�ݺ�ߣshows by User: peterjones

�ݺ�ߣshows by User: peterjones / http://www.slideshare.net/images/logo.gif �ݺ�ߣshows by User: peterjones / Sun, 14 Apr 2019 23:38:53 GMT �ݺ�ߣShare feed for �ݺ�ߣshows by User: peterjones Systemic Design Toolkit - Systems Innovation Barcelona /slideshow/systemic-design-toolkit-systems-innovation-barcelona/140800616 jonessdtoolkitworkshop-190414233853
The Systemic Design Toolkit represents a formalized set of methods and research tools designed by Namahn and developed with collaboration by me (SDA) and Alex Ryan of MaRS. The Toolkit can be discovered at https://www.systemicdesigntoolkit.org/]]>
The Systemic Design Toolkit represents a formalized set of methods and research tools designed by Namahn and developed with collaboration by me (SDA) and Alex Ryan of MaRS. The Toolkit can be discovered at https://www.systemicdesigntoolkit.org/]]> Sun, 14 Apr 2019 23:38:53 GMT /slideshow/systemic-design-toolkit-systems-innovation-barcelona/140800616 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) Systemic Design Toolkit - Systems Innovation Barcelona peterjones The Systemic Design Toolkit represents a formalized set of methods and research tools designed by Namahn and developed with collaboration by me (SDA) and Alex Ryan of MaRS. The Toolkit can be discovered at https://www.systemicdesigntoolkit.org/ <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jonessdtoolkitworkshop-190414233853-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> The Systemic Design Toolkit represents a formalized set of methods and research tools designed by Namahn and developed with collaboration by me (SDA) and Alex Ryan of MaRS. The Toolkit can be discovered at https://www.systemicdesigntoolkit.org/

Systemic Design Toolkit - Systems Innovation Barcelona from Peter Jones

]]> 1878 4 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jonessdtoolkitworkshop-190414233853-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 How Might We: Simplexity in Design Charrettes /slideshow/how-might-we-simplexity-in-design-charrettes/140799412 hmwsimplexityasdesigncharrette-190414231038
Basadur Simplexity as Design Process for Innovation. Workshop delivered to the October 2018 How Might We? Conference, Cincinnati.]]>
Basadur Simplexity as Design Process for Innovation. Workshop delivered to the October 2018 How Might We? Conference, Cincinnati.]]> Sun, 14 Apr 2019 23:10:38 GMT /slideshow/how-might-we-simplexity-in-design-charrettes/140799412 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) How Might We: Simplexity in Design Charrettes peterjones Basadur Simplexity as Design Process for Innovation. Workshop delivered to the October 2018 How Might We? Conference, Cincinnati. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hmwsimplexityasdesigncharrette-190414231038-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Basadur Simplexity as Design Process for Innovation. Workshop delivered to the October 2018 How Might We? Conference, Cincinnati.

How Might We: Simplexity in Design Charrettes from Peter Jones

]]> 1042 4 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hmwsimplexityasdesigncharrette-190414231038-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Anticipation 2017 Assembling Requisite Stakeholder Variety /slideshow/anticipation-2017-assembling-requisite-stakeholder-variety/140799211 jonesant2017stakeholdervariety-190414230605
Talk from Anticipation 2017 on stakeholder selection in collaborative foresight contexts ]]>
Talk from Anticipation 2017 on stakeholder selection in collaborative foresight contexts ]]> Sun, 14 Apr 2019 23:06:05 GMT /slideshow/anticipation-2017-assembling-requisite-stakeholder-variety/140799211 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) Anticipation 2017 Assembling Requisite Stakeholder Variety peterjones Talk from Anticipation 2017 on stakeholder selection in collaborative foresight contexts <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jonesant2017stakeholdervariety-190414230605-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Talk from Anticipation 2017 on stakeholder selection in collaborative foresight contexts

