Asia-Pacific Foresight Conference 2012

16-18th November, 2012

Perth, Western Australia

Russell Clemens: independent research: organisational anthropology

email: rshclemens@gmail.com / Linkedin.

THE CYBERNETICS OF FORESIGHT

FUTURES THINKING FOR THE 21ST CENTURY

PIERRE WACK (1922 – 1997)

Futurist; April 1998, Vol. 32 Issue 3, p.43

Obituary

“Announces the death of Pierre Wack, a pioneer of scenario planning, on December 22, 1997.

Comments from futurist Ian Wilson about the planning developed by Wack and his colleagues.”

(connection.ebscohost.com/c/obituaries/400908/pierre-wack)

STAFFORD BEER (1926 – 2002)

“Futurist Stafford Beer, a leading theorist in the field of management cybernetics, died on August 23 in Toronto following cardiac arrest; he was 75.

Beer, who had studied philosophy and psychology at University College in London, pioneered the use of cybernetics for modelling management and operational systems in the steel industry. He is credited with solving complex problems in production, marketing, finance, personnel, and other areas.

In 1986 he joined fellow futurists Isaac Asimov, Alvin Toffler, Al Gore Jr., and others at the World Future Society's conference in New York, offering his invaluable insights on crisis management and conflict resolution.”

(FUTURIST UPDATE, News & Previews from the World Future Society, October 2002, www.wfs.org/futupoct02.htm)

Remembering . . .

FUTURISTS - Past

INTRODUCTION

1. Cybernet ics & Fores ight

2. Related by common symbols

3. Shared h is tor ies

4. 21 s t century ‘ too lk i ts ’

I n t r o d u c t i o n

CYBERNETICS – FOCUS ON “DOING” …

C y b e r n e t i c s & F o r e s i g h t

W o r k i n g D e f i n i t i o n s

What Sta fford Beer

& P ier re Wack

d id !

i . e . , M a n a g e m e n t C y b e r n e t i c s & S c e n a r i o P l a n n i n g , r e s p e c t i v e l y

POSIWID: purpose of a system is what it does … (Beer)

CYBERNETICS – GENESIS

H i s t o r y o f M o d e r n C y b e r n e t i c s

• M a c y C o n f e r e n c e s – a s e t o f m e e t i n g s o f s c h o l a r s f r o m v a r i o u s d i s c i p l i n e s h e l d i n N e w Yo r k f r o m 1 9 4 6 t h r o u g h t o 1 9 5 3 o n t h e i n i t i a t i v e o f W a r r e n M c C u l l o c h & t h e J o s i a h M a c y , J r . F o u n d a t i o n .

• P r i n c i p a l P u r p o s e – t o s e t t h e f o u n d a t i o n s f o r a g e n e r a l s c i e n c e o f t h e w o r k i n g s o f t h e h u m a n m i n d .

(American Cybernetics Society: Macy Summary)

“ I s p e c i f i c a l l y w a n t t o c o n s i d e r t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e s e t o f c r o s s - d i s c i p l i n a r y i d e a s w h i c h w e f i r s t

c a l l e d ' f e e d - b a c k ' a n d t h e n c a l l e d ' t e l e o l o g i c a l m e c h a n i s m s ' a n d t h e n c a l l e d ' c y b e r n e t i c s ' - - a f o r m o f c r o s s - d i s c i p l i n a r y t h o u g h t w h i c h m a d e i t p o s s i b l e

f o r m e m b e r s o f m a n y d i s c i p l i n e s t o c o m m u n i c a t e w i t h e a c h o t h e r e a s i l y i n a l a n g u a g e w h i c h a l l c o u l d

u n d e r s t a n d . ”

(Margaret Mead, cited in von Foerster 1995).

MANAGING FROM THE FUTURE

P a r a d i g m

“Managing from the Future”

" I n t e r n a l i s i n g s o m e f u t u r e g o a l s o t h e i n s t i t u t i o n c a n p l a n t i t s f e e t i n t h a t f u t u r e a n d m a n a g e t h e p r e s e n t f r o m t h e r e ”

( P a s c a l e , M i l l e m a n n & G i o j a , 1 9 9 7 ) .

T h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f a “ c o m m o n u n d e r s t a n d i n g i s e s s e n t i a l ”( v a n d e H e i j d e n , 1 9 8 8 ) .

