Innovation+in+practice+wk+1+intro+pdf

1,109 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,109
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
12
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
37
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Innovation+in+practice+wk+1+intro+pdf

  1. 1. Innovation in Practice Pilot 2010 Innovation in Practice
  2. 2. Innovation in Practice Pilot 2010 DISCOURSES IN INNOVATION 1: DISCLOSING THE (K)NEW: LEARNING, SKILL ACQUISITION AND THE PRODUCTIVIST LIMITS OF INNOVATION THEORY
  3. 3. Innovation in Practice Pilot 2010 INNOVATION IN PRACTICE METHODS AND PROCESSES IMAGINATION, BODY, MATERIALITY
  4. 4. in novation
  5. 5. in novation
  6. 6. If there‟s one thing that we want to do in this course it is to smash this romanticist and Cartesian illusion that “innovation” happens in the head – however literally or metaphorically – of some uniquely gifted or talented individual who exists in isolation form that world of which they are a part, and all of those “practices,” or even more appropriately, that community of practitioners who - however acknowledgedly or unacknoweldgedly – inform what they do, and all of those various semiotic, linguistic, material, economic, social, cultural, political, and cognitive systems that similarly inform them as well.
  7. 7. in novation “Innovation” exists in our skillful adaptive relationships to those environments in which we exist….
  8. 8. in novation … our relationships to each other in those environments….
  9. 9. in novation … and those materials that constitute those environments….
  10. 10. … the objects or tools that we make with those materials that then further facilitate our relationships to those environments…
  11. 11. in novation … and even more specifically in those “communities of practice” that provide us with the requisite skills to do all of these things!
  12. 12. Innovation in Practice Pilot 2010 DISCOURSES IN INNOVATION 1: DISCLOSING THE (K)NEW: LEARNING, SKILL ACQUISITION AND THE PRODUCTIVIST LIMITS OF INNOVATION THEORY
  13. 13. Innovation in Practice Pilot 2010 INNOVATION IN PRACTICE METHODS AND PROCESSES IMAGINATION, BODY, MATERIALITY
  14. 14. Innovation in Practice Pilot 2010 INNOVATION IN PRACTICE METHODS AND PROCESSES IMAGINATION, BODY, MATERIALITY
  15. 15. Haridimos Tsoukas Complex Knowledge. Studies in Organizational Epistemology
  16. 16. Open Ontology/Enactivist Epistemology/PoeticPraxeology The world in which we exist can only be truly understood – let alone “innovated” for – according to the “logic” of complex systems theory, second order cybernetics, emergence, and an enactive, embodied, or dynamic understanding of the nature of cognition or mind, or what he specifically calls an “open” as opposed to a “closed” ontology, an “enactivist” as opposed to a “representationalist” epistemology, and a “poetic” as opposed to an “Intrumentalist” praxeology.
  17. 17. Open Ontology/Enactivist Epistemology/Poetic Praxeology “An open-world ontology assumes that the world is always in a process of becoming, of turning into something different. Flow, flux, and change are the fundamental processes of the world. The future is open, unknowable in principle, and it always holds the possibility of surprise.” “An enactivist epistemology assumes that knowing is action. We bring the world forward by making distinctions and giving form to an unarticulated background of understanding. Knowledge is the outcome of an active knower who has a certain biological structure, follows certain historically shaped cognitive practices, and is rooted within a consensual domain and sociocultural practice.” “A poetic praxeology sees the practitioner as an active being who, while inevitably shaped by the sociocultural practices in which he/she is rooted, necessarily shapes them in turn by undertaking action that is relatively opaque in its consequences and unclear in its motives and desires, unreflective and situated in its mode of operation, but inherently capable of self-observation and reflexivity, thus susceptible to chronic change.” Tsoukas, Haridimos. 2005. Complex Knowledge. Studies in Organizational Epistemology. New York. Oxford University Press. P 5
  18. 18. The world is not an absolute, stable, pre-determined, and “re- presentable” thing that exists outside of or beyond our perceptions and understandings of it, but is rather in a constant state of, “flux, flow, and change,” that is simultaneously affected by our “enactive” participation in it, and our “poetic” disclosure of it.
