please join and contribute – COVID-19 Resources (Systems Community) | Facebook Group

Set up by Rob Young – useful links and a place for systems community conversations

via COVID-19 Resources (Systems Community) | Groups | Facebook

Centre for Systems Philosophy

via Centre for Systems Philosophy

What is Systems Philosophy?

Systems Philosophy is the philosophical component of Systemology, the transdisciplinary field concerned with the scientific study of all kinds of systems. In general terms Systems Philosophy arose out of the need to develop a scientific worldview that reflected the realization that everything in the concrete world is a system or part of one, with “system” being understood as “a whole that functions as a whole in virtue of the relationship between its parts”. The implication of this insight is that to properly understand something we have to understand not only its composition (as in the classical reductionistic approach), but also the relationships between its parts, between the parts and the whole, and between the whole and its environment. This calls for a change in perspective in how we conceptualise, study and engage with the concrete world. The central aim of Systems Philosophy is to articulate the systems worldview and find ways to use it to help solve important problems in science, philosophy and society.

Systems Philosophy arose specifically in the context of a search for a worldview that would appropriately reflect not only the physical complexity of the world but also the meaning, value and dignity of life and culture. The central ambition of systems philosophers from the outset has been to contribute in practical ways to scientific and humanistic efforts to build societies grounded in the values of justice, freedom, social welfare and environmental stewardship.

Key publications – http://www.systemsphilosophy.org/recommended-reading.html

History and development – http://www.systemsphilosophy.org/history-and-development-of-systems-philosophy.html

Scope – http://www.systemsphilosophy.org/scope-of-systems-philosophy.html

ME_WE game | Inspire people to adhere to the new existential concept of the Me-We-World through gamification.

via ME_WE game | Inspire people to adhere to the new existential concept of the Me-We-World through gamification.

G-Complexity, Quantum Computation and Anticipatory Processes, Nadin (2014) – and the concept of G-Complexity

Dialogue is sought by M. Nadin – https://www.nadin.ws/

 

Machine Intelligence – A Chimera. AI & Society. London: Springer Verlag (Springer Nature) 2018, pp. 1-28

Rethinking the experiment: a necessary (R)evolution, AI & Society 33:4, pp 467–485. New York/London: Springer. 2018

Rethinking the Experiment. https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.02491

Machine Intelligence – A Chimera. AI & Society. Heidelberg: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/s00146-018-0842-8

http://www.nadin.ws/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Machine_Intelligence_Chimera_AI-society.pdf

Medicine: The Decisive Test of Anticipation, Anticipation and Medicine. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishers, 2016, pp. 1-27 (978-1482208191)

https://www.nadin.ws/archives/2926

G-Complexity, Quantum Computation and Anticipatory Processes, Computer Communication & Collaboration, 2:1, 2014, 16-34. (DOIC: 2292-1036-2014-01-003-18).

https://www.nadin.ws/archives/2220

The Intractable and the Undecidable – Computation and Anticipatory Processes, International Journal of Applied Research on Information Technology and Computing, 4:3, 2013, 99-121.

Predictive and Anticipatory Computing, in Encyclopedia of Computer Science and Technology, Second Edition DOI: 10.1081/E-ECST2-120054027
Copyright © 2017 by Taylor & Francis.

https://www.nadin.ws/archives/2972

via (PDF) G-Complexity, Quantum Computation and Anticipatory Processes

G-Complexity, Quantum Computation and Anticipatory Processes

January 2014, Mihai Nadin

Related research
Computation is the medium of contemporary science. To understand the consequences of this gnoseological and epistemological revolution, one has to evaluate the outcome. As sciences become computational, difficulties concerning data processing associated with knowledge acquisition and dissemination are reduced. The focus on data afforded a quantum leap in many domains, including computation itself. The word complexity became part of the modern scientific discourse as a result of our ability to capture more data, and to associate it with interactions characterized quantitatively. In the process, the notion of complexity itself lost its resolution. This study introduces the undecidable as a criterion for characterizing a particular type of complexity. Defined as G-complexity, it allows for the understanding of questions pertinent to knowledge about the world, in particular, the living. With decidability as a well-defined criterion for complexity, we provide a context for understanding how experimental evidence-the hallmark of science in our days-can be accumulated, and what the characteristics of scientific work are at this juncture in the development of science.

Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship | SCO – Initial Convening

A little bit of a confusing hodge-podge – a centre set up by Skoll at the Said Business School at Oxford University, which seems to have suddenly sprung to life with both a newsletter (copied at bottom) which links to a blog page (copied below) which has a bit of a different set of links.

via Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship | SCO – Initial Convening

 

SCO – Initial Convening

Latest blog update from the Skoll Centre’s main research initiative, the Systems Change Observatory.

