Solutions to Complex Problems
 |
| Microsoft 'Idea' from Clip Art| |
which change the way we do things. That innovative
idea can
evade discovery from many people. The
answer, the innovation, often is staring them
in their
faces; one of those, ‘Why didn’t I think of that?”
moments! Complex
problem solutions are more
effective solved pooling resources of more than
one
person.
process (SDDP) in their paper The New Angora. The SDDP
recognizes the
multiple differences brought to the table by a group of people from various
cultures and experiences. Through a structured process of gathering ideas,
recognizing the inter-dependencies of potential solutions, and translating the
terminology and conceptual understanding into a common language, a group can optimize a
solution accepted by all.
SDDP is actually another hybrid
of the Delphi Method; an interactive process gathering data, evaluating, taking
another look and refining. The Delphi methods cycle to an accepted point of
exhausted back and forth data and refining. The SDDP is more structured and
facilitated to override the existing human flaws inherited through differences
in language, culture, and experience. The SDDP makes a point of directly
analyzing the differences caused by different individual thought processes,
language specific to a culture, and knowledge and understanding molded through
individuals’ life and education. Facilitation of the Delphi process was not
originally set up to account for these differences; the Delphi process relies
on group centered on a particular area of expertise. SDDP attempts to
accommodate the interests of the group participating in the solution, and blend all participants into a common understanding.
Organizational behaviorists
determined several decades ago a limit to the number a manager, or a
facilitator, or a teacher can appropriately manage in a group. The Delphi
Methods recognized this fact with inputs from small to large groups. The New
Media Consortium method utilizes the Internet, which the SDDP recognized, but
with an open format of all members and a cadre of individual that rotate to
referee the inputs and disseminate to all participants.
With experiences facilitators for
subgroups in the SDDP the same factors of spread think and EPE come into to
play although hidden in their subconscious. Educational systems and social
cultural factors after years of built up experience are hard to eliminate. The
forces are inherent in any innovative process.
Perhaps
Sherden, in Future Sellers recommendation to weed out forecasts without the
technological and trend base can provide a more sound approach to innovation. Sherden
suggests empowering a group’s members, somewhat bounded by guiding principles.
An open culture where information is shared offers an organizational climate
that encourages the motivation to participate, and a sense of being an equal
part of the group. To me, this sounds very similar to the way that the NMC
determines their technology forecasts.
References
Christakis,
A. The SDP Process
Follett,
K. P. (2007). New agora: new geometry of
languaging and new technology of democracy: the structured design dialogue
process. Int. Journal of Applied Systemic Studies, Vol. 1
Sherden,
W. A. (1998). Fortune Sellers
Vigdor
Schreibman and Alexander N. Christakis
New
Agora: New Geometry of Languaging And New Technology of Democracy: The
Structured Design Dialogue Process
