Great! But what's involved in being a good, easily-useable prototype? What resources are available for him and for those who might seek to replicate his endeavor, either in all specifics, or in some aspects? Suppose a young musician in Brazil wants to use Simon's school as a prototype for something in his city slum. Where does he start?
The traditional method when there is a particularly successful pioneering effort in some social system, such as a business, organization, school, or program, is that others interested in adopting it travel, visit onsite, observe, study, have conversations, take notes, then go back home and try to duplicate the system. Sometimes the new effort writes itself up, describes its history and current situation, and publishes that, even engages in teaching and spreading it. (Such as Brian Robertson with Holacracy and holacracy.org). Or others do the writeup and help spread the word, the description of the project/endeavor/creation. (For example Frederic Laloux in Reinventing Organizations. See especially pp. 206-7.)
But does anyone, on either side, understand exactly what makes the innovative system successful? Does anyone know what is essential, and what is actually not essential, to success in some other social setting or context? Does anyone really have a complete description of the parameters relevant to success? Does anyone know what parameters can be tweaked, and still have success elsewhere, or how far they can be tweaked? (Seeking answers to these questions about certain highly successful pioneers in human consciousness transformation is what led to the creation of Neurolinguistic Programming, a highly successful meta-model.) Does anyone know which kinds of parameters would have to be adapted to the new situation, and how to do that and preserve whatever is essential to success? Does "success" even need to look the same in both situations?
Let's zoom out a bit. Why is this an important issue? As we look around our world, we see old systems dying, dissolving, being plowed under. New systems, mostly spontaneous, organic emergents on the grassroots level, abound. By the hundreds of thousands, if Paul Hawken is correct. Many of them have served as prototypes for others. Or want to. Or will want to. Or will be asked to.
If we want our new world "online" as quickly, easily, inexpensively, and ecologically-balanced with all other human and natural systems rapidly appearing in the same world, then we had best pay some attention to the process of prototyping: how to make it efficient and effective, in as many different situations and contexts as possible.
Is there some better alternative to self-descriptions and others' descriptions? If not, and it seems not, then what would be involved in creating/co-creating something?
There are a budding number of endeavors which seek to help grassroots organizations/projects synergize with one another. (Hawken's Wiser.org, and the proposed ASELF Vision, are two of many). What framework or meta-model do they use to accomplish that? I don't know yet.
What I do know is that "my hair is on fire" with this quest, this new (additional) ministry for my church.
Based on what I learned about Simon's endeavor, in an evening presentation he made, I created (and shared with him which he found helpful) a "description" of his project which is in terms that might translate to a similar project elsewhere, but this was just a guess at the relevant parameters. Also, it didn't take into account Simon himself; could someone without his unique constellation of experiences, contacts, and personal wisdom and knowledge, pull off the same success? No way to predict what it would take.
So, what's next, what's next? Is there even such a thing possible, as I am imagining, which might be useful in a variety of situations? Is this quest quixotic? There actually might not be any useful meta-models for prototyping which are of sufficient generality to be helpful. I'm betting there are. Do you know of anyone who is engaged in this inquiry?
I seek to gather any information you might have, relevant to this quest. And your reflections, comments, questions, suggestions, cautions, etc.
Naturally, I'm thinking about a Second-Tier approach to this Holy Grail "Meta-model for Prototyping Small Social Systems."
Here's one Turquoise-consciousness consideration, although it could be phrased in other terms:
A prototype cannot be transplanted or seeded into non-fertile soil. That soil not only includes various factors in all 4 quadrants, it also includes whether there is something in the new place's energetic field which offers fertile soil. Or, to use a new buzzword, the new endeavor has to be already-emergent, energetically, for worldly success in implementing a prototype to assist its emergence.
It seems to be part of the approach of Apithology (Will Varey, Founder)
in considering various factors in facilitating a system toward greater thriving, to assess what is "emergent" and I am wondering whether in this way, and other ways, Apithology might have something to offer my quest.
by Rev. Alia Aurami, Ph.D., Head Minister, Amplifying Divine Light in All Church
"Amplifying Divine Light in All" is a completely independent church fostering empowerment of people to co-create loving, thriving God-realized lives, and wellbeing for everyone, on a clean, peaceful Earth.
Our main religious purpose and mission is to amplify the Divine Light in everyone. When you read this blogpost, you will agree or disagree with its various points, and find new insights, and then you will know more about what is true for you. Knowing more of your own Truth amplifies your Divine Light. Thus providing/presenting this blogpost is one way for us to accomplish our purpose and mission.
This blogpost and our providing/presenting it are therefore a central and essential part of our exercise and practice of our religion.
None of the contents herein are claimed as absolute truth. They represent one possible perspective which might prove useful for you.
All rights reserved under the Common Law. This means please respect our creatorship.