In March 2019, we had a daylong session that integrated in-person attendance with contributions from participants around the world. This meeting incorporated opinions from previously conducted unstructured interviews to identify the most relevant issues and concerns regarding systems change among this first round of Observatory contributors.

The discussions raised were far from exhaustive. The value of this study lies in starting an exploration of topics that have not yet been systematically studied and understood with practitioners who, despite sharing similar concerns, are approaching problems differently.

Emergent themes

From our discussions, four key themes emerged:

  1. Definitions and conceptions of systems change
  2. The intersections of systems change, social entrepreneurship, and scaling solutions
  3. Implementing systems change
  4. Measurement and evaluation of systems change interventions.

The first two refer to the connections between systems change, social entrepreneurship and scaling-up an intervention in the social impact space.

Graph showing the top topics from interviews.

The last two themes consider the principles for designing and implementing systems change activities and the challenges in setting up measurement and evaluation instruments for system change interventions. Given the diverse experiences of our interviewees, our findings highlight different mechanisms, challenges and prospects to positively drive and evaluate system change. We will share snapshots on these themes to map relevant issues and spark deeper conversations.

Looking ahead

One of the salient issues in systems change work is the relative lack of over-time data on ventures that pursue a systems approach to social innovation. This limits our understanding of how system change is conceived and pursued to address a wide range of challenges. Beyond this initial study, the SCO intends to explore what happens in the life-course of these ventures, shedding light on aggregate patterns across ventures and over time.

The SCO can contribute by providing key outputs on systems change in action. This includes identifying the skills required to engage in systems change, approaches and pathways to change that organisations follow over time and their experience with implementation. This can help entrepreneurs identify what skills to build and activities in which to engage.

The ambition of the SCO is to add value to the field by keeping in mind the relevance of our research for our stakeholders. We intend to offer value by leveraging our academic skills to undertake translational research in order to produce, compile, and disseminate knowledge that can be useful for academics and practitioners in the field of systems change.

Stay up to date with the latest news and research insights from the Systems Change Observatory, sign up to receive the newsletter.

You might also like

Welcome

Welcome, system change colleagues, to the Systems Change Observatory (SCO) newsletter.

Systems change itself is a phrase that many are using more and more: Big challenges in the world have persuaded activists, policy makers, corporates, and researchers to ‘think big’ and to think in ‘whole system’ terms. The useful conversations now are to explore new ways of talking, understanding, and intervening – no one organization or community or even country can solve these challenges on their own. And the challenges themselves are outcomes from complex, interdependent, layered processes that often span jurisdictions.

Over the coming months we will highlight the ambitions of the SCO and themes that emerged from our initial convening in May 2019. At times we will ask for your contributions to add to our observations of the systems change landscape as it relates to education, research and practitioner knowledge and experiences.

Read on and we look forward to learning with you.
Prof Marc Ventresca
University of Oxford and Wolfson College

What is the Systems Change Observatory?

The Systems Change Observatory (SCO) is a research initiative of the Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship at Saïd Business School. The Observatory aims to provide a space for a wide range of stakeholders in systems change theory, policy and practice to discuss, share experiences and learn best ways to steer systems change practice to achieve positive social and environmental impact.

This research study explores pathways to systems change made visible in the starting points and initiatives of a large sample of ventures over time. The goal is to generate actionable insights, case studies and tools in support of systems change, both for practice and policy. The research integrates insights from organisational design and strategy, institutional and funding contexts, the work of leaders and broader venture ecosystems.

Getting started

In March 2019, we had a daylong session that integrated in-person attendance with contributions from participants around the world. This meeting incorporated opinions from previously conducted unstructured interviews to identify the most relevant issues and concerns regarding systems change among this first round of Observatory contributors.

Spotlight profile: Dr Paulo Savaget

Dr Paulo Savaget is the postdoctoral researcher for the Systems Change Observatory research initiative. Paulo works on the implementation of an applied research agenda focused on transforming unjust systems through social innovation and social entrepreneurship.

Useful resources

In each edition of this newsletter, we will share useful insightful resources related to systems change.
Practitioner Reports
Embracing Complexity – Towards a shared understanding of funding systems change.

Systems Leadership and Platforms: How to mobilize people to transform systems and build the platforms to scale these efforts By John Hagel and Gemma Mortensen.

Beyond Organisational Scale: How Social Entrepreneurs create systems Change.
Academic Paper

Ferraro, F., Etzion, D., & Gehman, J. (2015). Tackling Grand Challenges Pragmatically: Robust Action Revisited. Organization Studies, 36(3), 363–390.

