This is where Systems Innovation is so different. It is symbiotic with democracy. If you require a large number of agents to drive transformation, then the innovation capacity has to be as micro as possible and agency has to be established at that particular level. In the decentralised, distributed, and coordinated model that System Innovation enables, agency to change is preserved by all.
- No location available
-
- [note::I think this is really what I'm interesting in doing with my career - to build tools that make it easier for ordinary people to understand the wicked problems they'd like to help solve, in order to give every single individual the capacity and agency to help solve it.]

collective decision-making is problematic in complex realities because of the asymmetries between information and context. It is the agents within the system who can reconcile the two, who are attuned to the micro sensitivities and asymmetries that drive the innovation they require. They are the ones who are most conscious of the impact of innovation and its spillover effects. They know what is necessary for their immediate context and situational reality.
- No location available
-
- [note::"collective decision-making is problematic in complex realities because of the asymmetries between information and context." - this feels like could be in a book called "How To Make Sense of Any Mess: Social Problems Edition". I'm having trouble putting this idea in concrete terms - what would "information" and "context" be?]

Whatever is learned from systems mapping exercises tends not to be shared democratically. In fact, more often than not, when a consultant is hired, the knowledge sits externally with them rather than with the system agents themselves who require it to effect any meaningful change and who can add contextual nuance to it.
- No location available
-
- [note::YES! How can we build a system/protocol that enables sharing of these systems maps with anyone and everyone who is interested in contributing to helping solve a given complex issue. There's Kumo, of course, but that is at its core, a diagramming software, not necessarily a library. There's also "visualizing complexity".
If I were to build such a system, how would I prevent it from becoming just "another website"? It seems like getting governments involved would be the key to ensuring global adoption - but how?]

What needs to be addressed is the ‘dark matter’ of systems: the behaviours, architecture, protocols, shared language, contracting agreements, feedback mechanisms, metrics, and so forth.
- No location available
- systems, organizational structure, organizational infrastructure, organisational design, organizational efficiency,
- [note::Love this analogy. I think I'd like to be a "dark matter practitioner" - a person that thinks about and works to improve all the basic infrastructure that allows us to collaborate, connect, and solve problems as a society. All the things we can't necessarily see, but is all around us all of the time.]

This is where Systems Innovation is so different. It is symbiotic with democracy. If you require a large number of agents to drive transformation, then the innovation capacity has to be as micro as possible and agency has to be established at that particular level. In the decentralised, distributed, and coordinated model that System Innovation enables, agency to change is preserved by all.
- No location available
-
- [note::I think this is really what I'm interesting in doing with my career - to build tools that make it easier for ordinary people to understand the wicked problems they'd like to help solve, in order to give every single individual the capacity and agency to help solve it.]

collective decision-making is problematic in complex realities because of the asymmetries between information and context. It is the agents within the system who can reconcile the two, who are attuned to the micro sensitivities and asymmetries that drive the innovation they require. They are the ones who are most conscious of the impact of innovation and its spillover effects. They know what is necessary for their immediate context and situational reality.
- No location available
-
- [note::"collective decision-making is problematic in complex realities because of the asymmetries between information and context." - this feels like could be in a book called "How To Make Sense of Any Mess: Social Problems Edition". I'm having trouble putting this idea in concrete terms - what would "information" and "context" be?]

Whatever is learned from systems mapping exercises tends not to be shared democratically. In fact, more often than not, when a consultant is hired, the knowledge sits externally with them rather than with the system agents themselves who require it to effect any meaningful change and who can add contextual nuance to it.
- No location available
-
- [note::YES! How can we build a system/protocol that enables sharing of these systems maps with anyone and everyone who is interested in contributing to helping solve a given complex issue. There's Kumo, of course, but that is at its core, a diagramming software, not necessarily a library. There's also "visualizing complexity".
If I were to build such a system, how would I prevent it from becoming just "another website"? It seems like getting governments involved would be the key to ensuring global adoption - but how?]

What needs to be addressed is the ‘dark matter’ of systems: the behaviours, architecture, protocols, shared language, contracting agreements, feedback mechanisms, metrics, and so forth.
- No location available
- systems, organizational structure, organizational infrastructure, organisational design, organizational efficiency,
- [note::Love this analogy. I think I'd like to be a "dark matter practitioner" - a person that thinks about and works to improve all the basic infrastructure that allows us to collaborate, connect, and solve problems as a society. All the things we can't necessarily see, but is all around us all of the time.]