David Chapman, @meaningness
A positive and realistic vision for the future of society, culture, and self, drawing lessons from recent history
Source: Desiderata for any future mode of meaningness | Meaningness
David Chapman, @meaningness
A positive and realistic vision for the future of society, culture, and self, drawing lessons from recent history
Source: Desiderata for any future mode of meaningness | Meaningness
via Ivo Velitchkov, @kvistgaard
PDF: http://scholar.google.com/scholar_url?url=https://papiro.unizar.es/ojs/index.php/rc51-jos/article/view/2645/2876&hl=en&sa=X&d=5375668230332869629&scisig=AAGBfm331u72a4Xo56ttFAPux_uAlwx-NQ&nossl=1&oi=scholaralrt&hist=bN7ZLmAAAAAJ:7176502050180105990:AAGBfm0Hmw9XYjm7BId1-xoTIzFmallUQw
Truth is always a reduction of complexity. The various aspects of an observed phenomena are reduced to only those that relate to how truth is defined by the observer. In this sense, social sciences create society by applying theories that define what is truth to it. This logic becomes a problem when the social sciences in question do not reflect a wide range of different theories that can complement and criticize each other, providing a more complex observation and, thus, a more complex truth. This is the case with some social sciences of the Global South, especially, in early stages of their institutional and organizational development. However, decisions made in early stages of a system can only be changed with considerable effort later on. There tends to be an effect of path dependency, especially in organizations engaged in social sciences in the Global South.
This article will explore the mechanisms of production of truth and thus of reduction of complexity by Marxist critical sociology in Ecuador, between the 1960s and 2010. A focus will be the institutionalization of these mechanisms in organizations and the augmentation of complexity within critical sociology, usually connected to certain ideas of politics and sciences.
via Ivo Velitchkov on twitter – @kvistgaard
Source: Social sustainability in agriculture – A system-based framework – ScienceDirect
Sustainability has become a key term for linking environmental, economic and social issues, in both the sciences and politics. Conceptions and frameworks of sustainability have thus arisen to evaluate agricultural systems on their sustainability. Within these conceptions and in political and scientific discourses, what can be understood as the social pillar of sustainability in agriculture varies greatly, especially in regards to the scope and the sustainability standards applied. While rural inhabitants have been subject of various ‘sustainability studies’, the consideration of the social dimension in agriculture is still rather underrepresented. Our conceptual framework can contribute to enhance the understanding of the social dimension of sustainability by utilizing a social science-based approach to comprehend the complexity of social interaction in agriculture: Based on Parsons’ system approach, we capture the components of a social system that encompasses agriculture and its embeddedness in society. This includes all major actors, their interactions and institutions. Further, we develop Maslow’s hierarchy of needs as well as the rights approach into a sustainability scale. We call the conceptual framework the sustainable agricultural social system. This general framework can later be adapted to local cultural and social settings, serving as a more comprehensive and flexible sustainability framework.
Source: Accompanied learning — an alternative to the ‘know-it-all’ consulting model | Marcus Jenal
My company is a consulting firm and on my CV I call myself a consultant. Consultants are experts that are hired to bring solutions to a problem or improve the functioning of a mechanism, process or organisation. They are expected to have all the answers and are paid by somebody to give them the right answers to their questions or solutions for their problems.
When I work with organisations and teams on complex challenges, I often do not feel comfortable in this role as a consultant or expert. Too often, I do not know the answers or solutions. Too often, I have felt that moment of panic in the plane on the way to a client that I do not really know what to tell them, that I do not have the answers they are hoping to get from me. As I have said and written before, intervening in complex systems is not about fixing things, like fixing an engine. Complex systems are evolving interconnected systems. Understanding these interconnections and shifting the context is a more appropriate approach to change. This always needs to be based on a deep sense of understanding the local context and continuous mutual learning.
As I write on the ‘About me’ page of my website, “Learning is at the heart of achieving change and my aim is to provide a structure for more meaningful learning.” Hence, what I can do as external partner is to accompany organisations and teams through a learning and change process and share with them my experiences and understanding of complex change processes – while at the same time continually learn about their situation, context and possible ways forward. There is no step by step guide I can walk them through. Every situation is different so what I can do is learn together with them and augment their learning process. That’s accompanied learning.
But a good teacher, and a real expert, knows that they are in a process of learning themselves. They are not leaders. They are not making seeds grow … They are fertilizer, tending to the soil. (Nora Bateson)
The term ‘accompanied learning’ itself is a product of mutual learning, of a process of discussion and interaction between me and a group of people from “Organization Unbound“, an outfit that describes itself as “an attempt to re-imagine the way we think about and engage in social change”.