Anticipation 2017 Assembling Requisite Stakeholder Variety from Peter Jones

]]> 197 3 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jonesant2017stakeholdervariety-190414230605-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Anticipatory Factors in Dialogic Design ISSS 2016 /slideshow/anticipatory-factors-in-dialogic-design-isss-2016/65444192 anticipatoryfactorsindialogicdesignisss2016-160828193731
Applications of the systemic practices of dialogic design (Structured Dialogic Design and it variants) have recently developed and integrated futures and foresight models as anticipatory frameworks for policy and long-term planning situations (Weigand, et al, 2014). We have identified this model of practice as collaborative foresight, reflecting the perspective from practice that futures literacy must be considered an essential complement to multi-stakeholder deliberation where complex and competing interests are considered in planning and decision making. This study proposes approaches to advancement in science and practice that integrate essential properties of collective anticipatory modelling for design decisions. Scientific principles for dialogic design have been developed and practiced over the course of nearly 50 years of developmental evolution, following Warfield’s (1986) Domain of Science Model (DoSM) and Christakis’ (2006, 2008) research extending the DoSM. One of the key principles in the DoSM refers to the recursive learning necessary to develop systemic practices, a second-order (deutero) learning process as noted in Warfield’s DoSM cycle. The standard model requires warranted claims to be evaluated from their testing in the Arena of real-world practice and reflective learning in order to advance new theory for inclusion in the accepted Corpus (theory supported by accepted evidence). Recent developments from practice following from advanced design and strategic foresight theory lend support for progressing the models of dialogic design to explicitly entail methods of design and futuring within the historical model of dialogue. The observation driving this proposal can be summarized as “participants in collective designing efforts are likely to fail in their expected outcomes if they do not facilitate the requisite anticipation of future complexity in their domain of action.” Simply put, people will make significantly better plans and policies together if they can develop competency in futures thinking and share their understanding with one another. ]]>
Applications of the systemic practices of dialogic design (Structured Dialogic Design and it variants) have recently developed and integrated futures and foresight models as anticipatory frameworks for policy and long-term planning situations (Weigand, et al, 2014). We have identified this model of practice as collaborative foresight, reflecting the perspective from practice that futures literacy must be considered an essential complement to multi-stakeholder deliberation where complex and competing interests are considered in planning and decision making. This study proposes approaches to advancement in science and practice that integrate essential properties of collective anticipatory modelling for design decisions. Scientific principles for dialogic design have been developed and practiced over the course of nearly 50 years of developmental evolution, following Warfield’s (1986) Domain of Science Model (DoSM) and Christakis’ (2006, 2008) research extending the DoSM. One of the key principles in the DoSM refers to the recursive learning necessary to develop systemic practices, a second-order (deutero) learning process as noted in Warfield’s DoSM cycle. The standard model requires warranted claims to be evaluated from their testing in the Arena of real-world practice and reflective learning in order to advance new theory for inclusion in the accepted Corpus (theory supported by accepted evidence). Recent developments from practice following from advanced design and strategic foresight theory lend support for progressing the models of dialogic design to explicitly entail methods of design and futuring within the historical model of dialogue. The observation driving this proposal can be summarized as “participants in collective designing efforts are likely to fail in their expected outcomes if they do not facilitate the requisite anticipation of future complexity in their domain of action.” Simply put, people will make significantly better plans and policies together if they can develop competency in futures thinking and share their understanding with one another. ]]> Sun, 28 Aug 2016 19:37:31 GMT /slideshow/anticipatory-factors-in-dialogic-design-isss-2016/65444192 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) Anticipatory Factors in Dialogic Design ISSS 2016 peterjones Applications of the systemic practices of dialogic design (Structured Dialogic Design and it variants) have recently developed and integrated futures and foresight models as anticipatory frameworks for policy and long-term planning situations (Weigand, et al, 2014). We have identified this model of practice as collaborative foresight, reflecting the perspective from practice that futures literacy must be considered an essential complement to multi-stakeholder deliberation where complex and competing interests are considered in planning and decision making. This study proposes approaches to advancement in science and practice that integrate essential properties of collective anticipatory modelling for design decisions. Scientific principles for dialogic design have been developed and practiced over the course of nearly 50 years of developmental evolution, following Warfield’s (1986) Domain of Science Model (DoSM) and Christakis’ (2006, 2008) research extending the DoSM. One of the key principles in the DoSM refers to the recursive learning necessary to develop systemic practices, a second-order (deutero) learning process as noted in Warfield’s DoSM cycle. The standard model requires warranted claims to be evaluated from their testing in the Arena of real-world practice and reflective learning in order to advance new theory for inclusion in the accepted Corpus (theory supported by accepted evidence). Recent developments from practice following from advanced design and strategic foresight theory lend support for progressing the models of dialogic design to explicitly entail methods of design and futuring within the historical model of dialogue. The observation driving this proposal can be summarized as “participants in collective designing efforts are likely to fail in their expected outcomes if they do not facilitate the requisite anticipation of future complexity in their domain of action.” Simply put, people will make significantly better plans and policies together if they can develop competency in futures thinking and share their understanding with one another. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/anticipatoryfactorsindialogicdesignisss2016-160828193731-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Applications of the systemic practices of dialogic design (Structured Dialogic Design and it variants) have recently developed and integrated futures and foresight models as anticipatory frameworks for policy and long-term planning situations (Weigand, et al, 2014). We have identified this model of practice as collaborative foresight, reflecting the perspective from practice that futures literacy must be considered an essential complement to multi-stakeholder deliberation where complex and competing interests are considered in planning and decision making. This study proposes approaches to advancement in science and practice that integrate essential properties of collective anticipatory modelling for design decisions. Scientific principles for dialogic design have been developed and practiced over the course of nearly 50 years of developmental evolution, following Warfield’s (1986) Domain of Science Model (DoSM) and Christakis’ (2006, 2008) research extending the DoSM. One of the key principles in the DoSM refers to the recursive learning necessary to develop systemic practices, a second-order (deutero) learning process as noted in Warfield’s DoSM cycle. The standard model requires warranted claims to be evaluated from their testing in the Arena of real-world practice and reflective learning in order to advance new theory for inclusion in the accepted Corpus (theory supported by accepted evidence). Recent developments from practice following from advanced design and strategic foresight theory lend support for progressing the models of dialogic design to explicitly entail methods of design and futuring within the historical model of dialogue. The observation driving this proposal can be summarized as “participants in collective designing efforts are likely to fail in their expected outcomes if they do not facilitate the requisite anticipation of future complexity in their domain of action.” Simply put, people will make significantly better plans and policies together if they can develop competency in futures thinking and share their understanding with one another.