  19. 19. Francisco Varela Ethical Know-How: Action, Wisdom, and Cognition
  20. 20. Cognitive science is waking up to the full importance of the realization that perception does not consist In the recovery of a pre-given world, but rather in the perceptual guidance of action in a world that is inseparable from our sensorimotor capacities, and that “higher" cognitive structures also emerge from patterns of perceptually guided action. Thus cognition consists not of representations but of embodied action. Thus we can say that the world we know is not pre-given; it is, rather, enacted through our history of structural coupling, and the temporal hinges that articulate enaction are rooted in the number of alternative rnicroworlds that are activated in every situation. These alternatives are the source of both common sense and creativity in cognition. Varela, Francisco. 1999. Ethical Know-How: Action, Wisdom, and Cognition. Stanford University Press.
  21. 21. This “epistemic shift” toward a more “open,” “enactive,” and “praxeological” understanding of the nature of our existence has been influenced by a number of different sources besides Varela‟s “neurophenomenological” amalgamation of his and Humbeto Maturana‟s insights into the neurophysiological nature and structure of our systems of perception and cognition and phenomenological philosophy and these include…
  22. 22. Pheonomenology/Pragmatism/Cybernetics/Systems Theory William James - January 11, 1842 – August 26, Heinz Von Foerster born November 13, 1911 – 1910 October 2, 2002 Henri Bergson born, 8 October 1859 – 4 January Stephen Toulmin - 25 March 1922 - 4 December 1941 2009 John Dewey – born October 20, 1859 – June 1, Stafford Beer – born September 25, 1926 - August 1952 23, 2002 Alfred North Whitehead born 15 February 1861 – Humberto Maturana September 14, 1928 – 30 December 1947 Alasdair Macintyre - 12 January 1929 Ludwig Wittgenstein - born 26 April 1889 – 29 April 1951 Richard Rorty – born October 4, 1931 – June 8, 2007 Michael Polanyi - March 11, 1891 – February 22, 1976 George Lakoff - May 24, 1941 Martin Heidegger - born September 26, 1889 – Francisco Varela - September 7, 1946 – May 28, May 26, 1976 2001 Hans-Georg Gadamer - born February 11, 1900 – Charles Taylor - born 28 January 1948 March 13, 2002 Gregory Bateson – born 9 May 1904 – 4 July 1980
  23. 23. Phenomenology and Pragmatism Martin Heidegger Hans-Georg Gadamer John Dewey
  24. 24. Cybernetics/Systems Theory/Enactive-Embodied Mind Gregory Bateson Heinz Von Forester Francisco Varela
  25. 25. “Truth” – or perhaps even more appropriately – what we know, or can come to know, is produced in practice. That is through our active participation in a world –what Heidegger called our “being-in-the-world” – that we “hermeneutically” or interpretively disclose or produce – i.e. “enact” - as Gadamer suggested, and consensually agree upon and act within as Dewey claimed. Facts that have been even more “empirically” validated in recent years through the likes of Bateson‟s and Von Forester‟s research into the organizational nature and structure of those systems in which we exist – whether social, cultural, economic, or cognitive - and are inextricably “structurally coupled” to as Maturana and Varela claim.
  26. 26. “Truth” is produced in Practice
  27. 27. Bruno Latour – Actor Network Theory The Social Construction of Scientific Facts
  28. 28. Hannah Arendt The Human Condition
  29. 29. “The use of the experiment for the purpose of knowledge was already the consequence of the conviction that one can only know what he has made himself, for this conviction meant that one might learn about those things man did not make by figuring out and imitating the process through which they had come into being.” Arendt, Hannah. 1958. The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. p295
  30. 30. Francisco Varela and Humberto Maturana Autopoiesis and Cognition. The Realization of the Living.
