Systems Community of Inquiry

I would like AVIC users to always demonstrate that they are qualified and are also contributing to AVIC best and distinctive use. It is sort of like going into an exclusive country club. You dress well, use your best manners, and make an atmosphere where ‘the finest people’ are eager to join and attend. This is like the Cosmos Club in Washington. You have to be accomplished and do well, not just be rich.
The ‘dues’ that you pay to the club every quarter is your inquiry. You show what you are working on and keep questions open that other members can contribute to. If you don’t have any inquiry of your own, then you really aren’t fit for the club. You also demonstrate your fitness, and pay your dues, by engaging positively with others in their projects. You are an advisor, mentor, swarm information collector, linkage maven, etc. But of course these are things that you want to do, not because you must in order to maintain your membership. You are here because this is what you thirst to do, to have communion with like-minded, elevated company.

AVIC ought to facilitate and manage an annual community gathering. These gatherings can take any form as long as they follow the following criteria:

-The gathering must support the initiative of an existing Ackoff Center for Design Thinking (ACDT
-The gathering must be virtual (E.G. Twitter Design through hashtag, virtual meeting space, etc…)

AVIC should offer highly active facilitation that does at least the following: attracts and cultivates new members of the right kind, ejects bad actors, sorts discussion threads to raise some to “featured” status for a while and put others to archive in order to create focus, reduce confusion, and raise sense of activity. Encourages people to learn and use features, keeps people on schedule to group goals such as preparation for meetings, corrects links, renames titles that are unclear, reorganizes materials that are not working and might work better some other way. Introduces nodes (people or information) who might have something in common but may not have connected themselves.

AVIC should continue to evolve approaches for understanding and working with systems. Here’s my current state of mind, and yes I know I should have it checked.

http://insightmaker.com/insight/258

Below is an email exchage I had with an interested AVIC designer – Bill fisher. I believe this is the most appropriate place to account for his ideas…

Bill Fisher to wdennis
show details Aug 3 (5 days ago)

Hello Dennis,

I think this is a great idea. Would you please provide me with information on this initiative.

Regards,

Bill,

—————————————————

Hi Bill,

You can find some background information here: http://is.gd/cY7Y1

Take a look and let me know what you think.

Dennis

—————————————————

Hi Dennis,

Thanks for the information.

A few thoughts…

The purpose for the initiative is what?

I think Turning Learning Right Side Up should guide this initiative. Ideally every citizen of the world ought to know how to use concepts such as Idealized Design and its universal applications. Each student should demonstrate they not only know the subject, but also know how to use these practical ideas as well or better than their teacher.

I prefer wisdom rather than inquiry as a focus. Russ would say: wisdom comes from effectiveness ‘doing the right thing’ vs. ‘doing things right.’ And that data, information, knowledge and understanding have to do with efficiency or in some cases doing ‘the wrong thing righter.’

The world seems to be drowning in information and starved for people who know how to ‘do the right thing.’

The tools and techniques needed to ‘do the right thing’ are what?

Regards,

Bill,

—————————————————

The purpose of the initiative, as I see it at this stage, is to design a “Virtual Inquiry Center” as per Dr John Pourdehand’s vision for commemorating Dr Ackoff. The book Turning Learning right side up, to me, is an excellent book by Dr. Ackoff that demonstrates, through the use of systems principles, how the education system would need to change in order for it to “do the right thing” perhaps wrongly at first vs “doing the wrong things right.” Can you expand a bit further on HOW we can use this book as a guide to the initiative via the following forum entrie on “syscoi.com”:

What do YOU think AVIC’s Mission ought to be?
What properties do YOU believe AVIC ought to have NOW?
All you have to do is register with the sight, locate the “AVIC” forum and then contribute to the discussions above. Additinally, you can also contribute the the initiative via LinkedIn. let me invite you to become a member of the “Russel L. Ackoff” linkedin group. I manage the group and would approve you immediatly. There are a few discussions going on there you may want to contribute to.

Best regards,

Dennis

—————————————————

Hi Dennis,

I put a request in to join your LinkedIn group.

David A. Schmaltz on “syscoi.com”:wrote:

• I think you’ve touched an important element of systems thinking. The distinction that systems thinking is different doesn’t seem to gain anyone much traction. As someone who long touted my own perspectives as different, one client confided to me that he loved the way I think, but he hates that he seems to have to feel wrong or stupid in order to employ me. I had been unaware of this subtle effect my thinking differently had on others.
It might be more useful to explain systems thinking as something everyone does all the time without necessarily being aware that they are doing it
I think David has hit the nail on the head. So how do you talk about systems thinking without using the word system, systems thinking, systems dynamics, systemic or holistic? I think fractals may provide the answer. Russ refers to fractals on page 248, Re-Creating The Corporation.

Fractals are iterated patterns.

Russ liked to use this quote:

Without changing our patterns of thought, we will not be able to solve the problems we created with our current patterns of thought. (Albert Einstein)

I have been working on the idea of pattern management as a fast frugal effective way to move things forward.

It is also no longer reasonable to spend an extensive amount of time examining a problem from all sides, slowly working towards a consensus and then incrementally implementing the solution. One must be able to identify problems, create solutions and then execute them all within a very short time. This requires organizations to reorganize into flat hierarchies of decision making. (unknown)

People are very good at pattern recognition they work well with patterns. They use pattern management most of time without thinking about it. This is how I think this idea seems work (well). Patterns produce behaviour. Smart patterns produce smart behaviour. People enjoy working with smart behaviour. Changing behaviour is difficult. A tiny pattern change produces quick change in behaviour.

Let’s look at this example.
A sales message generates an active voice / passive voice pattern. Professional copywriter Bob Bly says: a sales message written in the active voice will out sell the same message written in the passive voice by a factor of (10). That’s huge. Pattern management reveals what a pattern is doing or should do and that can be most helpful.

The pattern is there. Most of us never think about it or how a tiny pattern change can improve effective behaviour. To make pattern identification easier I classify them as static, linear sequential and non-linear dynamic.

Let’s look at governance as a pattern.
Governance is often well documented placed in a binder and sits on a shelf. I call this a static example.
Whereas, continuous pattern management (CPM) that incorporates governance is dynamic and can affect all stakeholders from moment to moment. Governance should align operations in relation to a common (intent) purpose such as ‘create and distribute wealth’ to all stakeholders.

Where appropriate, you shift from one pattern type to another or to some relevant combination.

Back to AVIC, Russ would say: ‘the purpose for a corporation is to create and distribute wealth.’ I agree. Why not follow the same pattern of thought: the purpose for AVIC is to create and distribute wisdom? In business if you are not increasing value and profit then what are you going? If you are not creating and distributing wisdom then what are you doing?

I think patterns can effectively connect people around a common purpose without the need to talk about whole systems thinking.

Regards,

Bill,”