The result of this process is not only the term accompanied learning, but also a description of accompanied learning that I am sharing below. This definition is a slightly adapted version of what is published on the website of Organization Unbound. In their post, they also add a list of qualities for organisations to look for in a learning partner as well as a list of qualities for external learning partners to look for in organisations
Guided by a spirit of co-learning. A person or group within an organisation comes together with a person or group external to that organisation to learn together. Being in a relationship of mutual learning is the end goal. Because there are no recipes for transforming a living system, such as an organisation, we cannot plan it out or copy-paste best practices and expertise from other contexts. We can only collectively learn our way into the answers. Thus the primary role of the external partner is to be an exceptional co-learner (not to present their expertise, provide recommendations, propose solutions, guide a change process, or facilitate an intervention). They walk with organisational members as they experiment, probing for new insight and sharing knowledge and experience in response to what is emerging in practice. The Latin root of ‘accompaniment’ means to ‘eat bread together’, to satisfy a fundamental need. In the case of organisational accompaniment, this fundamental need is learning.
Focused on the day-to-day. Accompanied learning involves gently experimenting with small shifts in behaviour in the context of the organisation’s current work, rather than merely in separate retreats or through new structures or processes. It recognises that meaningful and sustained change unfolds in the micro-moments of organisational life. Instead of creating more work on top of people’s already packed agendas, the expectation is to work with what is already happening in the organisation. This more integrated approach allows changes in ways of being to evolve more naturally and to be initiated in a more distributed way across the organisation. It also reduces the level of anxiety and defensiveness often associated with organisational change.
Contributes to a broader field of learning. Accompanied learning is intended to feed development at all levels of the organisation, no matter where the inquiry begins (with an individual, team, department, etc.). It is also intended to contribute to the larger field of ‘organisational development for social change’ (via learning communities like Organization Unbound and The Barefoot Guide Connection). This coupling of an internally focused inquiry with a ‘greater good’ inquiry gives the learning relationship a deeper meaning. And this deeper meaning has a generative quality. The idea that through our learning we might be discovering insight that will help other teams/organisations is energizing and mind-expanding.
Organisationally-driven. Experiments are led from within the organisation (by anyone, no matter their formal position), rather than by the external learning partner. Because staff and volunteers experience their organisation on a daily basis, they have a more nuanced and intuitive understanding of its inner-workings. They are able to more clearly see leverage points for change and tinker with them in the context of their daily work. The external partner can share helpful examples, frameworks, and practices, but it is ultimately up to the organisation to decide if and how to apply them. The external partner does however serve as an important anchor and space holder for the learning relationship, ensuring that in the busyness of organisational life, it remains front and centre.
Whole-person centred. Accompanied learning involves engaging with each other as whole people, beyond our professional expertise and roles. Because much of how we learn is tacit rather than explicit, the collective intelligence of a co-learning experience is expanded when we relate to each other in richer, more subtle ways. Our joy, humour, sadness, discomfort, anger, love, and fear are not simply emotional states. They can be signals that something is shifting or needs shifting. They can be doorways to new insight. And they strongly influence our capacity to learn and experiment. Accompanied learning involves paying attention to the ebbs and flows of human experience and responding to them in generative ways. The intention is to grow, within the learning relationship itself, the kind of social field we want to see blossom in the organisation and in broader society.
Open-ended & emergent. There is no predetermined end-date, plan of action, deliverables, or methodology. The path is made by walking it together. The learning partners check in with each other periodically to see if the relationship is still relevant and, if so, how they would like to proceed. For some accompanied learning relationships, this check-in happens at the end of each encounter. For others, an intention is set to have a certain number of learning exchanges, followed by a check-in. The general aim is to be in a medium to long-term relationship so that there is sufficient breathing space to experiment, observe the results, and iterate based on those results. A longer term engagement also helps the parties get to know each other in more nuanced ways.
Multi-formed. A variety of accompanied learning constellations are possible. An individual can accompany an individual, a group of people, an entire organisation, or even a group of people that come together ad-hoc because they feel the need to effect change in their communities. An organisation can accompany another organisation. Or a team can accompany another team. And the constellation might evolve over time. For example, an individual might start off accompanying one person and welcome in others over time, as interest across the organisation grows.
Contractually experimental. Accompanied learning does not always involve a monetary transaction. It can be driven purely by mutual learning, if both parties are comfortable with that. However, if there is an expressed need for one person to earn a living through the value they contribute, then payment options are explored that enable the relationship to develop with as much freedom and flexibility as possible. For example, the organisation might hire the external partner hourly, on monthly retainer or agree to contribute a yet-to-be-determined amount at a later date, once the relationship has had time to demonstrate its learning value.
