shared interest between individuals could lead to the formation of an established group, which could then use the clubs enquiry type to find more people to join the group.; Asking a question about potential intimacy should serve to separate those looking for no more than sharing interests, activities or “just friendship” from those explicitly seeking an intimate or couple relationship. However, putting these all together recognises that there are no strict dividing lines between these categories.; Money would not be explicitly involved in the relationship – if money were involved, the “individual jobs & help” type should be used.; Features: learning, life; no money; low to high commitment; Parties relate symmetrically: individuals of equal status; Compulsory questions: desired/acceptable degree of closeness/intimacy
Collaborating in business partnership, collective, venture, etc.: The parties have equal status and power, but may have different qualities, attributes, skills or competences. People are looking for others with similar ambitions, and typically complementary abilities, to act as a team. Alternatively, people's skills may be similar, and the people could be coming together to share common services, or to present a shared public face.; This enquiry type is fine for finding more equal partners in a business or organisation, but if it's employees that are wanted, with a commitment different from the existing partners, then the employing enquiry type would be preferred.; The assumption is that the people are coming together to create or develop a self-sustaining entity that provides or contributes towards making a living. There is no assumption about where or how the different people live.; Features: work, with learning; money or benefits; high commitment; Parties mainly relate symmetrically: partner, member; though there may also be limited asymmetry between existing partners or members and new ones.; Compulsory questions: jurisdiction; legal framework
Living arrangements: communities, communes, co-housing projects, etc.: It may be a case of individuals searching for others with similar values and norms, with compatible behaviour, and who may bring different resources or abilities, to share the practical everyday matters of living.; People who want to share living may also be looking for an established place.; The assumption is that the people are coming together to provide for or to contribute towards their better living. This may be shorter term, as in younger individuals sharing flats or houses; or may be longer term, as intentional communities. There is no assumption that people will share business activities or income, though this may develop.; Features: life, learning; money or resources; high commitment; Parties mainly relate symmetrically: housemate, member, neighbour; though there may be some asymmetry between established and prospective members.; Compulsory questions: desired location; type of living arrangement
Individuals helping other individuals: One individual wants some help, or wants something doing; the other has the ability to help with it or to do it. In contrast with employing, with this enquiry type, no contract of employment is envisaged, though there may be a contract for a particular service. There is no ongoing obligation beyond the completion of the work. This category ranges from, on the one hand, simply doing some work for someone, to, on the other hand, helping the other do something, as in tuition, training, advice, or mentoring. There may not be a clear dividing line. Counselling, therapy and the like are included here.; This is not an enquiry type for corporate offerings, as the point is that the person helped may want to specify characteristics of the person they want as a helper, or vice versa.; The help given could be in the context of a trade or profession, and be paid; but could also potentially be voluntary or free. The currency involved may be alternative/complementary rather than state-backed.; Features: work, learning; some kind of exchange or money; low commitment; Parties relate asymmetrically: helper, individual; helped, individual; Compulsory questions: duration and time window
Employing people in organisations: Here there are two different roles: employer and employee. Both parties are looking for a contract of employment. The employer is offering money; the employee labour. The employer wants an employee with particular characteristics, skills, experience, attitude, availability, etc. The employee may be looking for terms and conditions; timescale; location; timetable; nature of work; colleague characteristics. For the CHOICE, the employer role is operated by an individual representing recruitment, personnel, HR, or similar function. Note that some discriminatory questions may be illegal, and will be prohibited in this enquiry type of CHOICE.; The assumption is that the employer will pay the employee. The employer will also pay for the use of this service.; Features: work, with learning; money or benefits; high commitment; Parties relate asymmetrically: on the one hand, the employer, which is corporate; on the other hand, the employee (trainee, apprentice, etc.), who is individual; Compulsory questions: weekly hours commitment; duration of contract; pay; location (at least the jurisdiction, and usually also work location)
People joining groups, such as clubs, associations or religious organisations: This is the enquiry type where people can find existing clubs and societies, for any kind of activity. The two separate roles are the association, and the member. An association may have conditions of membership that are required of prospective members. The individuals may have requirements about which criteria are used or not used, as well as about the nature of the association, its ethics and rules. Both parties may have an interest in the activity or meeting timetable, which will typically be relatively stable, as the association's members will be making arrangements around that timetable. The association may or may not have joining or membership fees; it may have rules or codes of practice; it may have particular standards or codes of ethics.; This enquiry type can also be used for crowdfunding. There is no clear dividing line between a club set up for the benefit of its members, and an association setting out to support a new business.; There will be some way of having membership status confirmed centrally, so that people can specify that they want to meet members of the association. Obviously that's only useful for large associations where one doesn't generally know people.; Features: learning, life; maybe money; medium commitment; Parties relate asymmetrically: one the one hand, the association; on the other, the member or individual; Compulsory questions: none

