collaborating for complexity: siuc synergetics

Copyright © 2011, Peter H. Jones

PeterJones,Ph.D.SIUCSynergeticsSymposium,April72011

Collaborating for Complexity

Social Design for Sustainable Innovation


“Only our minds are able to discover the generalized principles operating without exception in each & every special‐experience case which if detected & mastered will give knowledgeable advantage in all instances.”


Beyond sustainability.

First philosopher of Thrivability.

A reinvention of civilization … Creating the very idea of the futuristic

Buckminster Fuller


Fuller’s technology foresight?

“You may very appropriately want to ask me how we are going to resolve the ever‐acceleratingly dangerous impasse of world‐opposed politicians and ideological dogmas.

I answer, it will be resolved by the computer.”

His socio‐political foresight? Spot on.Yet his principles‐based design approaches did not account for social complexity.


Why I’m here

Peter Jones, Ph.D.

Senior Fellow, Strategic Innovation LabFaculty, Strategic Foresight & InnovationOCAD University, Toronto

Publications designdialogues.com Transformation Dialogic Design International Design Research Redesign, Inc.Democratic process Globalagoras.org

designforcare.com


Technology is the easy part. Now that we can do anything, why aren’t we doing the right things?

Large projects – institutions, governments, corporations – increasingly fail, big, & recover up.

Why do so many large projects fail?We first fail to understand social complexity.

The Chaos of Decision Making


System of Systems View – Economic interdependencies


“Humanity will overcome complexity through design science.”

But we will never overcome complexity.We will navigate it by collaborative design.

Our problem is, we compete. We do not (yet) collaborate well.

Fuller’s Fundamental Optimism


Design Science


Sustainable Design

Model for Sustainable Design

Nathan Shedroff, Design is the Problem


Collaboration requires cohesive collective communication processes

Which (in new collaborations) evolve in a progression from:

Cooperation > Coordination > Collaboration > Convergence

Collaboration necessary for problem types beyond Simple / Tame:

Complicated > Complex > Wicked > Chaotic

Principles of Collaborative Design


1. Complex problems are irreducible: are not resolved by analytical processes. 2. Socio‐technical complexity requires collaborative design.

Collaborative design is both a science & a design language.

3. Collaboration skills differ from design skills, and both are needed. 4. Collaboration is dialogic, entailing human biases & group dynamics.

5. Multiple perspectives are critical to ensure requisite variety in the system to be designed.

6. Dialogic collaboration is democratic, separates process & content.7. Complexity requires understanding, sensemaking, not problem‐solving.



As problem complexity increases, increased demand for requisite variety.

4 systems thinkers reinvented problematics:Ozbekhan Problematique 1968Beer Viable systems model 1972Rittel Wicked problems 1973Warfield Managing complexity 1974

Problem understanding, not problem solving

Complexity & Problematizing


Ross Ashby “The quantityof regulation that can be achieved is bounded by thequantity of information that can be transmitted ina certain channel.”

Requisite variety in groupprocess requires engaging participants whose varietyof knowledge is equal or greater than the elements in the system to be regulated.


Design Science

Stafford Beer’s Syntegrity process

Synergetics + Requisite Variety for viable organizations.

Cybersyn center in Allende’s think tank, 19Chilean Center of Public Stud


Poorly‐defined, evolving, multi‐factored situations. At least 10 properties, 7 of which require collaboration:

1. There is no definite formulation of a wicked problem.

2. Wicked problems have no stopping rules (you don’t know when you’re done).

3. Solutions are not True/False but Good/Bad (value judgments)

5. Every solution attempt is a one‐shot trial. Every attempt counts significantly.

7. Every wicked problem is essentially unique. (Nobody can claim expertise).

8. Each can be considered to be a symptom of another problem.

10. The designer has no right to be wrong.

Wicked Problems

Rittel, H. and Weber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning, Policy Sciences, 4, 155‐169


Christakis on Structured Dialogue:“Given the complexity of political, social, economic, & technological issues of the Information age, & the strong linkages among those issues, is it reasonable to expect that the approach for engaging people in dialogue 2500 years ago during the Golden Age of the Athenians would work today?”

“We proceed from the belief that problems have "solutions" --although we may not necessarily discover these in the case of every problem we encounter.

This peculiarity of our perception causes us to view difficulties as things that are clearly defined & discrete in themselves.”

THE PREDICAMENT OF MANKIND: A Quest for Structured Responses to Growing World‐wide Complexities and Uncertainties

Hasan Ozbekhan


COLLABORATION SKILLSfor

COMPLEXITY NAVIGATION


Multiple perspectives are criticalSocial design requires eliciting, understanding, & negotiating differing values, perspectives, goals

Conversations for Possibility

How might we reenergize our downtown and bring employers back to the city?

Good question! Where do we start?

CONVERSATIONAL DIALOGIC

?

How might we reenergize our downtown and bring employers back to the city?

Recent grad

Retiree

Business owner

City plannerPolitical officers

Land developers

Families


Social design organizes multiple stakeholder perspectives in a complex situation by relational structuring of commitment.

Conversations for Action

Let’s prepare an offer to the city. I’m in. Who else

do we need on the team?

What actions can we take that will make the most difference?

?

How do we organize our projects so this happens?

What steps can we take as individuals and groups?

Finding common ground

Management of Divergence (possibility) & Convergence (action)


Micro‐design language for collaboration.


Collaborative skills differ from design skills


Social design requires social processes


Stakeholder Variety

?