  31. 31. Purpose or aims, however, as we saw in the first chapter, are not features of the organization of any machine (allo- or autopoietic); these notions belong to the domain of our discourse about our actions, that is, they belong to the domain of descriptions, and when applied to a machine, or any system independent from us, they reflect our considering the machine or system in some encompassing context. Maturana, Humberto and Varela, Francisco. 1980. Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living, Dordrecht: D. Reidel
  32. 32. Reiner Schurmann Heidegger On Being and Acting. From Principles to Anarchy
  33. 33. ”it is only because man first grasps himself as archi-tect, as initiator of fabrication, that nature can in turn appear to him as moved by the mechanisms of cause and effect.” “it is only because the artisan experiences the origin of production as indigenous to himself, he finds another such origin in nature, concordant with although allogeneous to his own.” “The experience that guides the comprehension of origin as it is operative in the „philosophy of nature‟ is thus paradoxically the experiencing of fabricating tools and works of art, the experience of handiwork.” Shurmann, Reiner. Heidegger on Being and Acting from Principles to Anarchy. Indiana University Press. Bloomington
  34. 34. Jean-Luc Nancy The Creation of the World or Globalization
  35. 35. It “creation” means anything, it is the exact opposite of any form of production in the sense of a fabrication that supposes a given, a project, and a producer. The idea of creation, such as has been elaborated by the most diverse and at the same time most convergent thoughts… is above all the idea of the ex nihilo [out of nothing]. The world is created from nothing: this does not mean fabricated with nothing by a particularly ingenious producer. It means instead that it is not fabricated, produced by no producer, and not even coming out of nothing (like a miraculous apparition), but in quite a strict manner and more challenging for thought: the nothing itself, if one can speak in this way, or rather nothing grows as something…In creation, a growth grows from nothing and this nothing takes care of itself, cultivates its growth. Nancy, J-L, (2007)The Creation of the World or Globalization. Trans. Raffoul, F & Pettigrew, D. Albany, State University of New York Press. P 51
  36. 36. As much as we might have intellectually realized the enormous ontological and epistemological significance of these insights – insights that, whether in the physical sciences or philosophy we have, in many instances, been aware of for over a hundred years! – we have as yet to recognize the full implications of their significance within the machinations of our everyday lives. That is in the ways in which we actually come to know, learn, teach, and act within - or more importantly for our current purposes, design or “innovate” within - this world of which we are all a part, and actively, or even more appropriately, “enactively,” contribute to the construction of. There is an absolutely massive disconnect between what in a few weeks time we will see Donald Schön and Chris Argyris call our “espoused theories” and our “theories-in-use.” Or what we can even more simply describe as those fundamental beliefs and practices that actually inform what we do and those that we claim to inform what we do.
  37. 37. Gert Biesta Critique of the “representationalist” epistemology of modern education
  38. 38. John Gray and Fernando Flores Entrepreneurship and the Wired Life: Work in the Wake of Careers
  39. 39. Daniel Pink – “The MFA is the new MBA”
  40. 40. Complex- Collective – Collaborative – Emergent – Enactive theorisations of the nature of cultural production, organization, meaning, or “innovation” Leadbeater – Anderson – Taleb – Tapscott and Williams
  41. 41. Wenger – Lave – Dreyfus - Hildreth - Kimble
  42. 42. Peggy Kamuf – “Accounterability in Higher Education”
  43. 43. “First, I note the assumption that, according to this statement, my university education ought to have been a preparation for the global, competitive workforce. This is not said in so many words, but that would be precisely what signals it as an unexamined assumption. I do not share this assumption and my university experience has, I believe, been the richer for it; moreover I believe this despite the fact that, in another sense, I am now far poorer because my parents refused to continue subsidizing my studies ever since I changed my major to the Programme in Critical Thinking. No doubt like the author of these assertions, they were willing to invest in my university degree only so long as I promised an appreciable return of marketable skills. Nevertheless, I believe that my program of study, and this will be my second point, has definitely enhanced my „capability and capacity to think and develop and continue to learn‟, aims that, I agree, should motivate university teaching, learning, and research”
  44. 44. Innovation in Practice Pilot 2010 DISCOURSES IN INNOVATION 1: DISCLOSING THE (K)NEW: LEARNING, SKILL ACQUISITION AND THE PRODUCTIVIST LIMITS OF INNOVATION THEORY
  45. 45. DISCOURSES IN INNOVATION 1: DISCLOSING THE (K)NEW: LEARNING, SKILL ACQUISITION AND THE PRODUCTIVIST LIMITS OF INNOVATION THEORY • General Introduction and course overview. • Innovation as Creative Destruction – Schumpeter and Beyond. • Innovation as „History Making‟ - Ontological Design and the disclosure of the (k)new. • Innovation and „Expertise‟” - Hubert Dreyfus and the „tacit‟ nature of „skillful‟ innovation. • Innovation in „Practice‟ – The „tacit‟ knowledge of innovatory practice. Flores, Schon, and Nonaka. • Innovative Change – Stephen Turner and the “object” of transformative „practice. • Innovation and Systemic Change – Open Source Innovation, Distributed Mind, and the Economy of Contribution. • Summation, Critical Review and Essay Planning
  46. 46. “Innovation as Creative Destruction – Schumpeter and Beyond”. In this first lecture we will consider of some of the key ways in which innovation has come to be understood, both practically, conceptually, and critically through out its development. We will place particular emphasis on the way in which it has been articulated within the discourses of economics, business, organisation, and management theory, from Joseph Schumpeter‟s original analysis of it as “creative destruction” through to Henry Chesbrough‟s most recent ideas on “open innovation”.