Accompanied learning is an inherent part of my practice. Either when working with individuals, teams, organisations or other groups of people that explicitly bring me in to go through a process of accompanied learning. Or more subtly when working with people who bring me in as an expert. More and more, I would like to see the share of work shift more from the latter to the former, which is why I am setting up a separate page on accompanied learning on my website.
A constant education question for over 100 years has been:
What are the knowledge, skills, and dispositions students need in an age of rapid technological, environmental, social, and political change and where the future of work is unknown?
My own work with middle school students in relation to this question and prior to a 3 year secondment to government, focused on equipping students with thinking and problem-solving skills to take on the really difficult, messy problems that we humans are so good at creating. That work involved introducing students to the principles of inquiry by developing driving questions to anchor our learning. We explored tools, processes, and the principles of design and integrative thinking to uncover tensions and prototype a range of options out of those tensions. This work involved many post-it notes and a great deal of experimentation as we tested ideas, explored assumptions, and considered the implications of various problem-solving models to our identities as learners, learners in knowledge building communities, and participants in a complex world that extended beyond the classroom. I am grateful to my students and colleagues who contributed to this work.
My role at a provincial level – and which I have just left – allowed me to build on that work. For the past three years I’ve been a member of a unit supporting Innovation in Learning in a jurisdiction with about 2 million students across a wide geography and with different sub-systems. I’ve had a bird’s eye view of how different districts think about and approach innovation in learning, grounded in their local contexts. I’ve also gotten a sense of the wide range of practices and the challenges districts experience when engaged in this work. District innovation projects focused on deeper learning and developing global competencies in learners and some of that work can be seen here.
For the past year I’ve been preparing for a career transition and because of that have been deeply immersed in complexity theory and decision making in complex adaptive systems. Part of this involved taking an online course in decision-making in complex adaptive systems offered through Cognitive Edge. and flying to UK this fall for a 2 day component in October to experience some of the theory and processes in person. I was able to combine the course with a two week holiday in London – something that a classroom teacher NEVER gets to do in the autumn. I savoured the moment!
As I prepare to re-enter the classroom for 6 months, I am thinking deeply about how to introduce complexity theory and decision-making in CASs to middle school students as I firmly believe students need to be working with theories and approaches to problem solving as the theories are developing so they can contribute to the knowledge base particularly as children are so adept at grappling with novel practices and ideas – in ways that adults aren’t.
From this foray into complexity theory, I’d like to share a few things that I will be inroducing to students:
The first is the Cynefin framework for understanding problem domains. David Snowden’s Cynefin Framework will help students decide which problem solving approach to take by first identifying the domains in which problems are situated. A word of caution – there is a technique to this which must be learned so that one doesn’t end up misusing the framework or using it in a very limited way which could result in students becoming stuck in old thinking. Students will not get the full benefit of Cynefin if they merely use it to categorize problems. I highly recommend Snowden’s Ted Talk as a starting point for learning.
A second thing Snowden offers, and what drew me to his work in the first place, is a way to think differently about data. I don’t know anyone who isn’t alarmed by the intrusions data analytics seem to be making into our lives – the exploitative, stealthy, and threatening way analytic companies appear to be tightening their grip particularly as AI – whatever that is, gains prominence and the malicious way data analytics are being used for such things as inciting fear and destabilizing democracies.
Snowden offers an alternative way to engage with data. He shows that it is possible to turn away from the dehumanizing and destabilizing data culture created by Silicon Valley-style tech companies such as Facebook, Cambridge Analytica, or the ‘personalized learning’ platforms like the one students in Brooklyn recently walked out in protest over.
Snowden’s Sensemaker® is based on research from neuroscience, complexity theory, and years of experience trying to make sense and make decisions in very difficult contexts (the refugee crisis, understanding terrorist networks, gender-based violence, understanding resilience and how to foster it, identifying disruptions and opportunities in business …). His tool and methodology allows humans to remain in control of the meaning of their data and to participate in decisions on how that data gets used. Data is gathered and visualized in ways that allow humans to remain the experts of their own experiences. What is really interesting is that data can be gathered in real time and at scale. One Sensemaker project involved gathering 50 000 micro-narratives over a two week period in different countries that helped decision-makers understand how radicalization was occurring and how it might be addressed.
It is incumbent upon us as educators to help students think critically about data and also point them towards tools and practices that offer more than stealth and exploitative analytics as they learn to take on complex problems such as those identified in the SDGs, or in any of the many other inquiries, projects, and problems they are drawn to.
Here is a thorough example of what human-centered data gathering looks like, where Sensemaker was used to understand the experience of smallhold farmers in supply chains.