Anticipatory Factors in Dialogic Design ISSS 2016 from Peter Jones

]]> 3438 9 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/anticipatoryfactorsindialogicdesignisss2016-160828193731-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Flourishing Societies Framework - DwD Workshop /slideshow/flourishing-societies-framework-dwd-workshop/58156000 flourishingsocietiesframework-160211155752
How might we move or collective thinking and action beyond single-issue social action? Does it make sense to build our urban worlds and future societies by winning one political issue at a time? Can we design civic business models for our cities and society? All social services, determinants of health, and economics are complex and interrelated. So why do we expect any political body or activist group to get it right? Only meaningfully diverse, multi-stakeholder groups can envision the variety of interests and outcomes in complex social systems. In February's Design with Dialogue Peter Jones workshops tools for co-creating civic design proposals. A significant design challenge of our time is anticipating the relationships of multiple environmental and social problems as a complex system of nonlinear relationships. However, we cannot think about, model or discuss the relationships well, especially in the heat of discussion with deliberative groups and decision making processes. We need not only better engagement and dialogue processes for citizen deliberative problem solving, we require relevant tools. With the OCADU Strongly Sustainable Business Model Group and with Strategic Foresight & Innovation students we designed a relevant framework from the common language of business model tools, adapted for civic decision models for flourishing cities and settlements. The Flourishing Cities framework adapts a design tool for strongly sustainable business models as a visual organizer for engaging stakeholders in co-creating normative operational guidance for civic groups, community planners, and local governments. Flourishing can be understood as “to live within an optimal range of human functioning, one that connotes goodness, generativity, growth, and resilience,” or as John Ehrenfeld states it: “Flourishing is the possibility that human and other life will flourish on this planet forever.” This visual model enables a participatory mapping of propositions, values, and preferences that might yield significantly better group decisions for sociocultural and ecological development and governance in any planning engagement. ]]>
How might we move or collective thinking and action beyond single-issue social action? Does it make sense to build our urban worlds and future societies by winning one political issue at a time? Can we design civic business models for our cities and society? All social services, determinants of health, and economics are complex and interrelated. So why do we expect any political body or activist group to get it right? Only meaningfully diverse, multi-stakeholder groups can envision the variety of interests and outcomes in complex social systems. In February's Design with Dialogue Peter Jones workshops tools for co-creating civic design proposals. A significant design challenge of our time is anticipating the relationships of multiple environmental and social problems as a complex system of nonlinear relationships. However, we cannot think about, model or discuss the relationships well, especially in the heat of discussion with deliberative groups and decision making processes. We need not only better engagement and dialogue processes for citizen deliberative problem solving, we require relevant tools. With the OCADU Strongly Sustainable Business Model Group and with Strategic Foresight & Innovation students we designed a relevant framework from the common language of business model tools, adapted for civic decision models for flourishing cities and settlements. The Flourishing Cities framework adapts a design tool for strongly sustainable business models as a visual organizer for engaging stakeholders in co-creating normative operational guidance for civic groups, community planners, and local governments. Flourishing can be understood as “to live within an optimal range of human functioning, one that connotes goodness, generativity, growth, and resilience,” or as John Ehrenfeld states it: “Flourishing is the possibility that human and other life will flourish on this planet forever.” This visual model enables a participatory mapping of propositions, values, and preferences that might yield significantly better group decisions for sociocultural and ecological development and governance in any planning engagement. ]]> Thu, 11 Feb 2016 15:57:52 GMT /slideshow/flourishing-societies-framework-dwd-workshop/58156000 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) Flourishing Societies Framework - DwD Workshop peterjones How might we move or collective thinking and action beyond single-issue social action? Does it make sense to build our urban worlds and future societies by winning one political issue at a time? Can we design civic business models for our cities and society? All social services, determinants of health, and economics are complex and interrelated. So why do we expect any political body or activist group to get it right? Only meaningfully diverse, multi-stakeholder groups can envision the variety of interests and outcomes in complex social systems. In February's Design with Dialogue Peter Jones workshops tools for co-creating civic design proposals. A significant design challenge of our time is anticipating the relationships of multiple environmental and social problems as a complex system of nonlinear relationships. However, we cannot think about, model or discuss the relationships well, especially in the heat of discussion with deliberative groups and decision making processes. We need not only better engagement and dialogue processes for citizen deliberative problem solving, we require relevant tools. With the OCADU Strongly Sustainable Business Model Group and with Strategic Foresight & Innovation students we designed a relevant framework from the common language of business model tools, adapted for civic decision models for flourishing cities and settlements. The Flourishing Cities framework adapts a design tool for strongly sustainable business models as a visual organizer for engaging stakeholders in co-creating normative operational guidance for civic groups, community planners, and local governments. Flourishing can be understood as “to live within an optimal range of human functioning, one that connotes goodness, generativity, growth, and resilience,” or as John Ehrenfeld states it: “Flourishing is the possibility that human and other life will flourish on this planet forever.” This visual model enables a participatory mapping of propositions, values, and preferences that might yield significantly better group decisions for sociocultural and ecological development and governance in any planning engagement. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/flourishingsocietiesframework-160211155752-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> How might we move or collective thinking and action beyond single-issue social action? Does it make sense to build our urban worlds and future societies by winning one political issue at a time? Can we design civic business models for our cities and society? All social services, determinants of health, and economics are complex and interrelated. So why do we expect any political body or activist group to get it right? Only meaningfully diverse, multi-stakeholder groups can envision the variety of interests and outcomes in complex social systems. In February's Design with Dialogue Peter Jones workshops tools for co-creating civic design proposals. A significant design challenge of our time is anticipating the relationships of multiple environmental and social problems as a complex system of nonlinear relationships. However, we cannot think about, model or discuss the relationships well, especially in the heat of discussion with deliberative groups and decision making processes. We need not only better engagement and dialogue processes for citizen deliberative problem solving, we require relevant tools. With the OCADU Strongly Sustainable Business Model Group and with Strategic Foresight & Innovation students we designed a relevant framework from the common language of business model tools, adapted for civic decision models for flourishing cities and settlements. The Flourishing Cities framework adapts a design tool for strongly sustainable business models as a visual organizer for engaging stakeholders in co-creating normative operational guidance for civic groups, community planners, and local governments. Flourishing can be understood as “to live within an optimal range of human functioning, one that connotes goodness, generativity, growth, and resilience,” or as John Ehrenfeld states it: “Flourishing is the possibility that human and other life will flourish on this planet forever.” This visual model enables a participatory mapping of propositions, values, and preferences that might yield significantly better group decisions for sociocultural and ecological development and governance in any planning engagement.