Feedback from SIGNAL: Fostering the Emergence of System Leadership Worldwide session, part of the Skoll 2020 Virtual Forum

via SIGNAL@cocreative.com

Dear Systems Change Allies,

Thank you for joining us for the SIGNAL: Fostering the Emergence of System Leadership Worldwide session, part of the Skoll 2020 Virtual Forum.

We’re inspired by the interest and momentum in exploring together how we might support people doing systems change work around the world. SIGNAL is a step toward gaining actionable insight into what these diverse folks need to deepen, quicken, and sustain their work on our most complex challenges.

Would you like to get involved in SIGNAL? Please let us know. As we shared in the session, SIGNAL is a collaborative research initiative and as we advance the project, we want to connect more and more partners into the learning, sharing, and action.

Would you like to learn more about SIGNAL? Here’s how:

  • Get the information deck we shared online, which also includes some information on Illuminate, the parent initiative of SIGNAL (and you can learn more about Illuminate here). You’ll find more information about SIGNAL plans and partners, as well as some early insights from our first interviews.
  • See and share the recording of the session.
  • Skim and comment on the session outputs in this shared document, including participant reflections, resources shared during the session, and more about who attended—and feel free to comment and add more!

You can find out more about the session’s presenters here:

In gratitude and collaboration,
The SIGNAL Collective

P.S. See some of what emerged below, more in our shared notes.

Please note: This is the only email you’ll receive about SIGNAL unless you opted in to receiving future project updates.
Visual scribing by Katherine Haugh at Global Knowledge Initiative.
“In one work, what’s one value you’re bringing to our session today?”
“Where are you joining from today?”

Systems Thinking & Sustainability – Systems Innovation – online session 6 April 2020, CORRECTION 11am London time (BST/GMT+1)

(WAS listed as 6pm)

Guest speakers

Rika Preiser

Ray Ison

Louis Klein

via Systems Thinking & Sustainability – Systems Innovation

A massive expansion in demographics, technology, and economic activity has ushered in the age of the Anthropocene as the new reality of the 21st century. As more of us pack into cities, as technology becomes ever more pervasive and we alter Earth systems on an ever-larger scale, the systems that now surround us and coordinate our everyday lives are no longer given by nature but instead created by us. The complex sustainability challenges of a water crisis, energy transition, climate change or pollution are the product of the very systems we create and support our way of life, with these systems in turn created and sustained by our ways of looking at the world, our paradigm. This insight has lead many to the conclusion that a shift to a more sustainable world will start with a shift in our ways of thinking to a way that helps us to better see and act in relation to the whole – the promise of systems thinking. In this talk we will explore the relationship between systems thinki

(View Full Event Description Here: https://systemsinnovation.io/event/systems-thinking-sustainability/)

Theory – Legitimation Code Theory (and Semantic Waves)

From the same source as ‘the Threshold Concept’ (https://stream.syscoi.com/2019/12/03/the-threshold-concept-an-introduction-and-overview-to-the-concept/) – the wonderful Martin McNamara at UCD (@celticowl):

via Theory – Legitimation Code Theory (How To Teach Powerful Things)

Semantic Waves

Semantic waves – repack!

 

 

 

Map–territory relation – Wikipedia

I’m usually pretty allergic to discussions about map/territory relationships – they usually devolve to being as simplistic as the average discussion about ‘mental models’ (to which my default response is: there aren’t models and they aren’t mental, but it’s a 50%-decent metaphor) – but this is a good summary.

via Map–territory relation – Wikipedia

As so often, the best insight is in the Bateson quote:

We say the map is different from the territory. But what is the territory? Operationally, somebody went out with a retina or a measuring stick and made representations which were then put on paper. What is on the paper map is a representation of what was in the retinal representation of the man who made the map; and as you push the question back, what you find is an infinite regress, an infinite series of maps. The territory never gets in at all. … Always, the process of representation will filter it out so that the mental world is only maps of maps, ad infinitum.

See also:

https://stream.syscoi.com/2019/12/28/a-curriculum-for-meta-rationality-what-they-dont-teach-you-at-stem-school-meaningness-and-some-summary-posts-on-david-chapmans-ideas/

Core Art of Hosting Practices – The Art of Hosting

Perhaps not truly systems thinking but a powerful set of practices.

The groan zone journey: https://amandafenton.com/2013/12/the-groan-zone-journey/

Seven little helpers for dialogue and action: http://www.chriscorrigan.com/parkinglot/seven-little-helpers-for-dialogue-and-action-part-5-make-a-wise-decision/

Breath pattern: https://www.mnartofhosting.com/breath-pattern.html

Core concepts: http://francois.thunus.org/aohCoreConcepts.htm

 

via Core Art of Hosting Practices – The Art of HostingThe Art of Hosting

Core Art of Hosting Practices

Work in progress!