Over the next few months I will continue to share my learning and resources that I come across that might be helpful to advancing how students think and develop solutions to difficult problems. In January, I re-enter teaching and will document key points in practice and learning.
This is a snapshot in time – read and contribute and edit at the original link:
🐒 Hi I’m Richard D. Bartlett! I’m writing a book about decentralised organising, finding lessons across diverse contexts, from social movements to formal workplaces.
I recently asked on Twitter and on a mailing list for examples of decentralised organisations that have a public, transparent, well-documented handbook that explains how they work (e.g. decision making, roles, communications tools, etc). The response was overwhelming so I’ve digested it into this page.
If you have more to add, please edit this page, contribute on Twitter, or email rich@thehum.org 
Documentation from specific organisations
Generalised lessons about decentralised organising
I think the best structure for any organising effort must be custom-fit to its local context. I don’t believe in “one size fits all” solutions, but we don’t need to start from a blank slate either. My book is a collection of “patterns”, experiences that are common in all collaborative groups. Each pattern names a common dysfunction (e.g. unfair distribution of care labour), and a response (e.g. account for care work the same way you treat other work).
My approach to organisational development:
So the “handbooks” listed here are examples of local context (with much gratitude to the authors who make their experience transparent for others to learn from). The “toolkits and books” are global lessons extracted from local experience.
@patconnoly @toddhoskins @shareable @JPatrickDunn @patriciarealini @WCCWLA@adriennemaree @AyniTeam @UlexProject @pircuk @NEON_UK @jaimeyann @feminineist@staccoP2P @bcnencomu @mrchrisadams @350 @rhizomecoop @jdaviescoates@PlatformLondon @CFTransition @transitiontowns @awesomefound @sam5 @radicalthnktnk@Jas_Tribe @Sam_Applebee @randallito @CosechaMovement @roguesofa @Owoy@douginamug @neil @mattcropp @wearehanno
If you have more to add, please edit this page, contribute on Twitter, or email rich at thehum.org 
On various facebook groups, Gerald says:
Good news! The ‘Systems Thinking’ four-volume set that I edited for Sage Publications in 2003 is in print again after being unavailable for a couple of years. I was told by the publisher that the whole series of books had gone out of print, but they’ve revived just this one due to continuing demand!
The four-volume set reprints classic papers on systems thinking from 1913 to 2003, and was assembled with advice from an international advisory board of systems thinking luminaries. It’s priced for libraries rather than individuals (£645), so if you are affiliated to a university that doesn’t already have it, please recommend it for purchase.
My goal in publicising this re-release is to get it into as many university libraries as possible – especially ones that don’t have a comprehensive collection on systems thinking and systems science. It will give staff and students who encounter systems thinking for the first time a ready-made resource to help them explore the history and development of the ideas.
The web site for the ‘Systems Thinking’ four-volume set is below. It is not particularly interesting visually, but lists the international advisory board and the full contents of each of the volumes, so you can see if you think it is worth recommending for purchase. Let’s get this into as many libraries as possible before it goes out of print again!
Source: Systems Thinking | SAGE Publications Ltd
Systems Thinking will be an essential reference for all libraries of business, management and organization studies.
International Advisory Board
Peter Allen, Cranfield University, UK
Bela H Banathy, Saybrook Institute, USA & International Systems Institute, USA
Kenneth Bausch, Institute for 21st Century Agoras, USA
Richard Bawden, Michigan State University, USA
Søren Brier, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Denmark
David Campbell, Tavistock Clinic, UK
Fritjof Capra, Center for Ecoliteracy, USA
Peter Checkland, Lancaster University, UK
José Córdoba, University of Hull, UK
Peter Corning, Institute for the Study of Complex Systems, USA
Donald de Raadt, Luleå University, Sweden
Eric Dent, University of Maryland, University College, USA
Peter Dudley, Integra Management Systems Ltd., UK
Robert Flood, Maastricht University, The Netherlands
Joyce Fortune, Open University, UK
Wojciech Gasparski, Institute of Philosophy and Sociology of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland
Wendy Gregory, University of Hull, UK
Jifa Gu, JAIST, Japan & Institute of Systems Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China
Enrique Herrscher, IDEA, Argentina
Kristo Ivanov, Umea University, Sweden