Flourishing Societies Framework - DwD Workshop from Peter Jones

]]> 3101 12 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/flourishingsocietiesframework-160211155752-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Designing Flourishing Societies RSD4 /slideshow/designing-flourishing-societies-rsd4/54264750 jonesrsd4designingflourishingsocieties-151022143043-lva1-app6892
Presentation by Peter Jones at RSD4 Banff, Alberta, 2015. Society can be defined as an object of culture, as culture is a medium for the collective development of social systems. Societies are not designed by a deliberative process, but are social entities that emerge over time as response to historicity and cultural development, and function largely by tacit agreement as observed in social norms. In the 1960’s social systemicists such as Ozbekhan, Fuller, and Doxiadis advocated deliberative civic planning as a normative science for designing sustainable and preferable societies and settlements. Even though their original methodologies of normative planning (Ozbekhan), anticipatory design science (Fuller) and ekistics (Doxiadis) did not gain the results hoped in applications over time, these arguments could be lodged against most systems methodologies. Yet when we consider their views of the human capacity to design future outcomes as a serious social and political project, we in our fragmented polities in the postmodern era might take heed. An argument follows that we, as cultural innovators in our own societies, having access to the wisdom of successful past transitions or redirections, have also failed to motivate and enact changes requisite to our common concerns. A systemic design approach is proposed toward constructing such idealizations as a necessary initial condition. The approach reconciles wisdom from our sociocultural histories with collaborative design practices of the current era to construct shared pathways to desired and feasible societal futures. ]]>
Presentation by Peter Jones at RSD4 Banff, Alberta, 2015. Society can be defined as an object of culture, as culture is a medium for the collective development of social systems. Societies are not designed by a deliberative process, but are social entities that emerge over time as response to historicity and cultural development, and function largely by tacit agreement as observed in social norms. In the 1960’s social systemicists such as Ozbekhan, Fuller, and Doxiadis advocated deliberative civic planning as a normative science for designing sustainable and preferable societies and settlements. Even though their original methodologies of normative planning (Ozbekhan), anticipatory design science (Fuller) and ekistics (Doxiadis) did not gain the results hoped in applications over time, these arguments could be lodged against most systems methodologies. Yet when we consider their views of the human capacity to design future outcomes as a serious social and political project, we in our fragmented polities in the postmodern era might take heed. An argument follows that we, as cultural innovators in our own societies, having access to the wisdom of successful past transitions or redirections, have also failed to motivate and enact changes requisite to our common concerns. A systemic design approach is proposed toward constructing such idealizations as a necessary initial condition. The approach reconciles wisdom from our sociocultural histories with collaborative design practices of the current era to construct shared pathways to desired and feasible societal futures. ]]> Thu, 22 Oct 2015 14:30:43 GMT /slideshow/designing-flourishing-societies-rsd4/54264750 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) Designing Flourishing Societies RSD4 peterjones Presentation by Peter Jones at RSD4 Banff, Alberta, 2015. Society can be defined as an object of culture, as culture is a medium for the collective development of social systems. Societies are not designed by a deliberative process, but are social entities that emerge over time as response to historicity and cultural development, and function largely by tacit agreement as observed in social norms. In the 1960’s social systemicists such as Ozbekhan, Fuller, and Doxiadis advocated deliberative civic planning as a normative science for designing sustainable and preferable societies and settlements. Even though their original methodologies of normative planning (Ozbekhan), anticipatory design science (Fuller) and ekistics (Doxiadis) did not gain the results hoped in applications over time, these arguments could be lodged against most systems methodologies. Yet when we consider their views of the human capacity to design future outcomes as a serious social and political project, we in our fragmented polities in the postmodern era might take heed. An argument follows that we, as cultural innovators in our own societies, having access to the wisdom of successful past transitions or redirections, have also failed to motivate and enact changes requisite to our common concerns. A systemic design approach is proposed toward constructing such idealizations as a necessary initial condition. The approach reconciles wisdom from our sociocultural histories with collaborative design practices of the current era to construct shared pathways to desired and feasible societal futures. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jonesrsd4designingflourishingsocieties-151022143043-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Presentation by Peter Jones at RSD4 Banff, Alberta, 2015. Society can be defined as an object of culture, as culture is a medium for the collective development of social systems. Societies are not designed by a deliberative process, but are social entities that emerge over time as response to historicity and cultural development, and function largely by tacit agreement as observed in social norms. In the 1960’s social systemicists such as Ozbekhan, Fuller, and Doxiadis advocated deliberative civic planning as a normative science for designing sustainable and preferable societies and settlements. Even though their original methodologies of normative planning (Ozbekhan), anticipatory design science (Fuller) and ekistics (Doxiadis) did not gain the results hoped in applications over time, these arguments could be lodged against most systems methodologies. Yet when we consider their views of the human capacity to design future outcomes as a serious social and political project, we in our fragmented polities in the postmodern era might take heed. An argument follows that we, as cultural innovators in our own societies, having access to the wisdom of successful past transitions or redirections, have also failed to motivate and enact changes requisite to our common concerns. A systemic design approach is proposed toward constructing such idealizations as a necessary initial condition. The approach reconciles wisdom from our sociocultural histories with collaborative design practices of the current era to construct shared pathways to desired and feasible societal futures.

Designing Flourishing Societies RSD4 from Peter Jones

]]> 1991 9 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jonesrsd4designingflourishingsocieties-151022143043-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Designing Futures to Flourish: ISSS 2015 keynote /slideshow/designing-futures-to-flourish-isss-2015-keynote/51862806 isssdesigningfuturesflourish-150820143017-lva1-app6891
We now find ourselves as a systems thinking community inquiring into planetary governance for climate and ecological politics. The Anthropocene demands a planetary response, and yet we often find even our fellow travelers tethered to discourses of technological management, cultural change, and right action. We might now advocate a stronger role for social systems design as a process for continual engagement of citizen stakeholders, and between these citizens and policy makers, as advocated by Christakis, Ulrich and others. As we have seen power (economic and political) separate from its cultural histories, and become globalized, we may find ourselves in trajectories of action but with marginal power to effect societal outcomes. We are faced with a dual mandate of restorative system design, recovering human needs in our communities, and policy system design, restoring the long historical arc toward democratic governance. And as these are both designable contexts, systemic design can integrate ecological, technological and design thinking to guide policy in more productive ways. • We find ourselves captured in the politics of solutionism. Most presentations of the “problems” as stated before us reveal a trajectory of preferred solutions and their possible shortcomings. • Climate change, even the entire Anthropocene aeonic perspective, represents a problematique of multiple effects systems. We are bound up in political discourses of “system change” and do not share a compelling common view of a flourishing world. We seem unable to reregister the most compelling societal choices and drivers save carbon mitigation. • We have not conducted, to my knowledge, a substantial stakeholder discovery that extends beyond the immediate and obvious primary combatants in the climate change wars. • As citizens and political actors on the planetary stage, we have been afraid or unable to present a clear view of the risk scenarios, possible governance strategies, or a normative plan for serious global investment. If the planet were a business concern, it would be in receivership by now. ]]>
We now find ourselves as a systems thinking community inquiring into planetary governance for climate and ecological politics. The Anthropocene demands a planetary response, and yet we often find even our fellow travelers tethered to discourses of technological management, cultural change, and right action. We might now advocate a stronger role for social systems design as a process for continual engagement of citizen stakeholders, and between these citizens and policy makers, as advocated by Christakis, Ulrich and others. As we have seen power (economic and political) separate from its cultural histories, and become globalized, we may find ourselves in trajectories of action but with marginal power to effect societal outcomes. We are faced with a dual mandate of restorative system design, recovering human needs in our communities, and policy system design, restoring the long historical arc toward democratic governance. And as these are both designable contexts, systemic design can integrate ecological, technological and design thinking to guide policy in more productive ways. • We find ourselves captured in the politics of solutionism. Most presentations of the “problems” as stated before us reveal a trajectory of preferred solutions and their possible shortcomings. • Climate change, even the entire Anthropocene aeonic perspective, represents a problematique of multiple effects systems. We are bound up in political discourses of “system change” and do not share a compelling common view of a flourishing world. We seem unable to reregister the most compelling societal choices and drivers save carbon mitigation. • We have not conducted, to my knowledge, a substantial stakeholder discovery that extends beyond the immediate and obvious primary combatants in the climate change wars. • As citizens and political actors on the planetary stage, we have been afraid or unable to present a clear view of the risk scenarios, possible governance strategies, or a normative plan for serious global investment. If the planet were a business concern, it would be in receivership by now. ]]> Thu, 20 Aug 2015 14:30:17 GMT /slideshow/designing-futures-to-flourish-isss-2015-keynote/51862806 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) Designing Futures to Flourish: ISSS 2015 keynote peterjones We now find ourselves as a systems thinking community inquiring into planetary governance for climate and ecological politics. The Anthropocene demands a planetary response, and yet we often find even our fellow travelers tethered to discourses of technological management, cultural change, and right action. We might now advocate a stronger role for social systems design as a process for continual engagement of citizen stakeholders, and between these citizens and policy makers, as advocated by Christakis, Ulrich and others. As we have seen power (economic and political) separate from its cultural histories, and become globalized, we may find ourselves in trajectories of action but with marginal power to effect societal outcomes. We are faced with a dual mandate of restorative system design, recovering human needs in our communities, and policy system design, restoring the long historical arc toward democratic governance. And as these are both designable contexts, systemic design can integrate ecological, technological and design thinking to guide policy in more productive ways. • We find ourselves captured in the politics of solutionism. Most presentations of the “problems” as stated before us reveal a trajectory of preferred solutions and their possible shortcomings. • Climate change, even the entire Anthropocene aeonic perspective, represents a problematique of multiple effects systems. We are bound up in political discourses of “system change” and do not share a compelling common view of a flourishing world. We seem unable to reregister the most compelling societal choices and drivers save carbon mitigation. • We have not conducted, to my knowledge, a substantial stakeholder discovery that extends beyond the immediate and obvious primary combatants in the climate change wars. • As citizens and political actors on the planetary stage, we have been afraid or unable to present a clear view of the risk scenarios, possible governance strategies, or a normative plan for serious global investment. If the planet were a business concern, it would be in receivership by now. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/isssdesigningfuturesflourish-150820143017-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> We now find ourselves as a systems thinking community inquiring into planetary governance for climate and ecological politics. The Anthropocene demands a planetary response, and yet we often find even our fellow travelers tethered to discourses of technological management, cultural change, and right action. We might now advocate a stronger role for social systems design as a process for continual engagement of citizen stakeholders, and between these citizens and policy makers, as advocated by Christakis, Ulrich and others. As we have seen power (economic and political) separate from its cultural histories, and become globalized, we may find ourselves in trajectories of action but with marginal power to effect societal outcomes. We are faced with a dual mandate of restorative system design, recovering human needs in our communities, and policy system design, restoring the long historical arc toward democratic governance. And as these are both designable contexts, systemic design can integrate ecological, technological and design thinking to guide policy in more productive ways. • We find ourselves captured in the politics of solutionism. Most presentations of the “problems” as stated before us reveal a trajectory of preferred solutions and their possible shortcomings. • Climate change, even the entire Anthropocene aeonic perspective, represents a problematique of multiple effects systems. We are bound up in political discourses of “system change” and do not share a compelling common view of a flourishing world. We seem unable to reregister the most compelling societal choices and drivers save carbon mitigation. • We have not conducted, to my knowledge, a substantial stakeholder discovery that extends beyond the immediate and obvious primary combatants in the climate change wars. • As citizens and political actors on the planetary stage, we have been afraid or unable to present a clear view of the risk scenarios, possible governance strategies, or a normative plan for serious global investment. If the planet were a business concern, it would be in receivership by now.