  47. 47. Joseph Schumpeter Innovation as Creative Destruction
  48. 48. Henry Chesbrough Open Innovation
  49. 49. Innovation as „History Making‟ - Ontological Design and the disclosure of the (k)new This lecture seeks to expand on our understanding of design‟s essentially “inventive,” “innovative,” or what we will call its “ontologically disclosive” nature. The principle inspiration for this re-reading of the nature of innovation is Hubert Dreyfus, Fernando Flores, and Charles Spinosa‟s hermeneutically and phenomenologically inspired reading of it in their text, Disclosing New Worlds. Entrepreneurship, Democratic Action, and the Cultivation of Solidarity. We will also discuss the basic underlying philosophical premises of this work.
  50. 50. Hubert Dreyfus, Fernando Flores, and Charles Spinosa Disclosing New Worlds: Entrepreneurship, Democratic Action, and the Cultivation of Solidarity
  51. 51. Innovation and „Expertise‟” - Hubert Dreyfus and the „tacit‟ nature of „skillful‟ innovation‟. This next lecture seeks to expand our understanding of what “tacit” knowledge is by focusing not only on Hubert Dreyfus‟ analysis of its importance to his more philosophically orientated critique of the nature of “cognition” or “intelligence”, but even more specifically his analysis of its role in “skill acquisition”, learning, and the development of the sort of “expertise” that is essential to innovation. Michael Polanyi‟s original definition and analysis of the concept will also be considered.
  52. 52. Hubert Dreyfus and the „tacit‟ nature of „skillful‟ innovation
  53. 53. Martin Heidegger
  54. 54. Michael Polanyi – Personal Knowledge
  55. 55. Innovation in „Practice‟ – The „tacit‟ knowledge of innovatory practice. Flores, Schon, and Nonaka In this next lecture we will seek to further explicate how these ideas have not only been directly applied to the discourse and practices of innovation theory through the work of individuals like Fernando Flores, but also to the discourses of Education, Learning, and Organisation and Management Theory, through the work of Donald Schon, Chris Argyris, and Ikujiro Nonaka.
  56. 56. Donald Schön The Reflective Practitioner
  57. 57. Chris Argyris Theory in Practice
  58. 58. Ikujiro Nonaka Enabling Knowledge Creation - “Tacit” Knowledge
  59. 59. “Innovative Change – Stephen Turner and the “object” of transformative „practice‟”. In this next lecture we will seek to further consider some of the more essential critical or philosophical questions about the nature of how “tacit” knowledge is actually transmitted, communicated, learnt, or acquired through those “practices” that we share. Stephen Turner‟s critique of the supposedly “collective” and “objective” nature of that knowledge that we “tacitly” share through our mutual co-option and adoption of shared “practices” leads directly into some of the key themes of the following analysis of the “distributed” nature of intelligence, “skill”, “expertise”, and “practice” that have been so important to the development of many of the most recent theories of “open source” innovation
  60. 60. Stephen Turner The Social Theory of Practices
  61. 61. Innovation and Systemic Change – Open Source Innovation, Distributed Mind, and the Economy of Contribution Having considered Turner‟s analysis and critique of the supposedly “collective” and “objective” nature of that “tacit” knowledge that we acquire through our mutual co-option and adoption of shared “practices”, this final lecture seeks to outline how some of the implications of this critique of the way in which that “innovative” knowledge that we “tacitly” acquire through those “practices” that we share has affected the development of some of the most recent theorisations of “open source” innovation that were briefly outlined in the introductory lecture. Some of the social, cultural, political, economic, and ethical implications of this model of innovation will also be considered – particularly as they relate to what Bernard Stiegler has recently described as the “economy of contribution”.
  62. 62. Being-in-the-World – The Movie

×