Mike Jackson, University of Hull, UK
James Kay, University of Waterloo, Canada
Lisl Klein, Bayswater Institute, UK
George Klir, Binghampton University, USA
Ervin Laszlo, Club of Budapest, Hungary
Harold Linstone, Portland State University, USA
Sid Luckett, University of Natal, South Africa
Gianfranco Minati, Italian Systems Society, Italy
John Mingers, Warwick University, UK
Heiner M ller Merbach, Universität Kaiserslautern, Germany
P N Murthy, Tata Consultancy Services, India
Yoshiteru Nakamori, Japan Advanced Institute for Science and Technology (JAIST), Japan
Harold Nelson, Advance Design Institute, Seattle, USA
Roger Packham, University of Western Sydney, Australia
Yong Pil Rhee, Seoul National University, South Korea
Kurt Richardson, Institute for the Study of Coherence and Emergence, USA
Fenton Robb, Independent Author, UK
Ricardo Rodríguez-Ulloa, Instituto Andino de Sistemas, Peru
Simanta Roy-Chowdhury, Barnet, Enfield and Harringay NHS Trust & University of East London, UK
John Sterman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA
Sytse Strijbos, Free University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
Stuart Umpleby, George Washington University, USA
John Van Gigch, California State University, USA
John Warfield, George Mason University, USA
Jennifer Wilby, The University of York, UK
Eric Wolstenholme, Cognitus Ltd., UK
Maurice Yolles, Liverpool John Moores University, UK
| The Skeleton of Science |
| Towards an Ontology of Levels |
| Basic Concepts |
| Obstacles, Potentials and Case Studies |
| Foundations to a Theory of General Evolution |
| An Executive Summary |
| Applications for Organization and Management |
| Its Provenance, Development, Methodology and Pathology |
| A Critical Enquiry |
| Epistemology or Technique? |
| The Search for Objectivity or the Quest for a Compelling Argument |
| A Counter-Ontoepistemology for a Systems Approach |
| A Phenomenological Ontology for Interpretive Systemology |
| An Alternative Theoretical Perspective |
| Three Guidelines for the Conductor of the Session |
| Preliminary and Evolving Ideas about the Implications for Clinical Theory |
| A Methodology for Strategic Problem Solving |
| Organizing Complexity through Disciplined Activity |
| A Development of Systems Thinking for the 1990s |
| Building Learning Organizations |
| Tackling Messy Problems |
| An Ongoing Conversation |
| Critical Theory and Soft Systems Methodology |
| Developing Housing Services for Older People |
| A Practical Face to Critical Systems Thinking |
| A New Strategy for Critical Systems Thinking |
| Probing Methodological Rationalities |
| The Nature and Role of Critical Learning Systems |
| A Concern for the Issues that Matter |
| An American-Chinese Case |
| Towards a Framework for Mixing Methodologies |
| Intending to Ask Lineal, Circular, Strategic, or Reflexive Questions? |
| Intersecting the Ideas of Foucault with the `Problem’ of Power in Family Therapy |
| Gender Paradoxes in Volatile Attachments |
Source: Think Biologically: Messy Management for a Complex World
When Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev barked “We will bury you!” in 1956, it was not considered an empty threat. It was seen as a real existential threat to capitalism and the American way of life. Many Western intellectuals believed that planned economies might indeed outperform free markets, whose inherent shortcomings—such as volatile economic cycles, lower investment rates, and the inefficiencies of competition—put capitalism at a relative disadvantage.1
Of course, reality turned out very differently, and we can see clearly today why planned economies almost invariably fail. They suppress diversity, initiative, innovation, and the adaptive capacity necessary for survival in an unpredictable environment. This lesson from history reveals an important insight: not only are there inherent limits to human intervention in a complex system—such as the economy—but we have difficulty seeing those limits before the fact.
The same lesson applies to businesses operating in today’s rapidly changing and unpredictable global environment. We have argued that businesses, like forests or oceans or ant colonies, are complex adaptive systems (CASs), in which local behaviors and events can cascade and reshape the entire system.2 As such, businesses are neither fully controllable nor predictable. Traditional approaches to management, which presume the opposite, are therefore often inadequate to address current business challenges.
To succeed over the long run, business leaders must not rely only on the traditional “mechanical” approach to management, which seeks to direct a company toward desired outcomes by engineering processes and controlling the behavior of its various components. They must also learn a “biological” approach, which acknowledges the uncertainty and complexity of business problems and so addresses them indirectly.