Designing Futures to Flourish: ISSS 2015 keynote from Peter Jones

]]> 1083 11 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/isssdesigningfuturesflourish-150820143017-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 The Flourishing Cities Framework��Systemic Civil Planning for �an Urban Business Model /slideshow/urban-ecologies-2015-final/49916478 jonesurbanecologies2015final-150627234925-lva1-app6892
Workshop at Urban Ecologies 2015. Today’s participatory design workshop is to learn and employ the Flourishing Cities canvas as a system map for designing civil governance processes. The Flourishing Cities framework adapts a design tool for constructing strongly sustainable business models as a visual organizer for engaging stakeholders in co-creating values-centred operational guidance for urban planners and local governments. This is based on research work developed from OCADU sLab Strongly Sustainable Business Model group as applied to the flourishing of cities and settlements.]]>
Workshop at Urban Ecologies 2015. Today’s participatory design workshop is to learn and employ the Flourishing Cities canvas as a system map for designing civil governance processes. The Flourishing Cities framework adapts a design tool for constructing strongly sustainable business models as a visual organizer for engaging stakeholders in co-creating values-centred operational guidance for urban planners and local governments. This is based on research work developed from OCADU sLab Strongly Sustainable Business Model group as applied to the flourishing of cities and settlements.]]> Sat, 27 Jun 2015 23:49:25 GMT /slideshow/urban-ecologies-2015-final/49916478 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) The Flourishing Cities Framework��Systemic Civil Planning for �an Urban Business Model peterjones Workshop at Urban Ecologies 2015. Today’s participatory design workshop is to learn and employ the Flourishing Cities canvas as a system map for designing civil governance processes. The Flourishing Cities framework adapts a design tool for constructing strongly sustainable business models as a visual organizer for engaging stakeholders in co-creating values-centred operational guidance for urban planners and local governments. This is based on research work developed from OCADU sLab Strongly Sustainable Business Model group as applied to the flourishing of cities and settlements. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jonesurbanecologies2015final-150627234925-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Workshop at Urban Ecologies 2015. Today’s participatory design workshop is to learn and employ the Flourishing Cities canvas as a system map for designing civil governance processes. The Flourishing Cities framework adapts a design tool for constructing strongly sustainable business models as a visual organizer for engaging stakeholders in co-creating values-centred operational guidance for urban planners and local governments. This is based on research work developed from OCADU sLab Strongly Sustainable Business Model group as applied to the flourishing of cities and settlements.

