- Sep 2022
Yolanda Gibb: How a mindset of Ambidextrous Creativity can get you generating AND exploiting your ideas?
Ambidextrous creativity is having a balance between exploration and subsequent exploitation of those explorations.
Small companies and individuals are good at exploration, but often less good at exploitation.
Triple loop learning<br /> this would visually form a spiral (versus overlap)<br /> - Single loop learning: doing things right (correcting mistakes)<br /> - double loop learning: doing the right things (causality)<br /> - triple loop learning: why these systems and processes (learning to learn)
Assets<br /> Relational capital * Structural capital - pkm is part of this<br /> there's value in a well structured PKM for a particualr thing as it's been used and tested over time; this is one of the issues with LYT or Second Brain (PARA, et al.) how well-tested are these? How well designed?<br /> * Structural capital is the part that stays at the office when all the people have gone home * Human Capital
4 Es of cognition<br /> * embodied * embedded * enacted * extended<br /> by way of extra-cranial processes
Yolanda Gibb's book<br /> Entrepreneurship, Neurodiversity & Gender: Exploring Opportunities for Enterprise and Self-employment As Pathways to Fulfilling Lives https://www.amazon.com/Entrepreneurship-Neurodiversity-Gender-Opportunities-Self-employment/dp/1800430582
Tools: - Ryyan - for literature searches - NVIVO - Obsidian - many others including getting out into one's environment
a software program used for qualitative and mixed-methods research. Specifically, it is used for the analysis of unstructured text, audio, video, and image data, including (but not limited to) interviews, focus groups, surveys, social media, and journal articles.
Ryyan<br /> https://www.rayyan.ai/<br /> for organizing, managing, and accelerating collaborative literature reviews
- ambidextrous creativity
- Yolanda Gibb
- triple loop learning
- personal knowledge management
- wicked problems
- literature review
- Apr 2022
Wicked problems of sustainability, such as poverty, hunger, and climate change, are common throughout society (United Nations Assembly, 2015)
This is a finding from the UN's 2015 assembly.
- Jan 2019
In the world of planning and wicked problems no such immunity is tolerated. Here the aim is not to find the truth, but to improve some characteristics of the world where people live. Planners are liable for the consequences of the actions they generate; the effects can matter a great deal to those people that are touched by those actions.
"Proposition 10: The planner has no right to be wrong"
In dealing with wicked problems, the modes of reasoning used in the argument are much richer than those permissible in the scientific discourse. Because of the essential uniqueness of the problem (see Proposition 7) and lacking opportunity for rigorous experimentation (see Proposition 5), it is not possible to put H to a crucial test.
"Proposition 9: The existence of a discrepancy representing a wicked problem can be explained in numerous ways. The choice of explanation determines the nature of the problem resolution."
Here lies a difficulty with incrementalism, as well. This doctrine advertises a policy of small steps, in the hope of contributing systematically to overall improvement. If, however, the problem is attacked on too low a level (an increment), then success of resolution may result in making things worse, because it may become more difficult to deal with the higher problems. Marginal improvement does not guarantee overall improvement.
"Proposition 8: Every wicked problem can be considered to be a symptom of another problem"
Of course, for any two problems at least one distinguishing property can be found (just as any number of properties can be found which they share in common), and each of them is therefore unique in a trivial sense. But by "'essentially unique" we mean that, despite long lists of similarities between a current problem and a previous one, there always might be an additional distinguishing property that is of overriding importance. Part of the art of dealing with wicked problems is the art of not knowing too early which type of solution to apply.
"Proposition 7: Every wicked problem is essentially unique"
In such fields of ill-defined problems and hence ill-definable solutions, the set of feasible plans of action relies on realistic judgment, the capability to appraise "exotic" ideas and on the amount of trust and credibility between planner and clientele that wilt lead to the conclusion, "OK let's try that."
"Proposition 5: Wicked problems do not have enumerable (or an exhaustively describable) set of potential solutions, nor is there a well-described set of permissible operations that may be incorporated into the plan"
Whenever actions are effectively irreversible and whenever the half-lives of the consequences are long, every trial counts. And every attempt to reverse a decision or to correct for the undesired consequences poses another set of wicked problems, which are in turn subject to the same dilemmas.
"Proposition 5: Every solution to a wicked problem is a 'one-shot operation'; because there is no opportunity to learn by trial-and-error, every attempt counts significantly"
With wicked problems, on the other hand, any solution, after being implemented, will generate waves of consequences over an extended--virtually an unbounded-- period of time.
"Proposition 4: There is no immediate and no ultimate test of a solution to a wicked problem"
The planner terminates work on a wicked problem, not for reasons inherent in the "logic" of the problem. He stops for considerations that are external to the problem: he runs out of time, or money, or patience.
"Proposition 2: Wicked problems have no stopping rule"
Evokes the notion of a last-mile form of satisficing.
For wicked planning problems, there are no true or false answers. Normally, many parties are equally equipped, interested, and/or entitled to judge the solutions, although none has the power to set formal decision rules to determine correctness. Their judgments are likely to differ widely to accord with their group or personal interests, their special value-sets, and their ideological predilections. Their assess- ments of proposed solutions are expressed as "good" or "bad" or, more likely, as "better or worse" or "satisfying" or "good enough."
"Proposition 3: Solutions to wicked problems are not true-or-false, but bad-or-good"
Yep, "good enough" is the satisficing threshold.
The information needed to understand the problem depends upon one's idea for solving it. That is to say: in order to describe a wicked-problem in sufficient detail, one has to develop an exhaustive inventory of all conceivable solutions ahead of time. The reason is that every question asking for additional information depends upon the understanding of the problem--and its resolution--at that time. Problem understanding and problem resolution are con- comitant to each other. Therefore, in order to anticipate all questions (in order to anticipate all information required for resolution ahead of time), knowledge of all conceivable solutions is required.
"Proposition 1: There is no definitive formulation of a wicked problem"
The formulation of a wicked problem is the problem! The process of formulating the problem and of conceiving a solution (or re-solution) are identical, since every specification of the problem is a specification of the direction in which a treatment is considered.
Context of the problem space and of potential soultions is also important here. Understanding the context also points the way toward participatory design and critical reflective thinking.
By now we are all beginning to realize that one of the most intractable problems is that of defining problems (of knowing what distinguishes an observed condition from a desired condition) and of locating problems (finding where in the complex causal networks the trouble really lies). In turn, and equally intractable, is the problem of identifying the actions that might effectively narrow the gap between what-is and what-ought-to-be.
Defining problems to solve and gaps to narrow remains a challenge in public policy, as well as science,
- Jan 2018
Pero la pregunta de la relación entre el diseño y la creación de órdenes sociales profundamente desiguales, insensibles y destructivos parece seguir siendo el ‘problema perverso’ del diseño.
- Jun 2017
For the task is not one of calculating the effi-ciency of different possible means toward an already determined end. It often involves,rather, deliberation about the end itself – about what would count as a satisfactory,or at least not entirely unacceptable, outcome to a particular “case.” And it may onlybe by action – and not, in the end, by any purely analytic process – that thisdeliberation can really be followed through.