P l a n n i n g f o r a s u s t a i n a b l e f u t u r e m e a n s “ f i r s t s y n c h r o n i s i n g w a t c h e s a n d t h e f i r s t s t e p t o w a r d s t h e u n k n o w n i s t o g e t a g r e e m e n t o n w h e r e w e a r e a l r e a d y ”

( J a m e s , 1 9 9 8 )

IMAGINATION …

S e n s e o f P l a c e : ‘ S t a r g a t i n g ’ 1 9 1 2 – 2 11 2

1912 2012

20122112

"... six [points] for the destination. But to chart a course, you need a point of origin.”

(Daniel Jackson )

‘Observer’

RICH PICTURES: 21ST DECEMBER 1912 > 2012 > 2112 … (200-year toolkits for 2,000+ year journeys)

Forest Philosophers – France, 1923

The Herald of Coming Good Paris, 1933

Arica – Chile,1970s

SuperSyntegration® – St Gallen, 2012

"The hour drew nigh &the moon did rend asunder."

[Al-Qur'an 54:1]

‘Glocal’ 2112

Rich Picture: ‘A Short Look @ Long Time’

Origins B.C.?

Moscow1912

Sufi traditions?

Perth 2012

‘21-Dec’

Time line recursions:Northern perspectives -- Southern placesEastern origins -- Wester destinations ...?

20 th century

21st century

22nd century19th century18th

‘Perth’ 1697‘Cygnus atratus’New Holland(Willem de Vlamingh)

(Wack, WW2)

Beyond Dispute – Toronto,1994

OVERVIEW

1. E c o n o m i c t r e n d s , c l i m a t e c h a n g e , d i s r u p t i v e i n n o v a t i v e t e c h n o l o g i e s & g e o p o l i t i c a l t u r b u l e n c e c o n t i n u e .

2. 9 - b i l l i o n p e o p l e ( 2 0 5 0 ) n e e d i n g i n c l u s i v e , h a r m o n i o u s , e q u i t a b l e & s u s t a i n a b i l i t y g o v e r n a n c e s y s t e m s .

3. C h a l l e n g e : ‘ S e e i n g ’ o u r f u t u r e s ( & c o m p l e x i t i e s ) b e t t e r – w i t h o u t a ‘ C r i s i s ! ’ r e s p o n s e .

4. C y b e r n e t i c s i n 2 1 s t c e n t u r y f o r e s i g h t ‘ t o o l k i t s ’

2 1 s t C e n t u r y A s s u m p t i o n s

PROPHETIC FORESIGHT SYSTEMS?

“ I m a g i n a l V i s i o n i n g f o r P r o p h e t i c F o r e s i g h t ”

(Markley 2012)*

M a r k l e y ( 2 0 1 2 ) b e l i e v e s :

1. F u t u r e v i a b l e s y s t e m s w i l l n e e d g r e a t e r i n p u t o f “ h i g h e r i n t u i t i o n ” i n s i t u a t i o n s w h e r e “ s y s t e m i c d i s r u p t i o n s & t r a n s f o r m a t i v e c h a n g e ” a b o u n d .

2. “ P r o p h e t i c ” f o r m s o f f o r e s i g h t i n v o l v i n g e t h i c s & “ w i s d o m ” a r e i n c r e a s i n g l y d e s i r a b l e f o r “ w i s e ” f u t u r e s t o e m e r g e .

3. L i k e l y s c e n a r i o s w i l l i n v o l v e e p o c h - s c a l e c h a n g e o n “ s p a c e s h i p e a r t h ” w i t h a c i v i l i z a t i o n a l t i p p i n g - p o i n t o c c u r r i n g a r o u n d 2 0 2 0 .

4. A p o s t - c o l l a p s e b i f u r c a t i o n p o i n t m a y o c c u r i n f o l l o w i n g d e c a d e s r e s u l t i n g i n e i t h e r a “ s u s t a i n a b i l i t y e r a ” ( w i s e -f u t u r e ) o r f u l l c i v i l i z a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e – b a s e d o n a “ c i v i l i z a t i o n a l r e f o r m a t i o n ” o r i t s a b s e n c e ( r e s p e c t i v e l y ) .

5. “ H i g h e r l e v e l ” c o n s c i o u s n e s s & a p p r o a c h e s a r e r e q u i r e d t o e x t e n d f o r e s i g h t c a p a c i t y .