The Flourishing Cities Framework Systemic Civil Planning for an Urban Business Model from Peter Jones

]]> 2646 4 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jonesurbanecologies2015final-150627234925-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 SDD Symposium - Bringing Design to Dialogic Design /slideshow/sdd-systemic-design-principles/49353477 jonessddsystemicdesignprinciples-150613172438-lva1-app6891
Design competencies address many gaps in current SDD practice: - Lack of methods defined for Discovery - Contested ways of enacting Action from planning - Creative approaches to coalition formation - Ability to better adapt & stage practices to differing cultures]]>
Design competencies address many gaps in current SDD practice: - Lack of methods defined for Discovery - Contested ways of enacting Action from planning - Creative approaches to coalition formation - Ability to better adapt & stage practices to differing cultures]]> Sat, 13 Jun 2015 17:24:38 GMT /slideshow/sdd-systemic-design-principles/49353477 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) SDD Symposium - Bringing Design to Dialogic Design peterjones Design competencies address many gaps in current SDD practice: - Lack of methods defined for Discovery �- Contested ways of enacting Action from planning � - Creative approaches to coalition formation �- Ability to better adapt & stage practices to differing cultures <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jonessddsystemicdesignprinciples-150613172438-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Design competencies address many gaps in current SDD practice: - Lack of methods defined for Discovery �- Contested ways of enacting Action from planning � - Creative approaches to coalition formation �- Ability to better adapt & stage practices to differing cultures

SDD Symposium - Bringing Design to Dialogic Design from Peter Jones

]]> 4587 6 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jonessddsystemicdesignprinciples-150613172438-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Systemic Design Principles & Methods (Royal College of Art) /slideshow/systemic-design-principles-methods/48206365 jonesrcasystemicdesignprinciplesmethods-150515205903-lva1-app6891
For a guest lecture for Qian Sun and the RCA Service Design program, April 29, 2015, Talk based on the 10 shared design principles for complex social systems, related to the 2014 paper: https://ocad.academia.edu/PeterJones and http://designdialogues.com/publications/]]>
For a guest lecture for Qian Sun and the RCA Service Design program, April 29, 2015, Talk based on the 10 shared design principles for complex social systems, related to the 2014 paper: https://ocad.academia.edu/PeterJones and http://designdialogues.com/publications/]]> Fri, 15 May 2015 20:59:03 GMT /slideshow/systemic-design-principles-methods/48206365 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) Systemic Design Principles & Methods (Royal College of Art) peterjones For a guest lecture for Qian Sun and the RCA Service Design program, April 29, 2015, Talk based on the 10 shared design principles for complex social systems, related to the 2014 paper: https://ocad.academia.edu/PeterJones and http://designdialogues.com/publications/ <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jonesrcasystemicdesignprinciplesmethods-150515205903-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> For a guest lecture for Qian Sun and the RCA Service Design program, April 29, 2015, Talk based on the 10 shared design principles for complex social systems, related to the 2014 paper: https://ocad.academia.edu/PeterJones and http://designdialogues.com/publications/

Systemic Design Principles & Methods (Royal College of Art) from Peter Jones

]]> 18896 9 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jonesrcasystemicdesignprinciplesmethods-150515205903-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Artifacts for the Systemic Design of Flourishing Enterprises - OCADU Research /slideshow/ocadu-research-flourishing-business/41674592 ocaduflourishingbusiness-141117162600-conversion-gate02
Human commerce utilizes the most significant share of natural resources and produces the largest aggregate impact on the earth’s environment. As a consequence of modern employment and work cultures, commerce, corporations as opposed to governments, also construct much of the social contract and social organizational forms in developed societies. Sustainable development movements to conserve resources and to democratize or enhance organizational practices have called for culture change or transformation. However, these approaches have not yielded results that will significantly enhance human flourishing in the face of globalized commerce, which has no common governance system. We suggest that the goals of alignment toward sustainable development or so-called corporate sustainability are misguided and systemically depreciative, as they purport to sustain activities that foreseeably accelerate ecological degradation. We propose a modeling practice for stakeholder design of strongly sustainable enterprises for the intention of whole system flourishing across living ecosystems and organized social systems. This systemic design approach to business transformation functions at the level of the business model. We claim that business model design affords the highest leverage across all modes of organizing for collective cultural adoption ecosystemic practices.]]>
Human commerce utilizes the most significant share of natural resources and produces the largest aggregate impact on the earth’s environment. As a consequence of modern employment and work cultures, commerce, corporations as opposed to governments, also construct much of the social contract and social organizational forms in developed societies. Sustainable development movements to conserve resources and to democratize or enhance organizational practices have called for culture change or transformation. However, these approaches have not yielded results that will significantly enhance human flourishing in the face of globalized commerce, which has no common governance system. We suggest that the goals of alignment toward sustainable development or so-called corporate sustainability are misguided and systemically depreciative, as they purport to sustain activities that foreseeably accelerate ecological degradation. We propose a modeling practice for stakeholder design of strongly sustainable enterprises for the intention of whole system flourishing across living ecosystems and organized social systems. This systemic design approach to business transformation functions at the level of the business model. We claim that business model design affords the highest leverage across all modes of organizing for collective cultural adoption ecosystemic practices.]]> Mon, 17 Nov 2014 16:26:00 GMT /slideshow/ocadu-research-flourishing-business/41674592 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) Artifacts for the Systemic Design of Flourishing Enterprises - OCADU Research peterjones Human commerce utilizes the most significant share of natural resources and produces the largest aggregate impact on the earth’s environment. As a consequence of modern employment and work cultures, commerce, corporations as opposed to governments, also construct much of the social contract and social organizational forms in developed societies. Sustainable development movements to conserve resources and to democratize or enhance organizational practices have called for culture change or transformation. However, these approaches have not yielded results that will significantly enhance human flourishing in the face of globalized commerce, which has no common governance system. We suggest that the goals of alignment toward sustainable development or so-called corporate sustainability are misguided and systemically depreciative, as they purport to sustain activities that foreseeably accelerate ecological degradation. We propose a modeling practice for stakeholder design of strongly sustainable enterprises for the intention of whole system flourishing across living ecosystems and organized social systems. This systemic design approach to business transformation functions at the level of the business model. We claim that business model design affords the highest leverage across all modes of organizing for collective cultural adoption ecosystemic practices. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/ocaduflourishingbusiness-141117162600-conversion-gate02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Human commerce utilizes the most significant share of natural resources and produces the largest aggregate impact on the earth’s environment. As a consequence of modern employment and work cultures, commerce, corporations as opposed to governments, also construct much of the social contract and social organizational forms in developed societies. Sustainable development movements to conserve resources and to democratize or enhance organizational practices have called for culture change or transformation. However, these approaches have not yielded results that will significantly enhance human flourishing in the face of globalized commerce, which has no common governance system. We suggest that the goals of alignment toward sustainable development or so-called corporate sustainability are misguided and systemically depreciative, as they purport to sustain activities that foreseeably accelerate ecological degradation. We propose a modeling practice for stakeholder design of strongly sustainable enterprises for the intention of whole system flourishing across living ecosystems and organized social systems. This systemic design approach to business transformation functions at the level of the business model. We claim that business model design affords the highest leverage across all modes of organizing for collective cultural adoption ecosystemic practices.

