Web Video & Global Innovation

Coming from a little behind in posting assignments :0) this TED talk is given by Chris Anderson on How web video powers global innovation.

Chris's very interesting talk is about how the web has created what he calls "Crowd Accelerated Innovation"

Take a look and see what you think.

This is a good example of how the forces of social media and technological innovation can be put to use as a somewhat educational venue.  Good in some aspects a little strange in others.

My 30 second video on HWAPs

This weeks assignment was to produce a video of a future innovation.  I have worked with weather and computers for many years and I have been interested in holographics.

I have always envisioned combining the two sciences Holography and Meteorology.  The first picture in the video is of an SDHS system or Satellite Data Handling System. A system I helped pioneer 20 years ago for the DoD's Air Weather Service.

With the help of Iron Man and a little photoshop work, this 30 sec video will,  I hope, show you my vision of future weather analysis using holographic projection - Holographic Weather Analysis and Prediction system (HWAPs). How weather analysis and holographics have progressed and where I believe we could be in the future giving Meteorologists more information to provide more precise forecasts and longer lead times for severe weather warning.



Make your own photo slideshow at Animoto.

New Agora

The New Agora paper states that there are seven modules to the architecture of SDDP which are comprised of 31 component constraints as stated in Schreibman and Christakis’   New Agora: New Geometry of Languaging  and New Technology of Democracy: *The Structured Design Dialogue Process:

1. 6 Consensus Methods: (1) Nominal Group Technique (NGT), (2)

Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM), (3) DELPHI, (4) OPtions Field, (5)

Options Profile, and (6) Trade-off Analysis (Years 1972-1982);

2. 7 Language Patterns: (1) Eelemental observations; (3) Problématique,

(3) Influence tree-pattern, (4) OPtions field pattern, (5) OPtions

profile/scenario pattern, (6) Superposition pattern, and (7) Action plan

pattern (Years 1970-1980);

3. 3 Application Time Phases: (1) Discovery, (2) Designing, and (3) Action

(Years 1989-2001;

4. 3 Key Role Responsibilities: (1) Context—Inquiry Design Team, (2)

Content— Stakeholders/Designers, and (3) Process—Facilitation Team

(Years 1982-2002);

5. 4 Stages of Interactive Inquiry: (1) Definition or Anticipation, (2) Design

of Alternatives, (3) Decision, and (4) Action Planning (Years 1989-1995);

6. Collaborative Software and Facility (Years 1981-1995);

7. 6 Dialogue Laws: (1) Requisite Variety )Ashby), (2) Parsimony (Miller),

(3) Saliency (Boulding), (4) Meaning and Wisdom (Peirce, (5)

Authenticity and Autonomy (Tsivacou), and (6) Evolutionary Learning

(Dye) (Years 2001-2003).

This architecture is built around the basis of the following:

4 Axioms to Assure Sound Foundations for the Science:

·       COMPLEXITY: We live in a world that is very complex.  Most observers are confused.  Social systems design issues are strongly interconnected (Warfield).

·       PARSIMONY: Human cognition & attention is limited.  Human beings are usually overloaded in group design meetings leading to bad designs (Simon).

·       SALIENCY: The field of options in designing social systems is multidimensional. Salient synthesis is difficult (Boulding).

·       ENGAGEMENT: Disregarding the participation of the stakeholders in designing social systems is unethical, and the designs are bound to fail (Ozbekhan).

o   However Stakeholders tend to try and solve a problem before its complexity is fully understood, but how complex is complex?

The Situational Complexity Index is defined as

            DK (N-7) / R (R-1)  where D = (V-5) / (N-5)

N = Number of total observations by all observers

R = Number of observations INCLUDED IN THE PROBLEMATIQUE (Influence Map)

V = Number of observations with 1 or more votes

K = Number of DISTINCT links among observations

D = Divergence or “spread think” of importance votes

_________________________________

7 is the “Miller number” (7 ± 2) “which is the limited individual capacity for short-term processing of information” and 5 is the “Warfield  spread think number”

6 Methods to Build Consensus :

1)     Nominal Group Technique

2)     Interpretive Structural Modeling

3)     DELPHI

4)     Options Field

5)     Options Profile

6)     Trade-off Analysis  

7 Patterns of Graphic Language:

1)     Elemental Observation

2)     Problematique (A mess)

3)     Influence Tree (Root Cause Map)

4)     Options Field

5)     Options Profile / Scenario

6)     Superposition Pattern

7)     Action Plan Pattern  

4 Stages of Interactive Inquiry:

1)     Definition or Anticipation

2)     Design of Alternatives

3)     Decision

4)     Action Planning  

7 Laws of Effective Dialogue

1)     Requisite Variety (Ashby)

2)     Requisite Parsimony (Miller, Warfield)

3)     Requisite Saliency (Boulding)

4)     Requisite Meaning & Wisdom (Peirce)

5)     Requisite Authenticity & Autonomy (Tsivacou)

6)     Requisite Evolutionary Learning (Dye)

Schreibman and Christakis show 6 Laws of Dialogue but

Christakis added a 7^th law in his presentation on Harnessing Collective Wisdom.

7)     Requisite Action (Laouris) 

My area of interest or innovation is in combining meteorology and holographic projection or Holographic Weather Analysis and Prediction system (HWAPs) as I call it.  Using the SDDP method I am considering on using the Delphi approach in building my consensus, with an options/scenario pattern of graphic language; definition and anticipation type inquiry and the requisite evolutionary learning.

New Agora Paper
http://www.harnessingcollectivewisdom.com/pdf/newagora.pdf