As you may notice, this page is getting step-by-step to completion. More gets added as time passes by…

[headlines only – click link above for content:]

CORE METHODOLOGIES:

CIRCLE PRACTICE (The Circle Way)

THE WORLD CAFE

OPEN SPACE TECHNOLOGY

PRO ACTION CAFE

COLLECTIVE STORY HARVESTING

BASIC ART OF HOSTING PATTERNS for PROCESS DESIGN:

THE FOUR-FOLD(ed) PRACTICE

CHAORDIC PATH

WICKED QUESTIONS

DIVERGENCE – EMERGENCE – CONVERGENCE

HARVESTING

APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY

MORE COMPLEX PROCESS DESIGN: 

CHAORDIC STEPPING STONES

BREATHS OF PROCESS DESIGN

AND MORE:

WORLDVIEW

STORYTELLING

COMMUNITY

Compiled by Ria Baeck

 

Learning Focusing: the Classic Six Steps | International Focusing Institute

Other links:

An Introduction to Focusing

About Eugene Gendlin: https://www.eugenegendlin.com/about

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Gendlin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focusing_(psychotherapy)

 

via Learning Focusing: the Classic Six Steps | International Focusing Institute

Learning Focusing: The Classic Six Steps

These Six Steps are also available in:

Nederlands (Dutch)  |  Deutsch (German)  |  Español (Spanish)
עברית (Hebrew)  |  Italiano (Italian)  |  Português (Portuguese)
日本語 (Japanese)   |  Dansk (Danish)  |  Suomi (Finnish)

Most people find it easier to learn Focusing through individual instruction than through simply reading about it. The actual process of Focusing, experienced from the inside, is fluid and open, allowing great room for individual differences and ways of working.

Yet to introduce the concepts and flavor of the technique, some structure can be useful. We offer one approach here: six steps. Although these steps may provide a window into Focusing, it is important to remember that they are not the six steps. Focusing has no rigid, fixed agenda for the inner world; many Focusing sessions bear little resemblance to the technical process that we define here. Still, every Certified Focusing Professional (Trainer) is deeply familiar with these six steps, and uses them as needed throughout a Focusing session. Many people have had success getting in touch with the heart of the process just by following these simple instructions.

So, with the caveat that what follows is a simple scaffolding for you to use as long as it’s useful and then to move beyond, we offer to you six steps, a taste of the process.


What follows is a lightly edited excerpt from The Focusing Manual, chapter four of Focusing by Eugene Gendlin.

The inner act of Focusing can be broken down into six main sub-acts or movements. As you gain more practice, you won’t need to think of these as six separate parts of the process. To think of them as separate movements makes the process seem more mechanical than it is—or will be, for you, later. I have subdivided the process in this way because I’ve learned from years of experimenting that this is one of the effective ways to teach Focusing to people who have never tried it before.

Think of this as only the basics. As you progress and learn more about Focusing you will add to these basic instructions, clarify them, and approach them from other angles. Eventually—perhaps not the first time you go through it—you will have the experience of something shifting inside.

So here are the Focusing instructions in brief form, manual style. If you want to try them out, do so easily, gently. If you find difficulty in one step or another, don’t push too hard; just move on to the next one. You can always come back.

Clearing A Space

What I will ask you to do will be silent, just to yourself. Take a moment just to relax . . . All right—now, inside you, I would like you to pay attention inwardly, in your body, perhaps in your stomach or chest. Now see what comes there when you ask, “How is my life going? What is the main thing for me right now?” Sense within your body. Let the answers come slowly from this sensing. When some concern comes, DO NOT GO INSIDE IT. Stand back, say “Yes, that’s there. I can feel that, there.” Let there be a little space between you and that. Then ask what else you feel. Wait again, and sense. Usually there are several things.

Felt Sense

From among what came, select one personal problem to focus on. DO NOT GO INSIDE IT. Stand back from it. Of course, there are many parts to that one thing you are thinking about—too many to think of each one alone. But you can feel all of these things together. Pay attention there where you usually feel things, and in there you can get a sense of what all of the problem feels like. Let yourself feel the unclear sense of all of that.

Handle

What is the quality of this unclear felt sense? Let a word, a phrase, or an image come up from the felt sense itself. It might be a quality-word, like tight, sticky, scary, stuck, heavy, jumpy or a phrase, or an image. Stay with the quality of the felt sense till something fits it just right.

Resonating

Go back and forth between the felt sense and the word (phrase, or image). Check how they resonate with each other. See if there is a little bodily signal that lets you know there is a fit. To do it, you have to have the felt sense there again, as well as the word. Let the felt sense change, if it does, and also the word or picture, until they feel just right in capturing the quality of the felt sense.