Artifacts for the Systemic Design of Flourishing Enterprises - OCADU Research from Peter Jones

]]> 3294 16 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/ocaduflourishingbusiness-141117162600-conversion-gate02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Systemic Design Principles & Methods ISSS 2014 /slideshow/systemic-design-principles-methods-isss2014/37614714 systemicdesignprinciplesmethodsisss2014-140803092505-phpapp02
Research paper presentation at ISSS 2014: Design Research Methods for Systemic Design: Perspectives from Design Education and Practice The recent development of systemic design as a research-based practice draws on long-held precedents in the system sciences toward representation of complex social and enterprise systems. A precedent article, published as Systemic Design Principles for Complex Social Systems (Jones, 2014) established an axiomatic and epistemological basis for complementary principles shared between design reasoning and systems theory. The current paper aims to establish a basis for identifying shared methods (techne) and action practice (phronesis). Systemic design is distinguished from user-oriented or industrial design practices in terms of its direct relationship to systems theory and explicit adoption of social system design tenets. Systemic design is concerned with higher-order socially-organized systems that encompass multiple subsystems in a complex policy, organizational or product-service context. By integrating systems thinking and its methods, systemic design brings human-centered design to complex, multi-stakeholder service systems as those found in industrial networks, transportation, medicine and healthcare. It adapts from known design competencies - form and process reasoning, social and generative research methods, and sketching and visualization practices - to describe, map, propose and reconfigure complex services and systems. ]]>
Research paper presentation at ISSS 2014: Design Research Methods for Systemic Design: Perspectives from Design Education and Practice The recent development of systemic design as a research-based practice draws on long-held precedents in the system sciences toward representation of complex social and enterprise systems. A precedent article, published as Systemic Design Principles for Complex Social Systems (Jones, 2014) established an axiomatic and epistemological basis for complementary principles shared between design reasoning and systems theory. The current paper aims to establish a basis for identifying shared methods (techne) and action practice (phronesis). Systemic design is distinguished from user-oriented or industrial design practices in terms of its direct relationship to systems theory and explicit adoption of social system design tenets. Systemic design is concerned with higher-order socially-organized systems that encompass multiple subsystems in a complex policy, organizational or product-service context. By integrating systems thinking and its methods, systemic design brings human-centered design to complex, multi-stakeholder service systems as those found in industrial networks, transportation, medicine and healthcare. It adapts from known design competencies - form and process reasoning, social and generative research methods, and sketching and visualization practices - to describe, map, propose and reconfigure complex services and systems. ]]> Sun, 03 Aug 2014 09:25:04 GMT /slideshow/systemic-design-principles-methods-isss2014/37614714 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) Systemic Design Principles & Methods ISSS 2014 peterjones Research paper presentation at ISSS 2014: Design Research Methods for Systemic Design: Perspectives from Design Education and Practice The recent development of systemic design as a research-based practice draws on long-held precedents in the system sciences toward representation of complex social and enterprise systems. A precedent article, published as Systemic Design Principles for Complex Social Systems (Jones, 2014) established an axiomatic and epistemological basis for complementary principles shared between design reasoning and systems theory. The current paper aims to establish a basis for identifying shared methods (techne) and action practice (phronesis). Systemic design is distinguished from user-oriented or industrial design practices in terms of its direct relationship to systems theory and explicit adoption of social system design tenets. Systemic design is concerned with higher-order socially-organized systems that encompass multiple subsystems in a complex policy, organizational or product-service context. By integrating systems thinking and its methods, systemic design brings human-centered design to complex, multi-stakeholder service systems as those found in industrial networks, transportation, medicine and healthcare. It adapts from known design competencies - form and process reasoning, social and generative research methods, and sketching and visualization practices - to describe, map, propose and reconfigure complex services and systems. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/systemicdesignprinciplesmethodsisss2014-140803092505-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Research paper presentation at ISSS 2014: Design Research Methods for Systemic Design: Perspectives from Design Education and Practice The recent development of systemic design as a research-based practice draws on long-held precedents in the system sciences toward representation of complex social and enterprise systems. A precedent article, published as Systemic Design Principles for Complex Social Systems (Jones, 2014) established an axiomatic and epistemological basis for complementary principles shared between design reasoning and systems theory. The current paper aims to establish a basis for identifying shared methods (techne) and action practice (phronesis). Systemic design is distinguished from user-oriented or industrial design practices in terms of its direct relationship to systems theory and explicit adoption of social system design tenets. Systemic design is concerned with higher-order socially-organized systems that encompass multiple subsystems in a complex policy, organizational or product-service context. By integrating systems thinking and its methods, systemic design brings human-centered design to complex, multi-stakeholder service systems as those found in industrial networks, transportation, medicine and healthcare. It adapts from known design competencies - form and process reasoning, social and generative research methods, and sketching and visualization practices - to describe, map, propose and reconfigure complex services and systems.

Systemic Design Principles & Methods ISSS 2014 from Peter Jones

]]> 8212 8 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/systemicdesignprinciplesmethodsisss2014-140803092505-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation 000000 http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Systemic Design Contexts ISSS 2014 /slideshow/systemic-design-contexts-isss-2014/37614713 systemicdesigncontextsisss-140803092502-phpapp02
An agenda for Systemic Design - An emerging research and educational track in systems sciences and design. Peter Jones talk at ISSS 2014 Movements in Design & Systems Thinking Education Movements RSD3 Symposium Systemic Design Research Relationship to Systems Community]]>
An agenda for Systemic Design - An emerging research and educational track in systems sciences and design. Peter Jones talk at ISSS 2014 Movements in Design & Systems Thinking Education Movements RSD3 Symposium Systemic Design Research Relationship to Systems Community]]> Sun, 03 Aug 2014 09:25:02 GMT /slideshow/systemic-design-contexts-isss-2014/37614713 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) Systemic Design Contexts ISSS 2014 peterjones An agenda for Systemic Design - An emerging research and educational track in systems sciences and design. Peter Jones talk at ISSS 2014 Movements in Design & Systems Thinking Education Movements RSD3 Symposium Systemic Design Research Relationship to Systems Community <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/systemicdesigncontextsisss-140803092502-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> An agenda for Systemic Design - An emerging research and educational track in systems sciences and design. Peter Jones talk at ISSS 2014 Movements in Design & Systems Thinking Education Movements RSD3 Symposium Systemic Design Research Relationship to Systems Community