Continues in original article (link at top)
How do regions acquire the knowledge they need to diversify their economic activities? How does the migration of workers among firms and industries contribute to the diffusion of that knowledge? Here we measure the industry-, occupation-, and location-specific knowledge carried by workers from one establishment to the next, using a dataset summarizing the individual work history for an entire country. We study pioneer firms—firms operating in an industry that was not present in a region—because the success of pioneers is the basic unit of regional economic diversification. We find that the growth and survival of pioneers increase significantly when their first hires are workers with experience in a related industry and with work experience in the same location, but not with past experience in a related occupation. We compare these results with new firms that are not pioneers and find that industry-specific knowledge is significantly more important for pioneer than…
View original post 104 more words
Epistemic Status: Common knowledge, just not to meThe Evolution of Trust [https://ncase.me/trust/] is a deceptively friendlylittle interactive game. Near the end, there’s a “sandbox” evolutionary gametheory simulator. It’s pretty flexible. You can do quick experiments in itwithout writing code. I highly recommend playing around.One of the things that surprised me was a strategy the game calls Simpleton,also known in the literature as Pavlov. In certain conditions, it works prettywell —… (Read more)
Source: The Pavlov Strategy – LessWrong 2.0
Epistemic Status: ConfidentThere’s a really interesting paper from 1996 called The Logic of Contrition[https://homepage.univie.ac.at/Karl.Sigmund/JTB97a.pdf], which I’ll summarizehere. In it, the authors identify a strategy called “Contrite Tit For Tat”,which does better than either Pavlov or Generous Tit For Tat in IteratedPrisoner’s Dilemma.In Contrite Tit For Tat, the player doesn’t only look at what he and the otherplayer played on the last term, but also another variable, thestandingof theplayers, whi… (Read more)
Source: Contrite Strategies and The Need For Standards – LessWrong 2.0
Professor Russell Ackoff was a great scholar, educator, consultant … and much more. Intellectual and pragmatic. Logician, mathematician, philosopher, … , systemist.
He was and excelled at so many things. One could fill an encyclopedia with #s trying to do him justice. The following I want to choose – feeling awkward about it as I am fairly old-fashioned and myself not too at-, dis-, ex-tracted 😉 by what some filters and algos suggest to be of relevance, based on keywords. Nevertheless, today I give in a little because I think Russ had deserved that he catches attention by more than those who watch out for reference to his vast body of contributions anyway.
#RLA100 #RLA #Ackoff #management #systems #systemsthinking #systemspractice #whole #holistic #purpose #inquiry #orientation #principles #approach #mindset #education #learning #future #design #interaction #philosophy #perspective #theory #practice #sensemaking #complexity #purposeful #human #mess #methodology #logic #method #strategy #organisation #process #efficiency #effectiveness #foundation #essence #DIKW #knowledge #understanding #wisdom #intellect #humour #flaws #entertainment #enlightenment #professionals #linkedin #tribute #differentiation #analysis #synthesis #relevance #rigour #remembrance #reverence #reflection
Few could nail an issue as cogent as he. Right on point. Yet always circumspective, bringing together contents and context – and consequences.
His sharp mind was accompanied by a sharp tongue that chiselled sentences of precision to stand the test of time. And hishumour was just as sharp.
Those who experienced him live will agree. Those who experience(d) him via books or (better to get a feel for the type of personality and clarity of deliverance) videos, regularly are stunned, along the lines of:
Brilliant. How clear. So succinct. Spot on.
So much of his understanding and wisdom is of fundamental essence. Theory and practice has developed, of course. But all development needs a sound, sturdy foundation.
Russ’ foundation is rock solid. Timeless.
A source and guide for sensemaking and design of interactive, complex human systems. And he has been at knowledge and understanding thereof long before systems – in the wider sense of the word – became fashionable. Fashionable industry would (to expand reference to architecture) benefit from more knowledge of the statics and understanding of the pillarsit builds on.
I would hold that lack thereof is one of the main reasons why (modern) systems approaches often are used on and understood from a process level/perspective only. Organisation and strategy fall short. And efforts then may bring short-term efficiency, but no long-term effectiveness.
Systems therefore is not a tool or a theory for normed (or even certified meticulous step-by-step) application, but a mindset and philosophy – as much as a holistic and wholesome practice.
Russell Ackoff has taught and influenced many. In academia, industry, and public sector. In many different countries. In continental Europe he is unfortunately less known than in the English-speaking world.
To all those not RLA fans yet, but curious to learn about and more so from him, I would recommend (from the many publications of his) the following two. They are both entry level to and summary of his wisdom (reference to the DIK-Understanding-W pyramid):
“Management in Small Doses” and “Ackoff’s F/laws The Cake”
Both absolute gems, treasure chests of decades of experience as teacher and practitioner in
quintessential Russ style:
Russ’ ability to explain was compelling.
LinkedIn is a platform for professionals. The ones I regularly exchange with are all applying some form of systems thinking in their practice. However, not all were familiar with RLA and the pile of gems he left behind. Where I made reference to his works, spread the word, instilled pieces of his insights, was a (hope so) non-intrusive and friendly “missionary”, I can honestly and with joy report,
not one (sic!), who did not take to Russ and saw relevance for their own work.