(* Journal of Futures Studies, September 2012, 17(1): 5-24)

PROPHETIC FORESIGHT SYSTEMS?

“ I m a g i n a l V i s i o n i n g f o r P r o p h e t i c F o r e s i g h t ”

(Markley 2012, p. 11)

1. w ē i ( 危 ) r o u g h l y m e a n s " d a n g e r , d a n g e r o u s ; e n d a n g e r , j e o p a r d i z e ; p e r i l o u s ; p r e c i p i t o u s , p r e c a r i o u s ; h i g h ; f e a r , a f r a i d “ .

2. w ē i j ī s u g g e s t s " c r u c i a l p o i n t "

3. j ī ( 机 ) d o e s n o t n e c e s s a r i l y m e a n " o p p o r t u n i t y . “

[jīhuì (机会) is closer to “opportunity”]

(Wikipedia:

Chinese_word_for_crisis)

CRISIS! … 2B or not 2B in crisis … is that a question of perception?

wēi j ī (wei-chi ) : “ d a n g e r ” & “ c r u c i a l p o i n t ”

Crisis! =

CAUSAL LAYERED ANALYSIS

(Inayatullah 2004)(Wikipedia image: Causal_layered_analysis)

A n a l y s i s

C L A : F o r e s i g h t & F u t u r e s

MAKING WORK SYSTEMS BETTER

“ A w o r k s y s t e m i s a p u r p o s e f u l d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e r e a l w o r l d i n w h i c h p e o p l e s p e n d e f f o r t i n m o r e o r l e s s c o h e r e n t a c t i v i t i e s f o r m u t u a l l y

i n f l u e n c i n g e a c h o t h e r a n d t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t . ” ( * )

Domain Time Span Function Method Focus Strategic Dilemma

1. Added-value 1 day to

1-2 years

Transforming product for clients.

Production to specifications.

Time, volume, quality, price.

Waste, efficiency. Using the right means? Adapt to change.

2. Innovation 1-2 years to

5-10 years

Detect change in operating environment values & create added value for the future.

Focus on discovery of new emerging trends.

Desirability, feasibility, transferability, systemicity (**).

Choices between alternative products & services.

Bifurcation point.

3. Value-systems 5-10 years to 20-50 years

Create elements of new culture through new language, descriptions & prescriptions.

Permanent debate between representatives of different world views, traditions & cultures.

Generative, tolerant, dialectical, congruent.

Irreversible consequences of whole system change. Tension between ideology & value systems.

4. Spiritual Beyond 20 years

Deal with personal mortality.

Focus on creativity & universality.

Art & personal behaviour.

Life & death.

W o r k S y s t e m D o m a i n s

Summary based on Hoebeke (1994, pp. 169-183) synthesising Checkland; Beer; Maturana & Jaques

* Wikipedia: Luc_Hoebeke** the complex, dynamic behaviour exhibited by systems, or systems-of-systems

CLA & CYBERNETICS

CLA Domain Cyberneticist Cybernetics DefinitionLitany 1. Added-value Margaret Mead “… a form of cross-disciplinary thought

which made it possible for members of many disciplines to communicate with each other easily in a language which all could understand.’

Social System & Structure

2. Innovation Stafford Beer“. . . the science of effective organization.”

Worldview 3. Value-systems

Gregory Bateson

“… a branch of mathematics dealing with problems of control, recursiveness and information focusing on forms and the patterns that connect.”

Myth & Metaphor 4. Spiritual Gordon Pask “… the science of defensible metaphors.”

CLA + Work System Domains + Cybernetics

CLA & ‘Cybernetic Foresighting’

P r o b l e m S i t u a t i o n – ‘ C o m m u n i c a t i o n L o o p s ’

S y s t e m s ‘ V e r b s ’ : 1 . E m e r g e n c e 2 . C o n t r o l 3 . H i e r a r c h y 4 . C o m m u n i c a t i o n 5 . I n f o r m a t i o n6 . E t h i c s

S y s t e m s ‘ V e r b s ’ : 1 . E m e r g e n c e 2 . C o n t r o l 3 . H i e r a r c h y 4 . C o m m u n i c a t i o n 5 . I n f o r m a t i o n6 . E t h i c s

C L A ‘ V e r b s ’ : 1 . L i t a n y 2 . S o c i a l s y s t e m s3 . W o r l d v i e w 4 . M y t h & M e t a p h o r

VIABLE SYSTEMS MODEL

(Wikipedia: Viable_system_model)

B e e r – V S M

VIABLE SYSTEMS MODEL

Syntegration ®

ECOLOGY OF MIND

1. ‘ecological epistemology’ … ‘recursive epistemology’

2. ‘unnamed science’

3. Central metaphor – ‘recursion’ . . . ‘a recursive vision’ . . .

“ … B a t e s o n b e l i e v e d t h a t r e c u r s i o n r e q u i r e s , i n a d d i t i o n t o c o g n i t i v e

u n d e r s t a n d i n g , a p e r p e t u a l a n d a e s t h e t i c ‘ s p a c e ’ f o r i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . . . .

