Since Montesquie's incisive differentiation of the principal forms of governance and their components, the rate at which theories of governance have been proposed has exponenetially grown now when we have a plethora of different theories on the best way to govern, lead and /or manage. Anyone interested in this topic is confronted with many conflicting schools of thought, from Weber's theory of the 'iron cage' to Wheatley's new-age concept of leadership. This seeming maze of different theories can be seen merely as different perspectives on the overall embracing concept of governance which is essentially the holistic conception and explanation of differentiated purposive human systems - about paradigms and systems that have their inception in and are limited by, human mind. The core challenge, then, is to put some order and rationale into the understanding of this 'many-headed ' concept of governance. This thesis meets this challenge by mapping out a cognitive framework that is capable of embracing and ordering all the multitudinous differentiated conceptions of human governance experienced at the different levels of society. In essence, this thesis reformulates the concept of organizational governance in terms of the metaphor of the human mind. The cognitive model of governance are embraced by the different organizations in different circumstances and why this is appropriate and necessary, how and why governance changes over time, and how it is important to institute processes of inquiry, dialogue and reflection in order to know and choose more consciously. As a consequence of using the mind metaphor to analyse governance in Western society, the key conclusion is that there has been a substantial shift or evolution in thinking from a mangerialist mindset to the more abstract politicist mindset. This fundamental shift in mindset is pervasive and influences the perspectives taken at many levels in the human governance systems. / Doctor of Philosophy (Management)