I noted in recent weeks there was an increase of mention of and reference to him on the LinkedIn platform. The body of his work is substantial in every sense of the word. I am aware much has long been shared and stated. Still, I see his approaching centennial as an appropriate time to contribute to rekindling the torch and honouring his legacy.
What would Y O U would like to share as your learning from and reverence to him?
A quote, an insight, an anecdote … that has relevance for you. Something that you associate with him. Whether you provide your own or complement what others share – it is about paying tribute.
Personally, I shall for each of the 10 weeks until his 100th birthday send every Tuesday a little aspect or wisdom (sequence not by priority) that I relate to Russ, something I aim to reflect and embody in my own work. Here is my first in the 10-week countdown:
The fundamental difference betweenanalysis, taking things apart ANDsynthesis, seeing the whole & its purpose, which defines the purpose of the parts.
He was a master of differentiation and maybe that aspect of logic and clarity is a key differentiator that made him so special and relevant.
Russ made a difference. His intellectual rigour and sharpness is missed, for sure. And then, the man himself: demanding, yet caring.
For those contacts I know they had truly close bonds with Russ, having been long-time collaborators, business partners and friends, I take the liberty to tag them: #jamshidgharajedaghi #johnpourdehnad
SAVE THE DATE! June 24 to 26, 2019
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
The 2019 annual conference of the American Society for Cybernetics will be held June 24 to 26, 2019.
Conference Theme
The conference theme is Acting Cybernetically. The conference will include a varied program of sessions on the theme of acting cybernetically, including participatory ‘playshops’, and performances as well as traditional academic papers. A vibrant pre- and post-conference program is planned to allow participants to enjoy the diverse experiences available in the Vancouver area. Information about registration, accommodations, and a call for papers/presentations will be coming soon. See the ASC’s Website for additional information.
Location
The conference will be held in the Department of Theatre and Film at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver on the traditional, ancestral, and unceded territory of the Musqueam people. All sessions will be held on campus and on-campus accommodations are available.
Regional Connections
The region affords a wonderful range of summer travel opportunities. The organizing committee of is very much looking forward to receiving you at the conference venue and hopes you will have memorable experiences in North America’s Cascadia region in summer 2019! The 2019 ASC conference will be held
immediately before the 2019 ISSS Conference in nearby Corvallis, Oregon,(June 28 – July 2), allowing participants the opportunity to attend both.
There is undeniable evidence showing that bacteria have strongly influenced the evolution and biological functions of multicellular organisms. It has been hypothesized that many host-microbial interactions have emerged so as to increase the adaptive fitness of the holobiont (the host plus its microbiota). Although this association has been corroborated for many specific cases, general mechanisms explaining the role of the microbiota in the evolution of the host are yet to be understood. Here we present an evolutionary model in which a network representing the host adapts in order to perform a predefined function. During its adaptation, the host network (HN) can interact with other networks representing its microbiota. We show that this interaction greatly accelerates and improves the adaptability of the HN without decreasing the adaptation of the microbial networks. Furthermore, the adaptation of the HN to perform several functions is possible only when it interacts with many different bacterial…
View original post 173 more words
Source: Cynefin™ & Theory of Constraints – Seattle, WA – Cognitive Edge

A Cognitive Edge Masterclass:
Discover significant process improvements opportunities with the integration of two highly effective management approaches!
More and more people continue to look for answers to improving processes, performance and ultimately results. This constant search has led people to study a lot of methods, many of which claim to be “The Answer.”
Despite all this research, process improvement efforts or results remain flat-lined. Uncertainties and complexities in today’s operating environments continue to blind-side with new and unanticipated risks.
What if you could learn to apply two management approaches which, when integrated, have the potential to dramatically improve results and create greater resilience under conditions of uncertainty?
In this 2-day intense Exploration, facilitated by thought-leaders in Cynefin™ and Theory of Constraints (TOC), you will discover ways complexity theory, the Cynefin™ framework, and TOC can be applied to significantly improve performance and results in your organisation.
In this masterclass you will learn how to:
This Masterclass is for managers, team leads, senior decision-makers, C-suite (CTO, CIO, CEO, CSO), strategists, consultants, and studied members of the TOC, Lean, and Agile communities. More broadly, this Cynefin™ and TOC Masterclass is for anyone who wants to immerse themselves deeply into theory informed practices to improve their ability to improve productivity and results in their organizations or with their clients.
Early “Front of the Class” registrations are limited to the first 8 registrations. Book your space early to ensure you are at the front of the class!
Registration is open until one day prior to course start IF seats remain available. Group registrations are common which can sell lead to fast sell-outs. Book early to confirm your seat.