B a t e s o n ’ s v i s i o n e m u l a t e s a s e t o f i d e a s a b o u t c o n s c i o u s n e s s a n d a l s o

a b o u t o r d e r i n l i v i n g s y s t e m s . T h e l a r g e r a r g u m e n t i s t h a t t h e e x p l a n a t o r y

s p a c e o f r e c u r s i o n – i n B a t e s o n ’ s s e n s e o f t h a t p h r a s e – i s n e c e s s a r y t o

a n y e c o l o g i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e a n d h e n c e t o o u r o w n s u r v i v a l . * (Harries-Jones 1995, p. 4)

“ B a t e s o n a r g u e s t h a t a n y f r a m e w o r k o f r e c u r s i o n w h i c h s e p a r a t e s h u m a n a c t i v i t y f r o m n a t u r e i s f a l l a c i o u s .

T h u s a n y i d e a o f r e c u r s i o n w h i c h r e p r e s e n t s n a t u r a l o r d e r o n l y f r o m t h e p e r s p e c t i v e o f ‘ h u m a n a g e n c y ’ a n d ‘ s o c i a l r e p r o d u c t i o n ’ i s a n t h r o p o m o r p h i c .

T h e l a r g e r q u e s t i o n i s h o w h u m a n s m a y d e r i v e r u l e s a b o u t t h e r e c u r s i v e n e s s o f n a t u r a l o r d e r s o t h a t a r e c u r s i v e e p i s t e m o l o g y i n c l u d e s t h i s k n o w l e d g e o f r e c u r s i o n i n n a t u r a l f o r m s . ” (Ibid. p. 268)

Bateson – Recursion

SYMBOLS

“A symbol is something that represents an idea, a process, or a physical entity. The purpose of a symbol is to communicate meaning.” *

* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbol

ENNEAGRAM

1. S y m b o l f o r ‘ s e e i n g ’ d y n a m i c w h o l e s

2. E u r o p e a n ‘ h i s t o r y ’ – M o s c o w c i r c a . 1 9 1 2 ( n o p r i o r e v i d e n c e )

3. V a r i e t y r e d u c t i o n – M i l l e r ’ s “ L a w o f 7 + / - 2 ” ( w h o l e i n t o 9 )

4. I n c o r p o r a t e s p r o c e s s ‘ d e v i a t i o n ’ a n d ‘ d i s t o r t i o n ’ r i s k w i t h i n

s y s t e m s n e e d i n g t o s t a y o n c o u r s e .

5. M a p s p o i n t s o f ‘ h a z a r d ’ ( e . g . , p h y s i c a l ; m o r a l ; i n t e l l e c t u a l ) .

6. C a n r e p r e s e n t a 2 n d c y b e r n e t i c p r o c e s s n e e d e d a t [ 4 ] t o

a d j u s t t h e s y s t e m t o a c h i e v e c o n t i n u o u s “ d y n a m i c h a r m o n y ”

w i t h / w i t h i n i t s e n v i r o n m e n t .

“ C y b e r n e t i c t h e o r y t a k e s i n t o a c c o u n t t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f c h a n g i n g t h e e n d - p o i n t s s o t h a t t h e m e c h a n i s m i s n o t o n l y s e l f r e g u l a t i n g b u t s e l f - i m p r o v i n g . ” (Bennett 1983, p.20)

3 INTER RELATED SYMBOLS – for ‘triadic thinking’

Whole systems Structures Loops

+ +

(Bennett 1983)

ENNEAGRAM – Basic Theory

(Ouspensky 1949, p.128)

(Speeth 1989 p.23)

(Ouspensky 1949, p.128)

E n n e a g r a m – O r i g i n a l ( 1 9 1 2 )