Systemic Design Contexts ISSS 2014 from Peter Jones

]]> 2370 4 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/systemicdesigncontextsisss-140803092502-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation 000000 http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Media Ecology - Technogenic Cultures /slideshow/media-ecology-technogenic-cultures/36518213 meapjonestechnogenic-140701123140-phpapp01
Media Ecology Association, Toronto, June 20, 2014 “We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us” John Culkin, SJ Technogenic cultures, such as ours, demonstrate tightly-coupled economic systems with cultural production. This has become a self-reinforcing societal process, where the production of technological efficiencies becomes an inviolable social good desirable as product of culture. ]]>
Media Ecology Association, Toronto, June 20, 2014 “We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us” John Culkin, SJ Technogenic cultures, such as ours, demonstrate tightly-coupled economic systems with cultural production. This has become a self-reinforcing societal process, where the production of technological efficiencies becomes an inviolable social good desirable as product of culture. ]]> Tue, 01 Jul 2014 12:31:40 GMT /slideshow/media-ecology-technogenic-cultures/36518213 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) Media Ecology - Technogenic Cultures peterjones Media Ecology Association, Toronto, June 20, 2014 “We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us” John Culkin, SJ Technogenic cultures, such as ours, demonstrate tightly-coupled economic systems with cultural production. This has become a self-reinforcing societal process, where the production of technological efficiencies becomes an inviolable social good desirable as product of culture. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/meapjonestechnogenic-140701123140-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Media Ecology Association, Toronto, June 20, 2014 “We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us” John Culkin, SJ Technogenic cultures, such as ours, demonstrate tightly-coupled economic systems with cultural production. This has become a self-reinforcing societal process, where the production of technological efficiencies becomes an inviolable social good desirable as product of culture.

Media Ecology - Technogenic Cultures from Peter Jones

]]> 1771 6 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/meapjonestechnogenic-140701123140-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 DwD Civic Empower Berlin /slideshow/dwd-civic-empower-berlin/15434144 dwdcivicpowerberlin-121130170447-phpapp01
]]>
]]> Fri, 30 Nov 2012 17:04:47 GMT /slideshow/dwd-civic-empower-berlin/15434144 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) DwD Civic Empower Berlin peterjones <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/dwdcivicpowerberlin-121130170447-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

DwD Civic Empower Berlin from Peter Jones

]]> 2657 5 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/dwdcivicpowerberlin-121130170447-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Medlove 2012 Berlin: Design for Community Care /slideshow/medlove-2012-berlin-design-for-community-care/15357618 designforcommunitycarepublic-121126152158-phpapp01
]]>
]]> Mon, 26 Nov 2012 15:21:56 GMT /slideshow/medlove-2012-berlin-design-for-community-care/15357618 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) Medlove 2012 Berlin: Design for Community Care peterjones <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/designforcommunitycarepublic-121126152158-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

Medlove 2012 Berlin: Design for Community Care from Peter Jones

]]> 1446 3 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/designforcommunitycarepublic-121126152158-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Designing the Systems Sciences - AHO, Oslo, Oct 2012 /slideshow/designing-the-systems-sciences-aho-oslo-oct-2012/14806265 designingsystemssciencesv3-121019155354-phpapp02
]]>
]]> Fri, 19 Oct 2012 15:53:53 GMT /slideshow/designing-the-systems-sciences-aho-oslo-oct-2012/14806265 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) Designing the Systems Sciences - AHO, Oslo, Oct 2012 peterjones <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/designingsystemssciencesv3-121019155354-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

Designing the Systems Sciences - AHO, Oslo, Oct 2012 from Peter Jones

]]> 1589 4 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/designingsystemssciencesv3-121019155354-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Dialogic Design for Foresight : DwD Workshop /slideshow/dialogic-design-for-foresight-dwd-workshop/14281870 dwdurbanicf-120913194104-phpapp02
]]>
]]> Thu, 13 Sep 2012 19:41:02 GMT /slideshow/dialogic-design-for-foresight-dwd-workshop/14281870 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) Dialogic Design for Foresight : DwD Workshop peterjones <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/dwdurbanicf-120913194104-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

Dialogic Design for Foresight : DwD Workshop from Peter Jones

]]> 2598 4 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/dwdurbanicf-120913194104-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 ISSS Language-Action Perspective Basics /slideshow/isss-languageaction-perspective-basics/13727907 issslapconvdesign-120723083423-phpapp01
]]>
]]> Mon, 23 Jul 2012 08:34:21 GMT /slideshow/isss-languageaction-perspective-basics/13727907 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) ISSS Language-Action Perspective Basics peterjones <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/issslapconvdesign-120723083423-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

ISSS Language-Action Perspective Basics from Peter Jones

]]> 1682 5 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/issslapconvdesign-120723083423-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 ISSS Visual Languages in Systemic Design /slideshow/isss-visual-languages-in-systemic-design/13727867 isssvisuallanguagesystemsv3-120723083043-phpapp01
]]>
]]> Mon, 23 Jul 2012 08:30:42 GMT /slideshow/isss-visual-languages-in-systemic-design/13727867 peterjones@slideshare.net(peterjones) ISSS Visual Languages in Systemic Design peterjones <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/isssvisuallanguagesystemsv3-120723083043-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

ISSS Visual Languages in Systemic Design from Peter Jones

]]> 2983 11 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/isssvisuallanguagesystemsv3-120723083043-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/profile-photo-peterjones-48x48.jpg?cb=1621433014 I live and work in Toronto, and lead Redesign Network, focusing on service and system design for information intensive work practices. We also are a practice centre for Dialogic Design, a systemic dialogue practice that helps organizations collaborate to reach consensus in planning and action for complex problems. I am an associate professor at OCAD U in the MDes Strategic Foresight and Innovation program and the Design for Health MDes. I'm known for the RSD Symposia series http://systemic-design.net and Design for Care, the Rosenfeld book on design in healthcare http://designforcare.com designdialogues.com https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jonessdtoolkitworkshop-190414233853-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds slideshow/systemic-design-toolkit-systems-innovation-barcelona/140800616 Systemic Design Toolki... https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hmwsimplexityasdesigncharrette-190414231038-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds slideshow/how-might-we-simplexity-in-design-charrettes/140799412 How Might We: Simplexi... https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jonesant2017stakeholdervariety-190414230605-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds slideshow/anticipation-2017-assembling-requisite-stakeholder-variety/140799211 Anticipation 2017 Asse...