Thanks Alejandra,
The section in it by Raul Espejo is great (as usual!)
Best regards,
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alejandra Poblete
Sent: Sunday, 8 February 2015 7:01 PM
To: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subject: Re: Beer's Viable Systems Model
Dear all, in order to collaborate with the main issue: "the way Viable Systems Model can be used for the design field as a whole" I am sending a link where you can view (and also download) a very good document about the work done by S. Beer in Chile, sponsored by president Salvador Allende in the period 1971-1973, called CYBERSYN (Synergy/Cybernetics-Multinode/Metagame).
Unfortunately this plan was abruptly interrupted due to the militar coup.
here is the link:
http://mediatecalibre.cl/wp-content/files_flutter/1310486753catalogocybersyn.pdf
best wishes
...........................................
Alejandra Poblete P.
COMUNICACIÓN VISUAL
of: 223251239
móvil - whatsapp: +56996896490
2015-02-06 18:39 GMT-03:00 Ken Friedman <[log in to unmask]>:
> Dear Terry,
>
> Your reply is long. To me, it seems somewhat confused. It leaves me
> with the same questions I had earlier.
>
> First, let me clarify a mistake concerning an assumption you
> mistakenly attribute to me. You [Terry Love] write, "you [Ken
> Friedman] assume this can only be done through the formal
> organisations such as IASDR, universities and design organisations, I see otherwise."
>
> This is not my assumption. I was responding to your earlier post. You
> [Terry Love] wrote about Beer’s VSM with respect to organisations,
> discussing “the level of IASDR and international strategic planning
> about design practices, research and education.” This is your phrase, not mine.
> Strategic planning takes place within organisations.
>
> In responding to your statement, I explained that IASDR is not the
> kind of organisation that can address these issues. You raised the
> issue of organisations and international strategic planning. Beer
> designed his model for this kind of organisational use. The problem is
> that it doesn’t work for an entire field.
>
> You state that Beer’s Viable Systems Model can be used for the design
> field as a whole. You do not state how. I asked you to explain “how.”
>
> My seven questions were 1) How are we to use Stafford Beer’s Viable
> Systems Model to solve the problems of the design field? It would help
> to have a few clear definitions along with way. 2) What is Stafford
> Beer’s Viable Systems Model as you see it? I have a sense of what Beer
> meant by VSM in The Brain of the Firm, but he applies his model to
> coherent, bounded organisations. I can’t see how to apply VSM to a
> system that has no managerial function or governing system. Perhaps
> you can define Beer’s VSM in a way that explains how to apply it to
> the design field as a field. 3) What do you mean by the proper noun
> [D]esign as distinct from the design field? 4) Which agencies or
> organisations are responsibility for “international strategic planning
> about design practices, research and education”? 5) How do you propose
> that these organisations apply Beer’s VSM? 6) Or, to put it another
> way, what do you (Terry Love) see as the “specific cultural and organisational failings or organisational illnesses”
> of the design field? 7) How can we use Beer’s VSM to change this situation?
>
> You apparently do not believe that it is necessary to answer questions
> 4 and 5. You say that it is possible to apply Beer’s Viable Systems
> Model to the field of design. Please explain how this is to be done.
>
> If you drop the questions about formal organisations, I’d welcome an
> answer to the remaining five questions: 1) How can we use Beer’s
> Viable Systems Model to solve the problems of the design field? 2)
> Please define Beer’s Viable Systems Model as you see it. Using
> undefined terms from the model transforms Beer’s ideas into jargon —
> for example, “ elements 2, 3, 3*, 4 and 5." It would help if you
> define Beer’s VSM in a way that explains how to apply it to the design
> field as a field. 3) What do you mean by the proper noun [D]esign as
> distinct from the design field? 6) What do you (Terry Love) see as the
> “specific cultural and organisational failings or organisational
> illnesses” of the design field? 7) How can we use Beer’s VSM to change this situation?
>
> Yours,
>
> Ken
>
> Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The
> Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Elsevier
> in Cooperation with Tongji University Press | Launching in 2015
>
> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and
> Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University
> Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne
> University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
>
> Email [log in to unmask] | Academia
> http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I
> http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 2015Feb06, at 21:24, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ken,
> >
> > Thanks for your clarification and questions.