Design team

Retirees

City planner

Political officers

Land developers

Families

Regional & Urban Planning

Business owners

Land owners

?

Design team

Hardwareengineering

New usersPartners

Retailers

Product Developers

Product Innovation

Business leadership

Current users


What type of innovator are you?

Creative Problem Solving Profile at basadur.com


An organization attempting to establish new financial products quickly in a very competitive environment, but encountering a high percentage of failures.

Insufficient conceptual focus


A typical group of managers from a large aerospace company serving the aircraft, airline, and aerospace industries and having trouble expanding into new products and new markets

Insufficient generation!


Many directors have enjoyed successful careers due to their implementation skills

Who do you want advising the board?


Complexity requires understanding, sensemaking, problem‐framing, not problem‐solving.


Simplexity ‐ Separate process & content

Simplexity process at basadur.com


WHERE DO YOU LOCATE COLLABORATIVE DESIGN?


A science & design language for collaboration.

Structured Dialogic Design

• Complex system / product planning• Strategic management / uncertainty• Foresight & futures scenarios• Coordinating ideas, power & action on complex social

& ecological issues• Understanding root forces & constraints in social

systems• Democratic resolution of wicked problems


Generic Design Science

John Warfield1974 The first group process using computersBattelle used Warfield’s Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) software (over phone lines, Dayton & Columbus)

Became process of Interactive Management

Aleco ChristakisDesign science is democratic.

Information Age requires collaborative designto navigate increasing complexity of situations


Christakis on Structured Dialogic Design:“Given the complexity of political, social, economic, & technological issues of the Information age, & the strong linkages among those issues, is it reasonable to expect that the approach for engaging people in dialogue 2500 years ago during the Golden Age of the Athenians would work today?”


Methodology for addressing root causes of wicked problems• Based on scientific & design principles

Consensus among very disparate stakeholders• All decisions are collected through inclusive voting

Elicits root causes AND interconnections• Grounded in systems science, visually describes system

Strategic AND Democratic• Exacting method for equality & autonomy in engagement

Dialogic Design


Dialogic Design – Collaborative Process

1

2

3


Dialogic Design Science: 7 Axioms

1. Complexity Axiom: Observational variety is respected when engaging stakeholders, ensuring cognitive limitations are not violated while striving for comprehensiveness (John Warfield). (Magical number 3, +/‐ 0)

2. Engagement Axiom: Designing social systems without the authentic engagement of the stakeholders is unethical, and results in inferior plans that are not implementable (Hasan Ozbekhan). (Normative planning)

3. Investment Axiom: Stakeholders must make personal investments of trust & commitment to be effective in discovering shared understanding & collaborative solutions (Tom Flanagan). (Dialogic principle)

4. Plus four others, including: Reconciliation of Power Axiom


Dialogic Design Principles: 7 Laws

1. Requisite Variety an appreciation of the diversity of perspectives and stakeholders is essential in managing complex situations. (Ashby)

2. Requisite Parsimony Structured dialogue is needed to avoid the cognitive overload of stakeholder/designers. (Warfield)

3. Requisite Saliency … observations can only be understood by comparisons in an organized set of observations. (Boulding)


7 Laws

4. Requisite Meaning … & wisdom are produced in a dialogue only when observers search for relationships of similarity, priority, influence, etc, within a set of observations. (Peirce)

5. Requisite Autonomy & Authenticity … protect the autonomy and authenticity of each observer in drawing distinctions. (Tsivacou)

6. Requisite Evolution of Observations … learning occurs in dialogue as people search for relationships in a set of observations. (Dye)

7. Requisite Action … action plans must be designed in authentic engagement of those whose futures influenced by the change (Laouris)


Collaboration is a human process.

Co-Laboratory

Co-located, onsite12-30+ participantsPrint media & real-time display

Cogniscope ISM method software

Facilitator-managed

Webscope

Mixed locationsWiki + teleconferenceMixed media & online display

Screen shareTeleconferenceWiki support


• Cyprus Reunification Dialogues (2001 – 2011) EU project for Israeli‐Palestinian dialogues (2011)

• Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) Initiative: 48 stakeholders & 10 observers from 38 organizations on CKD outcomes, resulting in action plan.

• Transnational indigenous Leaders Dialogue on Globalization: 40 Indigenous leaders from Americas and New Zealand & experts (2004)

• FDA Good Practices Review dialogues (1995‐1999)

• Schering‐Plough Drug Development Action Planning (1992‐1994).

• Alternative Energy Future Planning, Northwest Energy Alliance (2001).

Democratic across power & stakeholders.


• Collective sensemaking Collaboration is necessary to resolve any complex situation as multiple perspectives are critical.

• Complexity navigation methods We need better methods. The same tools – Facilitation, Brainstorming ‐ yield only the same results.

• Collaborative design skills Must be developed for a new generation of social design of systems, organizations, communities.

• Social design is cultural & human. Unlike tech skills, we do not change quickly. Requires diffusion into culture to change habits.

Collaborative Design ‐ not just teamwork


Thank you

“I am not a political revolutionary, I am design science revolutionary.”

“The self‐sufficient enterprise is becoming anachronistic. Each organization is part of a matrix of merging and evolving ideas and opportunities. … Leading companies focus less on positioning and more on patterns of people and institutions they work with ‐ or against.” James Brian Quinn, 2002

Peter Jones, Ph.D.Senior Fellow, Strategic Innovation LabFaculty, Strategic Foresight and Innovation, OCAD University

designdialogues.com dialogicdesignllc.com globalagoras.org