Architecture of Structured Dialogic Design
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Architecture of Structured Dialogic Design

  • 623 views
Uploaded on

This is a copy of the powerpoint presentation from the Institute for 21st Century Agoras (http://sunsite.utk.edu/FINS/loversofdemocracy/WISDOM.ppt)

This is a copy of the powerpoint presentation from the Institute for 21st Century Agoras (http://sunsite.utk.edu/FINS/loversofdemocracy/WISDOM.ppt)

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
623
On Slideshare
623
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. How People Harness Their Collective Wisdom and Power to Create the Future Alexander N. Christakis, PhD President, Institute for 21 st Century Agoras www.GlobalAgoras.org
  • 2. How People Harness Their Collective Wisdom and Power to Construct the Future in Co-Laboratories of Democracy Alexander N. Christakis Information Age / February 2006
  • 3. The Historic Challenge
    • "I would not give a whit for the simplicity this side of complexity, but I would give my life for the simplicity on the far side of complexity." 
    • O. W. Holmes
  • 4. Three Fundamental Premises for Participative Democracy
    • True dialogue is essential for participative democracy;
    • True dialogue is difficult in the Information Age – complexity demands that we address issues collaboratively , systematically , and systemically ; and
    • To address Information Age issues systemically, we need the support of the processes developed through the Science of Dialogic Design.
  • 5. Three Axioms of the Science of Dialogic Design
    • No single observer has the complete picture of complex problems;
    • Everyone has limits for the amount of information they can process at any one time; and
    • In order to make judgments, we need to compare similar things.
  • 6. Milestone in the Evolution of the Science of Dialogic Design
    • Nominal Group Technique;
    • Interpretive Structural Modeling;
    • DELPHI;
    • Options Field;
    • Options Profile; and
    • Trade-off Analysis.
    Consensus Methods _ 1972 through 1982
  • 7.
    • Elemental observation;
    • Problematique;
    • Influence tree pattern;
    • Options field pattern;
    • Options profile/scenario pattern;
    • Superposition pattern; and
    • Action plan pattern.
    Milestone in the Evolution of the Science of Dialogic Design Language Patterns _ 1970 through 1989
  • 8.
    • Discovery;
    • Designing; and
    • Action.
    Milestone in the Evolution of the Science of Dialogic Design Application Time Phases _ 1989 through 2001
  • 9.
    • Context – Inquiry Design Team;
    • Content – Stakeholder/Designers; and
    • Process – Facilitation Team
    Milestone in the Evolution of the Science of Dialogic Design Key Role Responsibilities _ 1982 through 2002
  • 10.
    • Definition or Anticipation;
    • Design of Alternatives;
    • Decision; and
    • Action Planning.
    Milestone in the Evolution of the Science of Dialogic Design Stages of Interactive Inquiry _ 1989 through 1995
  • 11.
    • Collaborative Space
    • Collaborative Software
    Milestone in the Evolution of the Science of Dialogic Design Supportive Technology _ 1981 through 1995
  • 12.
    • RequisiteVariety ( Ashby );
    • Requisite Parsimony ( Miller );
    • Requisite Saliency ( Boulding );
    • Meaning and Wisdom ( Peirce );
    • Authenticity and Autonomy ( Tsivacou ); and
    • Evolutionary Learning ( Dye )
    Milestone in the Evolution of the Science of Dialogic Design Dialogue Laws _ 2001 through 2003
  • 13. Requisite Evolutionary Learning and the Erroneous Priorities Effect
    • Whenever observations made by stakeholders in the context of a complex designing situation are interdependent, assigning priorities for action on the basis of aggregating individual stakeholder “importance voting” leads to the erroneous priorities effect and to ineffective actions. The effective priorities for action emerge after an evolutionary inquiry of the interdependencies among the observations through a dialogue focusing on “influence voting.”
  • 14. Evolutionary Learning and the Erroneous Priorities Effect
  • 15. Components of the Science Operational in Designing Phase