> >
> > There are many difficulties in exploring and planning using in the
> > realm
> of high-level views over the dynamic picture of design activity in the
> world as it evolves.
> >
> > Part of this problem is in language as Klaus and others might point out.
> Most of the language and concepts relating to design activity are
> aimed at lower more practical realms of human behaviour and cognition
> of individual designers, small groups, and the properties of design outputs.
> >
> > One way of seeing things is this traditional emphasis in the design
> discourse on the small-scale has hijacked many terms and concepts to
> that end, making it harder to see and discuss the larger-scale because
> the terminology has become interpreted as if only refers to the
> smaller-scale (designers and designs). Focusing only on trees makes it
> hard to see the forests, mountains and oceans
> >
> > When focusing on the larger-scale, there are other problems that get
> > in
> the way. One is the assumption that dynamic behaviours in realms of
> activity can only be shaped by formal organisational institutions.
> Concomitant with this is the assumption authority and management of
> change is solely vested with formally defined organisations that have
> agreed arrangements for authority and interaction supported by power
> of law. With these assumptions, it makes sense to ask as you did,
> whether particular design institutions exist to be able to dictate the
> pathways of development of design fields.
> >
> > I suggest there is a bigger view that is both more accurate and more
> useful and that enables us to go beyond the limitations of what is
> possible through and by formal organisations.
> >
> > The development of design activity over time can be seen in terms of
> > a
> bigger picture that includes all and everything that influences how
> design activity is undertaken.
> >
> > This bigger picture includes much more of human activity in the
> > world
> than the formally-defined institutions of design (design
> organisations, design businesses, design education programs, design
> research groups, government design policy institutes, design standards
> institutes etc.). It also includes many activities not directly
> associated with design that influence future directions in design. For
> example, lowering of energy costs can result in more money being
> available for design activity. Whilst much of this kind of picture is
> at the *level* of operation of organisations such as IASDR or ASME, it
> doesn’t assume that it is these organisations that *must* do the work.
> Instead it draws attention to how improvements can be made outside such formal organisations.
> >
> > Different kinds of concepts and theories are needed to explore this
> > big
> picture of the dynamic factors inside and outside the design arena
> that influence the future of design activity. The concepts and tools
> specialised for
> >
> > Some time ago, I coined the term 'design infrastructure' to help
> > address
> this issue of language for research and meta-analysis when taking a
> larger national and international view of design activity. Even this
> big concept of 'design infrastructure' is insufficient, however, when
> taking a larger scale view of design activity that includes the
> abstract conceptualisation of the dynamics of human relationships,
> organisational structures and other factors that shape how design
> activity emerges and is developed in the world, with its
> outputs(designs) and outcomes (consequences in the world of those designs).
> >
> > As you commented, it is difficult to manage discussion using the
> existing language of design. It needs very precise and careful use of
> language to avoid the drift into interpreting concepts as being
> small-scale. You were right, I wasn’t as careful as I should have been
> in my last post.
> >
> > One way of addressing the language problem of the larger scale
> > picture
> of design is though the language of ecology. The simplest big picture
> of design activity, perhaps, is to see the overall situation involving
> design activity as a large eco-system of different forms of
> dynamically changing organisations (some formal and some not) in which
> some of the activity of the different eco-system elements influences how design activity occurs.
> >
> > A PART of this eco-system is the world's design businesses, design
> schools, design research groups, design policy and standard making
> institutions, design research and business organisations such as DRS,
> ASME, ICOGRADA, IED, design journals and conferences, and any
> organisation of any sort with design in its name.
> >
> > A perhaps larger part consists of all the other factors (with their
> > own
> forms of organisation) that act to influence how design activity
> occurs and dynamically develops over time, in a variety of ways in different contexts.
> >
> > Taking the above together leads to three questions:
> >
> > Q1. How do we best represent this large complex picture of the
> > factors
> acting and influencing the dynamic development of design activity?
> >
> > Q2. How can we influence this large complex picture of the factors
> acting and influencing the dynamic development of design activity? In
> particular, how do we appropriately influence the majority of factors
> that are beyond the scope of the formal design organisations?
> >
> > Q3. How do we predict the consequences of interventions in this
> > large
> complex picture of the factors acting and influencing the dynamic
> development of design activity so that what we do results in better
> rather than worse outcomes?
