Note: OGM Forum is no longer active. This is a static snapshot as of February 2022. You can browse the site to see posts, but the functional features of the site will not work. You can search or download a zip archive of the files from the site at github/OpenGlobalMind/forum.openglobalmind.com.

Ideal Final Result

Designing the System
#1

Hi, I know we were just in a workshop talking about the future of OGM but I didn’t yet get a strong sense of what the “ideal final result” (in TRIZ talk) would look like! In a breakout session of Group 1 @maparent pushed back — with robust rationale — on my perspective that the Purpose of OGM should be something that can be finished off once and for all. His example was that the purpose of Medicine is “curing disease”, and this is something that is only approached incrementally. Maybe another iteration of this discourse is to refer explicitly to an ideal final result, which is only ever approached but which is nevertheless definitive. In this case, for Medicine, perhaps the ideal final result is “immortality.” What is OGM approaching — not by 2025 but in an idealised sense?

Untitled9-1

#2

What system is being deigned?

#3

The tagline for this section is:

We’re designing and building OGM as we fly it. This is where we do that.

#4

What is the goal of OGM?

#5

Now I think you have restated the question that I asked in simpler terms!

I don’t know if anyone has articulated an answer that satisfies anyone (much less everyone!). Here’s what I wrote about it:

Connect the connectors to what they need to thrive

In the context of ongoing learning and unlearning, resource flows we have created a ‘practice space’ BUT we and other stakeholders have other needs that are not yet satisfied SO Connect the network-weavers and their stakeholders to the resources they need to thrive.

Beyond this, some people have started to articulate their goals “for” OGM, but in my experience this hasn’t yet gelled into a clear “goal structure”, “gameplan”, or “roadmap”. Presently the state of the art seems to be described by these questions:

https://www.openglobalmind.com/projects/ogm-design

So the intermediate goals “for” OGM are to have answers to those or to cross them off the list.

My attempt (above, and more broadly in this thread) was to envision something less practical, and potentially non-sensical, so that we could do sensemaking “about” it. HTH

#6

We are basically taking about process when we say product. And process is by definition dynamic. And since we are talking about people as they live in this dysfunctional process we are stuck in, we are talking about being inside a complex adaptive system. Sorry if this logic stream is choppy, my main point is we are observing a social system that is about to collapse on multiple fronts. So the question arises: with an all hands on deck mindset, what can one do?

There is broad consensus in academia and amongst leading thinkers that all change has to be built ground on up. The existing structure governing our economy is unable to reform itself on its own for lack of direction. There are confusing market signals coming at them; one is we’ll keep things as they are, do what you can but maintain or better yet grow. Another is we have to accept the reality of our situation, and fix it no matter what the cost, there is no other option.

Now comes the question; how can one bring the most competent support to a widely decentralized economy that must nevertheless stay connected? There are a host of non-profits who operate local or regional with amazing ideas on how to built community, but they don’t know how to scale and the smart money doesn’t know about them, or doesn’t understand why they are important.

There is great need for peer generated best level thinking, reliable, trustworthy, insightful. We could do that, if we want to.

1 Like