  • 16. Some Graphic Language Patterns of the Science
  • 17. The Six Dialogue Laws
    • Ashby's Law of Requisite Variety
    • APPRECIATION OF THE DIVERSITY OF PERSPECTIVES OF OBSERVERS
  • 18. The Six Dialogue Laws
    • Miller's Law of Requisite Parsimony
    • STRUCTURED DIALOGUE IS REQUIRED TO AVOID THE COGNITIVE OVERLOAD OF OBSERVERS
  • 19. The Six Dialogue Laws
    • Boulding's Law of Requisite Saliency
    • THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF OBSERVATIONS CAN ONLY BE UNDERSTOOD THROUGH COMPARISONS WITHIN AN ORGANIZED SET
  • 20. The Six Dialogue Laws
    • Peirce's Law of Requisite Meaning
    • MEANING AND WISDOM ARE PRODUCED IN A DIALOGUE ONLY WHEN THE OBSERVERS SEARCH FOR RELATIONSHIPS OF SIMILARITY, PRIORITY, INFLUENCE, etc. WITHIN A SET OF OBSERVATIONS
  • 21. The Six Dialogue Laws
    • Tsivacou's Law of Requisite Autonomy in Distinction-Making
    • DURING DIALOGUE IT IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE AUTONOMY AND AUTHENTICITY OF EACH OBSERVER IN DRAWING DISTINCTIONS
  • 22. The Six Dialogue Laws
    • Dye's Law of Requisite Evolutionary Learning
    • LEARNING OCCURS IN A DIALOGUE AS THE OBSERVERS SEARCH FOR INFLUENCE RELATIONSHIPS AMONG THE MEMBERS OF A SET OF OBSERVATIONS
  • 23. Influence Voting Question
    • “ Supposing that in a dialogue on a complex Information Age issue the participants were able to implement:
    • (PRINCIPLE A: DIVERSITY OF PERSPECTIVES ) 
    • Will this SIGNIFICANTLY enhance their capacity to implement:
    • (PRINCIPLE B: STRUCTURED DIALOGUE )
    • ?”
  • 24. Influence Voting Question
    • “ Supposing that in a dialogue on a complex Information Age issue the participants were able to implement:
    • (PRINCIPLE B: STRUCTURED DIALOGUE )  
    • Will this SIGNIFICANTLY enhance their capacity to implement:
    • (PRINCIPLE A: DIVERSITY OF PERSPECTIVES )
    • ?”
  • 25. A Tree of Meaning MEANING AND WISDOM UNDERSTANDING IMPORTANCE APPRECIATION OF DIVERSITY LEARNING AUTONOMY STRUCTURED DIALOGUE Level I Level II Level III Level IV Level V Level VI Effective Action
  • 26. Community Co-laboratory of Democracy  
  • 27. Voting on Relative Importance
  • 28. Influence Tree of Intentions of the Future of Our Community (29 - Intention) REEXPLORE IDEAS TO ALLOW ELDERLY MEMBERS TO REMAIN ON THE BG HOMESTEAD (2 - Intention) MAKE THE TRANSITION FROM OUR EARLY STAGE OF GROWTH (WITH REGARD TO THE PHYSICAL BG) TO ONE OF STEWARDSHIP (42 - Intention) REUNITE LESS ACTIVE MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY WITH AN INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE ANEW (10 - Intention) LEARN TO HAVE FUN TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY (18 - Intention) USE OUR PAST KNOWLEDGE TO ENLIGHTEN OUR FUTURE PLANNING (24 - Intention) ACCOMPLISH SOME DEFINITIVE RESOLUTION TO ISSUES THAT SURFACE REPEATEDLY (26 - Intention) LIVE IN AN ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE MANNER WITHIN THE SOCIETY (12 - Intention) IDENTIFY WAYS TO IMPROVE OUR DECISION MAKING PROCESS (1 - Intention) RESTORE THE INTENTIONAL DIVERSITY OF THE COMMUNITY (21 - Intention) ENCOURAGE MEMBERS TO ACT ON THE SAYING "IT TAKES A VILLAGE TO RAISE A CHILD" (38 - Intention) IDENTIFY WAYS TO INVOLVE CHILDREN IN DECISION MAKING PROCESS (9 - Intention) DEVELOP EFFECTIVE WAYS OF RESOLVING DISPUTES SO THAT NO ONE FEELS LIKE A WINNER OR A LOSER Level II Level I Level IV Level III KEY Accomplishing Intention X Significantly Helps in Accomplishing Intention Y Y X Generated by the participants at the Bryn Gweled Community Center – January 11, 2003
  • 29. Interpretation of Influence Map
  • 30. What is the Institute for 21st Century Agoras?
    •   The Institute for 21st Century Agoras is a volunteer-driven organization dedicated to vigorous democracy on the model of that practiced in the agoras of ancient Greece. It employs Co-Laboratories of Democracy that enable civil dialogue in complex situations.
  • 31. What does Agoras mean?
    •   The agoras were the vital centers of the Greek cities. Their outdoor markets and convention halls where gossip mixed with politics. The agora of Athens was the birthplace of democracy. Here the town's citizens discussed pressing issues and made decisions on the basis of popular vote.