Asking

Now ask: what is it, about this whole problem, that makes this quality (which you have just named or pictured)? Make sure the quality is sensed again, freshly, vividly (not just remembered from before). When it is here again, tap it, touch it, be with it, asking, “What makes the whole problem so           ?” Or you ask, “What is in this sense?”

If you get a quick answer without a shift in the felt sense, just let that kind of answer go by. Return your attention to your body and freshly find the felt sense again. Then ask it again.

Be with the felt sense till something comes along with a shift, a slight “give” or release.

Receiving

Receive whatever comes with a shift in a friendly way. Stay with it a while, even if it is only a slight release. Whatever comes, this is only one shift; there will be others. You will probably continue after a little while, but stay here for a few moments.

IF DURING THESE INSTRUCTIONS SOMEWHERE YOU HAVE SPENT A LITTLE WHILE SENSING AND TOUCHING AN UNCLEAR HOLISTIC BODY SENSE OF THIS PROBLEM, THEN YOU HAVE FOCUSED. It doesn’t matter whether the body-shift came or not. It comes on its own. We don’t control that.

Instructions For Not Following Instructions

Isn’t it wrong to publish instructions for inward personal process?

One danger with a set of instructions is that people might use them to close off other ways. Anything human involves more than one method. Please notice, we don’t say that this method is all you need or might find valuable. Had we said that, we hope you would have thought us stupid.

Anything you learn here can go well with anything else that you may find helpful. If there seems to be a contradiction, go easy. Let your own steps find the way to reconcile the contradiction.

There are other reasons one might not like specifics, such as these steps. Instructions may seem to diminish mystery and openness, although that is not so.

Also, written instructions cannot avoid misunderstandings. No formula fits every person. Anyway, one must find one’s own path.

These problems occur with all types of knowledge about humans.

Adopt a “split-level” approach to all instructions: On the one hand follow the instructions exactly, so that you can discover the experiences to which they point. On the other hand be sensitive to yourself and your own body. Assume that only sound expansive experiences are worth having. The moment doing it feels wrong in your body, stop following the instruction, and back up slightly. Stay there with your attention until you can sense exactly what is going wrong.

These are very exact instructions for how not to follow instructions!

And, of course, they apply to themselves, as well.

In this way you will find your own body’s steps, either through the instructions, or through what is wrong with them.

Focusing is always like that: You don’t push on if it doesn’t feel right, but you don’t run away either. You go no further, but you back up only a little, so that you stay until what is in the way becomes clear.

Focusing is quite safe. It may not work but it is not negative. So, if you sense something that does not feel life-forwarding and sound in your body, sense what that is until that opens.

But isn’t it the height of self-contradiction to give exact steps for how not to follow instructions? Indeed. One often needs several attitudes at once.

In a society increasingly skilled at human processes, of course we share the specifics we learn. Shall we teach the specifics of driving a car and not the specifics of finding and opening the bodily felt sense? But, human processes do give rise to more different specifics than can be logically consistent. Human nature is not fixed and not knowable in some single system. That is fortunate. No knowledge can push you out of the driver’s seat of your life. Especially not our knowledge here, which is to be about finding your own process!

Therefore this knowledge, here, must arrange for itself to be superseded by you, as you sense for what feels sound, inside you. Instructions for not following instructions are the essence of Focusing—one’s own inwardly opening steps.

If you stop and sense what’s wrong at any point, and if you wait there until that opens and reveals itself, you can make good use of all sorts of methods and instructions. You do any method better than its authors can arrange.

 

Simple, Not Easy: Living the Future Today

via Simple, Not Easy: Living the Future Today

Simple, Not Easy: Living the Future Today

Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards.
Soren Kierkegaard

In this time of COVID disruption, we are missing two things that are essential to decision making: 1) Complete information and 2) Reliable connections with a community to create a meaningful, shared reality. In the absence of these, how do we make decisions and feel good that those decisions are both appropriate and effective? “Simple Rules” can supply us with what we need.

On March 29, 1998 a tornado hit St. Peter, Minnesota. City and state government, schools, hospitals, businesses all had emergency response plans. Dusty books on many shelves held the detailed instructions for what to do if and when “all hell breaks loose.”  When it did, though, those books did not save the day. Instead, people stood up, came together, did what needed to be done. The response and recovery were so efficient and effective the state wanted to figure out what went so right. I facilitated a focus group of citizens and professionals to deconstruct their success. This is what we found . . .