Combines 2 Systems: Math & Music

CLAUDIO NARANJO – Applied to character typing

(Naranjo 1990, inside cover)

(Naranjo 1990, p. 17)

Based on the Arica systems developed by Oscar Ichazo – Chile,

circa. 1960s

To B e e , o r n o t t o B e e … – a n A n c i e n t O r d e r … o r ‘ m o d e r n ’ M y t h ? –

(Bessing et al 1984, p. 145)

(Beesing et al 1984, p. 126)

EXAMPLES – (Bennett 1983)

EXAMPLE – (Markley 2012)

Laszlo’s (2001) 3-C’s (“conquest, colonization and consumption”) describe three waves during the preceding 10,000 year development cycle as shifts from “nomadic era”, “agricultural era”, “industrial era” and “information era” respectively; while

“connection, communication and consciousness” describe the transition to a future “fourth wave” centred on civilizational tipping points within the current information era.

Mapping the 6 “C’s” of “Spaceship Earth”

(Ouspensky 1949, p.128)(Ouspensky 1949, p.128)

1. Hazard- Weakness – Stress – Pivot point2. Resonance between “si-do” & “6”

aa’

PICKERING – “The Mangle of Practice …” (1995) & “The Cybernetic Brain” (2010)

I m a g e s o f ‘ app r e c i a t i n g ’ S y s t e m s @ W o r k

“ N o m a d S c i e n c e s ” … ( i n B r e a t h i n g U n i v e r s e )

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icosahedron

CYBERNETIC FORESIGHTING – Future Directions

www.malik-management.com/en

2 1 s t C e n t u r y M a n a g e m e n t To o l k i t sV i a b l e S y s t e m s P r a c t i c e

CYBERNETIC FORESIGHTING – 21ST CENTURY

SuperSyntegration ®

PERCEIVING – Beer & Truss (1994)

“Recursive Enneagram in Icosahedron”

(© Joseph Truss, 2012)

PERCEIVING – Ethics . . . (& Beyond?)

D i a l o g i c s < E t h i c s > M e t a p h y s i c s

E t h i c s b e c o m e s m a n i f e s t , w i t h o u t b e c o m i n g t o o e x p l i c i t , t h r o u g h u s e o f i t s “ t w i n s i s t e r s ” – “ M e t a p h y s i c s ” & “ D i a l o g i c s ”

(von Foerster 1995)

Note: no specific endorsement is implied for this interpretation/use of the images here – it is a convenient public artistic visualisation of the meta-’object’ and it’s shadow being case on clouds (cave walls) that is the focus.

SUMMARY

Summary

1. Foresight

• Shares common histories & future challenges with cybernetics (as a nomad science).

• Awareness of its ‘history’ appears low.

• Toolkits can benefit from cybernetic perspectives to help understand patterns, rhythms & blindsiding shock-points.

2. Enneagram

• Helps understand & communicate complex inter-related issues.

• Provides a whole-systems thinking framework across the CLA 4, 3, 2 & (1- history).

• Cybernetic interpretations give insight into sustainability’s triple bottom-line dynamics.

3. Future

• More research is required into applications & teaching methods – e.g., as ‘history’ of foresight etc.

• Markley’s (2012) scenarios can be seen as ‘back to the future’ for C21st foresighting based on what has already emerged since 1912.

Art@Work

©Clemens: 2006)

D e R o p p ’ s ( 1 9 7 2 ) “ N e w P r o m e t h e a n s ” a s l e a d i n g s y s t e m s t h i n k e r s a n d f u t u r e s p r a c t i t i o n e r s w h o a p p l y k n o w l e d g e o f t h e

a r t s a n d t h e s c i e n c e s t o w o r k i n h a r m o n y w i t h N a t u r e .

thank you

Transformations 21

S y n t e g r a t i o n ® 1 0 1 : A n I m p r e s s i o n (posted: S t G a l l e n , 2 0 1 1

Quotations from www.malik-management.com/en/malik-for-organizations/management-topics/environment/crisis-an-transformation21)

Links of interest: • Syntegration 101: An Impression (8:38 min) -- www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxPpVN-Wvvs • Malik Management für Chinesische Universitäten, Juni 2011 (0:35 min) -- www.youtube.com/watch?v=quomRC_gkwY

QUESTIONS?

… W i t h o u t F e a r o r F a v o u r …

© Clemens 2012 CC BY-NC-NDhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en

References – see paper