Masterclasses are limited to 20 seats* to ensure a high quality learning experience and to provide participants greater interaction time with instructors.
Dave Snowden divides his time between two roles: founder Chief Scientific Officer of Cognitive Edge and the founder and Director of the Centre for Applied Complexity at the University of Wales. His work is international in nature and covers government and industry looking at complex issues relating to strategy, organisational decision making and decision making. He has pioneered a science-based approach to organisations drawing on anthropology, neuroscience and complex adaptive systems theory. His paper with Boone on Leadership was the cover article for the Harvard Business Review in November 2007 and also won the Academy of Management award for the best practitioner paper in the same year. He has previously won a special award from the Academy for originality in his work on knowledge management. During his tenure at IBM, he was selected as one of the six on demand thinkers for w worldwide advertising campaign His company Cognitive Edge exists to integrate academic thinking with practice in organisations throughout the world and operates on a network model working with Academics, Government, Commercial Organisations, NGOs and Independent Consultants. He is also the main designer of the SenseMaker® software suite, originally developed in the field of counter-terrorism and now being actively deployed in both Government and Industry to handle issues of impact measurement, customer/ employee insight, narrative-based knowledge management, strategic foresight and risk management.
Steve Holt has been a manager, engineer, instructor and/or internal consultant in a large aerospace company for many years. In the 1980s he was first introduced to ideas of Quality Improvement and that started a learning journey that included Total Quality Management, Systems Thinking, TRIZ, Lean, Agile and Theory of Constraints. But he was still nagged by the question: With all the smart people in the world and all these wonderful methods, why do we still have trouble getting things done? This led into studies of Complexity, the Cynefin™ Framework, Mission Command, Critical Thinking and Red Team analysis. Rather than switching alliances when he learns a new approach, he continues to blend them together. This continues to show beneficial synergies.
The Theory of Constraints has been Steve’s primary improvement method since he took his first Constraints Management course at Washington State University in 1997. He is currently an Associate Professor teaching Constraints Management at the WSU. He has been a member of the Theory of Constraints International Certification Organization since 2003 and was a member of the TOCICO board of directors from 2010 to 2016. He has been part of a number of TOC implementations, many of which have been presented at TOCICO conferences. He gave the first introductory presentation on the CynefinTM Framework to the TOC community at the TOCICO 2010 annual conference. He had a “15 seconds of fame” experience when Dr. Eli Goldratt reacted (positively) to that presentation. Steve is a strong believer in the value and benefits of both TOC and CynefinTM and is looking forward to the opportunity to explore their interaction.
NOTE:
Cognitive Edge reserves the right to cancel or re-schedule the offered session. In the event of cancellation or rescheduling, a full refund of course fees will be processed within 10 business days of cancellation or rescheduling notice. Cancellations by registrants are only permitted with a minimum of 3 weeks notice ahead of course delivery date with refunds provided less a 10% processing fee. Substitutions are permitted at any time as well as rescheduling attendance to an alternate session within a 12 month period.
Explanation of ticket discount options below. PLEASE NOTE the discount changes for 2019 in bold in (2) below.
Source: Systems Approaches – Observatory of Public Sector Innovation Observatory of Public Sector Innovation
Often there a gap between the kinds of problems governments must address and their capacity to do so. By focusing on how the ‘system’ of government (its processes, methods and practices) can better work in concert, we can overcome silos, engage citizens and the right partners to address the cause of issues, not just their symptoms.
To promote ‘system thinking’ within government, we are developing a conceptual framework, with case studies and recommendations, to guide leaders and managers to adopt this approach to governance.
This work encourages governments to reflect on how the operation of their organisation and how its culture either supports or stifles innovation.
For this project, we produce research and, upon request, work directly with governments to analyse their system and its capacity to support innovation and conduct workshops to develop systems approaches to real-world policy problems.
To request systems analysis, workshop or advisory services for your government, send us an email.

Our 2017 report is our flagship report on Systems approaches. Systems can be defined as elements joined together by dynamics that produce an effect, create a whole or influence other elements of a system. Changing the dynamics of a well-established and complex system is not easy. This requires not only a new way of examining problems but also bold decision making that fundamentally challenges public sector institutions.
Traditionally, public policy makers have addressed social problems through discrete interventions that are layered on top of one another. However, these may shift consequences from one part of the system to another, or address symptoms while ignoring causes.
Since the recognition of this complexity gap (the gap between the problems faced by institutions and their capacity to tackle them) systems thinking, and other systems approaches such as design thinking, have gained traction. Looking at the whole system rather than the parts allows one to focus on where change can have the greatest impact.
To read more about what we uncovered and to read the case studies, please check out the full report.