They relied on some very simple principles to make decisions:

  • Pay attention
  • Know who is most prepared, and do what they say
  • Put safety first
  • Share resources

These principles weren’t explicit. No one negotiated. They didn’t wordsmith. They didn’t even write them down. When people reflected on the experience, though, they all agreed. These simple principles had informed individual decisions and shaped collective action. Each person applied the principles in a different way, depending on where they were, what they knew, and what they were able to do. Each one did their part, and together they saved the town.

Complexity science has a name for this phenomenon. Simple Rules. General, system-wide rules, influence individual and local behavior, generating patterns that make sense across the broader community. The classic case of Simple Rules applies to a flock of birds. In 1986 Craig Reynolds developed a computer simulation. It showed how birds could flock if they followed three “simple rules:”

  • Fly toward the center
  • Match the speed of your neighbor
  • Don’t run into anything (or anyone)

No one really knows what the birds think or how they make decisions, but we do know that computer programs, can identify a short list of simple rules that yields patterns that look like flocking birds. Without a leader, without detailed instructions, each bird interprets the rules to match its context. It makes a decision, takes action, and contributes to a coherent working whole.

Instead of requiring complete information, Simple Rules support efficient and effective decision making with whatever data is available locally. The residents of St. Peter didn’t know what the damage was. Some of them didn’t even know where their children were, but they could “Pay attention.” By making the most of local, limited intelligence, each person contributed to the systemic, coherent intelligence of the whole.

Simple Rules create the shared reality we need to support individual and collective decisions. They are a simple, elegant, flexible, and adaptable way to come together in collective action. Individuals hunger for personal and emotional stability. Families and neighborhoods look for patterns of shared experience, mutual support, and safety. Local, state, and federal governments—both elected and bureaucratic—struggle to serve a collective goals. In St. Peter, they discovered that when each person “Puts safety first,” regardless of who they are or where they are, patterns of safety emerge across the city. Each individual decision contributes to the overall community.

At the Human Systems Dynamics Institute, we often use Simple Rules to support systemic change for our clients and their organizations. Culture, poverty, corruption, and trust are examples of the patterns we help organizations and communities understand and influence with Simple Rules. Over the past week, our community has considered the patterns we would like to see emerge from this time of massive disruption. We offer these in hopes that they might ease anxiety and improve results as we face our current dilemmas.

  • Turn judgment into curiosity
  • Zoom in and zoom out
  • Focus on what’s true and useful
  • Connect with stories and impacts
  • Celebrate life

Stacy has her own Simple Rules that are guiding her choices in this Age of Uncertainty:

  • Take what you truly need, give what you can
  • Believe in your capacity to change the world with everyday and small actions
  • Be gentle

Never in modern history has the world stood face to face with death, as we do today. We must take these moments to see the patterns that create and sustain life. The patterns we create with our choices and actions today will persist long after our physical selves have passed away. We can create patterns of caring, connection, concern. We can celebrate those patterns wherever we find them and remember them in moments when they are not to be found. When we act on our own Simple Rules we are living the future we want today. Each choice, each action contributes to the emerging future for ourselves and others.

These are the patterns we hope for us and our world, and the behaviors we believe will create those patterns. These rules may not fit you, your life or community, or the world you want to create. We invite you to reflect on your hopes and dreams and expectations. From those, select a short list of Simple Rules to guide your decisions, when, like the storm in St. Peter, rules and habits of the past no longer serve.

If you want to create your own, consider these Simple Rules for Simple Rules:

  • Start with a verb. It is about what you DO, not what you think or believe.
  • Make the list short. If you have more than seven, you won’t remember them, and they won’t be useful in the moment when you need them.
  • Be sure they are positive. A negative rule prohibits, but it doesn’t inform. You need actions that will positively move to create the pattern you want.
  • Reflect on the rules that shape your behavior now, even if you haven’t been aware of them in the past. Anyone who lives in community already follows Simple Rules. What are yours? Are they useful today? Will they serve the future you want to build?

Share your list with us and visit us at hsdinstitute.org.

Three Horizons | International Futures Forum

Has there ever been a more apposite time for the Three Horizons model?

Also featured in https://medium.com/@designforsustainability/the-three-horizons-of-innovation-and-culture-change-d9681b0e0b0f

via Three Horizons | International Futures Forum

Three Horizons

IFF has found a ‘three horizons’ model of longer term change a useful framework both in workshop settings and for deeper analysis. IFF builds on previous versions of the model, for example in business planning, to adapt and deepen the analysis such that it becomes useful as a framework for thinking about longer term social change.  We have developed a suite of practical tools and resources to use the framework in practice which are available in the Three Horizons section of our IFF Practice Centre.