A table to correlate dimension and enquiry types

	sharing	collaborating	living	helping	employing	joining
The kinds of actors involved, and how they want to relate
peers	✓	✓	✓
help				✓
group			✓			✓
company					✓
Value exchange
contract				✓	✓	✓
commerce				✓	✓	✓
mutual	✓	✓	✓
Engagement: the aspect of time and commitment
immediate	✓			✓
intermittent	✓	✓		✓	✓	✓
continuous	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
lifelong	✓		✓			✓
Areas of life touched on
personal	✓		✓
learning	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
living	✓		✓
work		✓		✓	✓
enjoyment	✓		✓			✓

Guide to choosing a type

The following summary helps to choose between the types, based on the characteristics of symmetry of relationship, whether money is likely to be involved, and the level of commitment.

If there are just two individuals involved, then, if they relate symmetrically, with no money likely to be involved, it is a case of sharing. The intention may be for high or low commitment.
There are three clear reasons why individuals might get together, relating symmetrically, but with money being implicated somewhere, and relatively high commitment. First, to join in doing business and potentially earning money (a collaboration); second, for sharing living arrangements, and third, to share resources that are brought in by one party. The same enquiry type of sharing living arrangements also applies to the asymmetric situation of individuals and established living groups looking for each other.
If individuals relate asymmetrically, and there may be money involved, but typically with low or short-term commitment only, it comes under individual jobs & help.
If the potential relationship is between individual and an organisation, and clearly therefore asymmetrical, then if the organisation is an employer, the relationship is well-known as employment, with high legally defined commitments; but if the organisation is not an employer, then it is most likely to be some other kind of club, association, or other grouping, with a wide range of degrees of commitment.
But if the organisation is specifically about living, use sharing living arrangements.

The main category of relationships that are not supported by the CHOICE (see below) is commercial relations between organisations and individuals, which is a dominant form of relationship in our current society.

Areas of life not covered

At first sight it may not be clear what is left out of the above categories, so here it is spelled out which areas of life are not envisaged being covered by enquiry types (which include much of our present economy), why these are not currently suitable for CHOICE, and how they could start to be brought within its scope.

Existing business market to consumer (rather: richer ethical marketplaces)

A prevalent aspect of live in contemporary society is businesses selling goods or services to an individual, generally through a market mechanism. However, the market mechanism effectively destroys or hides the kind of information that is central to the operation of the CHOICE. The individual has no easy means of choice on ethical issues.

For example, many retail chains have questionable ethics. In most cases, the business is run on capitalist lines, making money for shareholders, typically contributing to, not reducing the problems of inequality.

A start towards a CHOICE approach to retail operations would be to have retailers commiting to answer all questions asked by consumers about provenance and ethics. This would begin with the existing ethical retail practices (Fairtrade, organic, cruelty free, etc.) and build an increasingly rich platform for individual ethical choice in consumption. In effect, this would amount to building in transparency and ethical choice centrally into the market mechanisms.

Traditional courses of training or education (rather: a wider concept of learning)

In our current society, most courses other than compulsory education are provided by organisations run on business principles (even if they are technically charities, as universities and many schools are), and the market for these services is similar to other business markets. For similar reasons to the "business market to consumer" category above, this is problematic for the CHOICE.

A CHOICE approach would facilitate five approaches to learning, rather than trying to box all learning up in a separate category.

Learning should be happening in the workplace as a natural and expected consequence of employment.
People can form peer-to-peer relationships around sharing learning activities, which may be a natural extension of a shared interest, or may choose to come together to share their following of a (traditionally provided) course.
Individuals offering and receiving tuition would come under "individual jobs & help".
A club, society or other group could be set up for the purpose of helping the learning and development of its members. Like any club, this can have criteria for membership, and these criteria could include interest in specific kinds of learning, or perhaps certain pre-requisite achievements that are necessary for the level of learning envisaged.
Least formally, sharing living arrangements can naturally lead to more wide and diverse learning than normally happens in the context of a nuclear family.

Existing business to business transactions (rather: ethical supply chains)

Most business to business transactions are generally constrained by the rules of operation of the respective businesses and the markets in which they participate. As with most business-to-consumer operations, there are great pressures to squeeze ethics out of the system, and to base transactions solely on profitability.

If an ethical business-to-consumer market place were to develop, the thinking (above) about applying CHOICE to business to consumer relationships could be developed to apply here as well.

Existing investment and banking (rather: targeted lending and sharing of resources)

Most current investment is done through investment or banking intermediaries who squeeze almost all ethics out of investment decisions. Even the current "ethical investment" funds do little more than bias towards, or more usually away from, particular business areas – their bluntness calls into question the value of supporting them.