It seems the basic idea is an organization that can both produce a current product and create the next product. In the 9 page wikipedia article there is no mention of Stafford Beer's work on management cybernetics and the Viable System Model.
Beer's Viable System Model (VSM) lies at the heart of the St. Gallen Management Model, which I have described earlier. The advantage of the VSM and cybernetics is that they have a large and well-developed theoretical and philosophical literature, including both ethics and the philosophy of science. The idea of an ambidextrous organization seems to be a good example of how ideas are sometimes reinvented. Perhaps at a future conference we could bring together those who are developing the idea of an ambidextrous organization and those who have been working with the VSM. This might be one way of introducing European styles of thought to GWSB and perhaps AOM. I think an article connecting these two literatures would be a good project for a doctoral student.
The Rise Of America's Lunatic Fringe … Anyone who spends any amount of time on the internet has seen them. They are the moonbats, the wingnuts, the whackjobs, the Conspiratorialists. They are America's new Lunatic Fringe, and their numbers are growing. While the rise of the internet fed a segment of society that has always existed, as the cyberworld has become an increasingly important source of both entertainment and information, an entirely new demographic has joined what was already amongst us. … When the trust is gone the Fringe becomes the mainstream. The government can no longer afford to ignore the Lunatic Fringe, because it is becoming less loon and more understandably and righteously indignant every day. The government did not create the Fringe, but through callous disregard, incompetence, blatant self-interest, cronyism, selective enforcement, and pandering to its financial support base, the government has fertilized the fringe until it has grown to redwood-like size. The nation's leadership is viewed not with admiration, but with distrust. It is no longer the solution, but the problem. – Chindit/Zero Hedge
Dominant Social Theme: It's getting crazier out there and somebody ought to do something.
Free-Market Analysis: Zero Hedge posted the article excerpted above, perhaps because the website's editors wanted to get a reaction on a slow news day. Zero Hedge is what we might call an alternative news site, so it is part of the trend that this editorial by Chindit (whoever that is) is identifying.
The article is interesting to us here at The Daily Bell because over the past ten years as we have actively participated in what we call the Internet Reformation, we've become believers in “directed history.” This is the idea that a small group of impossibly wealthy individuals and families are trying to create world government by orchestrating historical events.
Anyone who spends any amount of time on the internet has seen them.
They are the moonbats, the wingnuts, the whackjobs, the Conspiratorialists. They are America’s new Lunatic Fringe, and their numbers are growing.
While the rise of the internet fed a segment of society that has always existed, when the cyberworld became an increasingly important source both of entertainment and information, an entirely new demographic joined what was already amongst us.
Who are they and what do they believe? The Lunatic Fringe is not uniform in either its background or beliefs. Some clearly seem to be emotionally disturbed. Some are racist and hateful. Others are simply naïve and gullible, or uninformed. Still more are frustrated by an economy and a government that are behaving out of whack with what most people expected from life and from leadership. They want to believe America stands for something noble, but it is increasingly felt by them that it does not. They are confused, frustrated, and disappointed. They feel violated and betrayed. They grow angrier by the day. Some harbor a diffuse rage which could blow at any time. Others have figuratively thrown in the towel and have joined the ranks of what are called Preppers and Survivalists.
Collectively, though individually they differ, the beliefs of the Fringe conspiracies behind the JFK assassination, the lunar landing, and 911. The collective also includes the Birthers, and believers in everything from FEMA Camps to chemtrails to that retro old favorite of Colonel Jack Ripper, fluoridation. The Fringe holds beliefs that have the world controlled variously by the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, the Bilderbergers, Bohemian Grove, Skull and Bones, the Council on Foreign Relations, 33rd Degree Freemasons, the Vatican, the Queen of England, or just The Illuminati. Every event and every incident in the world is affected by some Master Plan carried out by whomever the believer chooses from the aforementioned gallery of rogues. For many, al Qaeda is really al CIAda, and the prime directive of that organization, along with all the other USG alphabet agencies, is to further the goals of the elite, usually through some “false flag” operation or “psy-op”, and funded through illicit drug sales.
On December 14, 2012, a group of 12 assembled in Palo Alto for a raucous discussion of online education. Hybrid Pedagogy contributors Sean Michael Morris and Jesse Stommel gathered together with folks from a diverse array of disciplines and backgrounds, representing STEM fields, the humanities, schools of education, corporations, non-profits, ivies, community colleges, and small liberal arts colleges. Among us were adjuncts, CEOs, a graduate student, several digital humanists, and two outspoken educational technology journalists. As a group, we’d chaired online programs, designed MOOCs, dropped out of MOOCs, and the term “MOOC” was even coined in one of our living rooms. The goal of the summit was to open a broader conversation about online learning and the future of higher education. See the story in The Chronicle. This co-authored document, which calls for hacking and open discussion, was the result.
A Bill of Rights and Principles for Learning in the Digital Age
“A man’s brain originally is like a little empty attic, and you have to stock it with such furniture as you choose.”
Amazon Page
“The habit of mind which leads to a search for relationships between facts,” wrote James Webb Young in his famous 1939 5-step technique for creative problem-solving, “becomes of the highest importance in the production of ideas.”But just how does one acquire those vital cognitive customs? That’s precisely what science writer Maria Konnikova explores inMastermind: How to Think Like Sherlock Holmes (UK; public library) — an effort to reverse-engineer Holmes’s methodology into actionable insights that help develop “habits of thought that will allow you to engage mindfully with yourself and your world as a matter of course.”
#SOCMINT Use Google Translate at top of middle column.
Si yo sé algo que tú no sabes sobre lo que tú estás trabajando y tú sabes algo que yo no sé, lo lógico sería colaborar. Pero, si yo te lo cuento existe el riesgo de que tú se lo cuentes a otros, impidiendo o reduciendo el beneficio que yo pudiera obtener por ello, o que revelándote una parte, me des las gracias y completes el resto por tu cuenta. Este es uno de los argumentos que el premio Nobel de Economía de 1972, John Kenneth Arrow, daba para explicar que en la actividad inventiva existe un fallo de mercado y justifica la intervención de los poderes públicos para que no se produzca una escasez de recursos en ella. El modelo de innovación de la “Factoría de Inventos” de Edison, donde todo se cocía internamente, incluso el carácter individualista y la fama de jugador duro atribuidos a éste, responden a un planteamiento cerrado de la innovación, una traducción del dilema presentado por Arrow.
Sin embargo, este planteamiento resulta contradictorio con la naturaleza creativa propia de la innovación. Crear es fundamentalmente asociar, conectar, explorar, cuestionar y relacionarse. Quizá por eso cada día aparecen más innovaciones y nuevas empresas fruto de procesos colaborativos y asociaciones no siempre evidentes, como pueden ser los casos de BMW y Peugeot-Citröen que están desarrollando un nuevo concepto de vehículo híbrido conjuntamente, Lego, que obtiene propuestas de nuevos diseños de sus clientes más acérrimos y finalmente fabrica los que tienen mayor demanda, o ESMT, una escuela de negocios de Berlín fundada por los propios negocios[1].
¿POR QUE NO DEBEMOS RENUNCIAR A LA INNOVACIÓN ABIERTA?