 

We have been exploring and expanding the theoretical underpinnings of the model whilst at the same time using it in practice to prompt discussion of transformative innovation in a variety of settings – eg energy policy, rural development, broadcasting, health services, financial services etc. In education we have used the model as the basis for a strategic thinking kit for schools produced jointly with Education Scotland and called ‘Opening Up Transformative Innovation’. The model itself is simple and familiar. The first horizon – H1 – is the dominant system at present. It represents ‘business as usual’. As the world changes, so aspects of business as usual begin to feel out of place or no longer fit for purpose. In the end ‘business as usual’ is superseded by new ways of doing things.

Three Horizons

Innovation has started already in light of the apparent short-comings of the first horizon system. This forms a second horizon – H2. At some point the innovations become more effective than the original system – this is a point of disruption. Clayton Christensen called it the ‘innovator’s dilemma’ – should you protect your core business that is on the wane or invest in the innovation that looks as if it might replace it? Meanwhile, there are other innovations happening already that today look way off beam. This is fringe activity. It feels like it is a long way from H1, based on fundamentally different premises. This is the third horizon – H3. It is the long term successor to business as usual – the radical innovation that introduces a completely new way of doing things. The model offers a simple way into a conversation about:

  • the dominant system and the challenges to its sustainability into the future, ie the case for change (horizon 1) the desirable future state, the ideal system we desire and of which we can identify elements in the present that give us encouragement (horizon 3) the nature of the tensions and dilemmas between vision and reality, and the distinction between innovations that serve to prolong the status quo and those that serve to bring the third horizon vision closer to reality (horizon 2) a mature perspective that accepts the need both to address the challenges in the first horizon and foster the seeds of the third. This is not an either/or, good/bad discussion. We need to ‘keep the lights on’ today, and think about how to keep them on a generation from now in very different circumstances. IFF calls this the gentle art of ‘redesigning the plane whilst flying it’.

IFF has used this model with a number of different groups. One observation has been that most policy making, and most policy discussion, occurs by default in the first horizon. It is about fixing the failing system, innovating in order to maintain it, ‘keeping the lights on’. The extended model of the three horizons opens up a new policy domain for most people: second horizon policy making underpinned by third horizon aspirations. 

IFF member Bill Sharpe’s new book on Three Horizons: The Patterning of Hope is now available in the IFF Shop. In addition, a short slide presentationoutlining a simple process to kickstart a three horizons conversation can be downloaded from slideshare alongside a longer presentation describing in more detail some of the underlying dynamics.

Activating Systems Change through Systems Leadership – Global Knowledge Initiative

via Activating Systems Change through Systems Leadership – Global Knowledge Initiative

Activating Systems Change through Systems Leadership

Defining a new form of leadership fit for the era of complexity

How might we better lead systems change and deliver sustainable results?

Challenge

Systems are all arounds us.  They drive many of the challenges we will face throughout the 21st Century.  Some of these systems are relatively simple, like the lock on a door. These can be readily understood through a prism of linear causality—”if this, then that”.  But other systems, including those most pertinent to the challenges international development seeks to address, are incredibly complex.  These systems are made up of countless actors and interactions, which are also being influenced by a multi-faceted enabling environment composed of culture, policy, rules, norms, and a host of other forces.  Changing these systems is hard and defies the ability of any single actor or institution.  But while we have advanced our ability to recognize the difficulty of challenges that emerge from complex systems, we have not evolved our notions of leadership to match.  Often, we still envision the leader as that singular individual who makes the decisions and pushes things forward. But if we are to solve 21st Century challenges, we will need a 21stCentury form of leadership suited for complexity.

Solution

GKI’s research team, in conjunction with USAID, set off to learn more about what this 21st Century form of leadership might look like—what we call Systems Leadership.  Ideas about leadership come from nearly every field—business management, cognitive psychology, and political science are just a few examples that point to the diversity of academic disciplines that proffer theories on leadership.  But our team was interested in understanding howleadership can be utilized to catalyze change in a complex system.  To answer this, the team designed a two-pronged research methodology that scanned literature from 12 disciplines along a spectrum spanning from complexity science to leadership studies.  Simultaneously, the team interviewed 25 experts from thought leading organizations like the Ashoka Foundation, FSG, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the World Economic Forum.

“USAID is accustomed to working in complex and shifting systems — something which has influenced our need to both understand how a system can influence a partnership or activity, and how we can unlock leadership potential within a system to influence systems change. We hope, through this research, to better understand the characteristics and skills of system leaders so we can apply them to strengthen this capacity within USAID. These goals have both long and short-term objectives, and GKI’s analysis is helping us kick start this effort.” – Cristine Geers, Innovation Advisor, U.S. Global Development Lab

The goal is for these findings to support engagement with USAID staff, improve their understanding of Systems Leadership, and help them apply these insights in their work. To aid this, the team synthesized the research into a brief introductory document and infographics that illuminate core concepts to Systems Leadership. These insights offer resources and guidance to international development practitioners asking the following questions: (1) What is Systems Leadership? (2) What contexts warrant Systems Leadership as a strategy for change? (3) How does one engage in leadership of this kind? (4) What case studies might help illustrate it? (5) How can individuals build their capacity to engage in Systems Leadership? and (6) how might a Systems Leader use monitoring, evaluation, research, and learning to understand the effect their interventions have on a system?  GKI briefed a group of USAID staff on these findings in early February 2018, and USAID’s Global Development Lab is leading further efforts for dissemination by integrating research insights into training materials that will be shared with USAID Missions around the world.

Results / Outcomes

  • Conducted a research process that synthesized insights across 12 academic disciplines and 25 thought leaders from around the world
  • Defined a framework for understanding Systems Leadership in relation to other leadership styles
  • Identified the most common challenges presented by complex systems in an international development context
  • Developed a framework for understanding the approaches that Systems Leaders can use to activate the component parts of a system, and documented over 50 practical tools and resources for doing so
  • Constructed three illustrative case studies of Systems Leadership in action
  • Created a DIY learning guide to support the development of capacities relevant to Systems Leadership
  • Offered a preliminary Monitoring, Evaluation, Research, and Learning framework for creating, adapting, and iterating on Systems Leadership strategies
  • Briefed 40+ USAID headquarters and field mission staff on the findings of this research and potential applications for their work

much more in source via Activating Systems Change through Systems Leadership – Global Knowledge Initiative

Government after shock – an unconventional event for unconventional times – International networked event: 17 – 18 November 2020, Observatory of Public Sector Innovation

via Government after shock – an unconventional event for unconventional times – Observatory of Public Sector Innovation Observatory of Public Sector Innovation

Post-Crisis Recovery

Government after shock – an unconventional event for unconventional times

International networked event: 17 – 18 November 2020

We have witnessed governments innovate at an unprecedented rate in the face of Covid-19, rising to meet the urgent needs of their countries and residents. But how do governments carry on beyond crisis: how do they continue with the same momentum and agility for problem solving, innovation and collaborative approaches?

From 17 – 18 November 2020, the OECD Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI), alongside a core group of international partners, will convene a virtual, networked event to allow policy makers, practitioners and public sector leaders to share lessons from a multitude of contexts and edge cases, including issues and solutions that have emerged across governments in response to the Covid-19 crisis. Participants will collaborate across local, national, and international scales to generate new insights around changing assumptions about how government works, innovation throughout a crisis, and what’s needed to navigate beyond crisis. The goal is to develop a better collective understanding of how governments can work better together to anticipate and respond to emergent issues.

OPSI, in collaboration with a worldwide network of national and sectoral contributing partners, will convene networks of leading researchers, policy makers and practitioners around the world using an innovative format that aims to combine the best of more conventional, structured conferencing with leading-edge networked dialogue.

  • Part 1 – Government after shock: Rethinking and rebuilding through innovation will be grassroots oriented, and focus on insights from the frontline
  • Part 2 – Government after shock: Collaboration for systemic change beyond crisis will bring together contributions from leaders around the world in an open forum.

The goal: to support each country’s capacity to anticipate, understand, and govern complex and changing circumstances, meanwhile promoting international collaboration on the topic of public sector innovation.

New ways of convening, talking, learning

It is anticipated that, along with timely presentations from public sector leaders and practitioners, there will be local and regional linked sessions as well as opportunities for live digital participation through interactive platforms.

Should the public health crisis have eased, we envisage the option for flagship city events as well as smaller in-house workplace meetups through to individual participation.

Such a hybrid format may also demonstrate newer, timely ways to elicit and share insights and lived practice. It is anticipated that this special 2020 ‘knowledge event’ partnership coordinated by OECD OPSI will also collaborate in the curation of an innovative format post-event outcomes report.

In the planning, delivery and post-event curation there will also be a range of localised roles that promise a unique experience:

  • virtual facilitators
  • social rapporteurs
  • hashtag hosts
  • + more.

Register interest now

You or your organisation can get involved in a number of different ways. Working with partners, we will be looking to soon run a co-design experience to help scope and shape the events and there are likely to also be a range of events in the lead-up to November, or you may wish to focus on the November events.

We invite you to put these dates in your diary – Tuesday 17 and Wednesday 18 November 2020 – and we would urge you to register interest in participating so we can keep you up to date as this exciting program evolves.

Note that checking your Expression of Interest (whether individual or on behalf of your organisation) provides for interest in both the main event on November 18-19 and early participation options such as hosting a local or thematic co-design roundtable.