> >
> > From this questions and this big picture viewpoint it seems obvious
> > that
> individuals in any position can act in many ways to provide influences
> to improve future development of design activity (phd-design is an
> example). I suggest necessarily such influences mostly occur outside
> the existing formal organisations related to design practices, education and research.
> >
> > It is in this latter context that theories and tools such as Beer's
> > VSM
> become useful.
> >
> > You asked how I envisaged Beer's VSM to be used in “international
> strategic planning about design practices, research and education”.
> >
> > Whereas you assume this can only be done through the formal
> organisations such as IASDR, universities and design organisations, I
> see otherwise.
> >
> > Anyone, anywhere and anytime can map any realm of design activity
> > onto
> Beer's VSM, identify the pathologies and act to influence improved
> development of design in that realm by acting to reduce those pathologies.
> >
> > I described in the earlier posts how mapping various realms of
> > design
> activity showed a general pattern of weakness in design organisations
> in systems elements 2, 3, 3*, 4 and 5 of Beer's VSM.
> >
> > There are many actions and activities one can undertake as a result
> > of
> identifying such issues. For example, taking leadership to act to
> raise the issues and promote integration of technical and
> non-technical design would be acting to improve the viability of
> design by improving Beer's system element 3.
> >
> > Developing new strategies to provide information from the different
> technical and non-technical streams of design practices to provide
> information to the business managers of design organisations would
> assist with developing and strengthening systems element 3*.
> >
> > Working to gather information from outside of design realms and
> > analyse
> its potential for improving how design activity might be undertaken or
> improving design outcomes would provide new information to guide
> strategy-making and business development. That is, it would strengthen
> system element 4 in Beer's VSM.
> >
> > Ditto for other activities to strengthen system elements 2, 3, 3*, 4
> > and
> 5 in Beer's VSM.
> >
> > Beer's VSM provides a very clear visual representation for designers
> > of
> what is needed for highly complex situations to be viable, including
> the combination of formal and informal organisational structures that
> deliver designs.
> >
> > I suggest Beer's VSM is a tool that can be used by almost anyone to
> identify ways of improving design outcomes and the viability of their
> design-related organisation, and acting to improve the viability of
> that organisation.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Terry
> >
> > --
> > Dr Terence Love
> > PhD (UWA), B.A. (Hons) Engin, PGCE. FDRS, AMIMechE, MISI
> >
> > Honorary Fellow
> > Institute of Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Development Management
> > School Lancaster University Bailrigg, Lancaster, UK
> >
> > Love Services Pty Ltd
> > PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks Western Australia 6030
> > Tel: +61 (0)4 3497 5848
> > Fax:+61 (0)8 9305 7629
> > [log in to unmask]
> > --
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ken Friedman
> > Sent: Friday, 6 February 2015 11:58 AM
> > To: PhD-Design
> > Subject: Beer's Viable Systems Model
> >
> > Dear Terry,
> >
> > Thanks for your post. This is a corrected post — I hope that I have
> removed all typographic errors and infelicities. This new thread is
> not about “automated image rhetoric and user characteristics
> assessment.” It deserves a new header, I am replying under the header of your new topic.
> The topic is Stafford Beer’s Viable Systems Model (VSM).
> >
> > Carlos did not suggest that VSM lacks use or value. Rather, his post
> asked what exactly you propose. How can we make Beer’s VSM useful in
> the design field? (It may be an editor’s eye, but proper nouns refer
> to a specific individual or organisation. Proper nouns that do not
> refer to a specific individual or organisation confuse me. I
> understand that you propose Beer’s VSM as useful for the design field.
> I do not understand what you mean by saying that VSM is useful for
> “Design” with an upper-case [D], a proper noun. This seems to be
> something new and different from the verb design, and from the common
> noun design as you have written about it in the past.
> >
> > There is some confusion on how this is to work “at the level of
> > IASDR
> and international strategic planning about design practices, research
> and education.” IASDR is the International Association of Societies of
> Design Research. It is an organisation for membership organisations in
> the field of design research. The member societies are the Chinese
> Institute of Design, Design Research Society, the Design Society, the
> Japanese Society for the Science of Design, and the Korean Society for
> Design Science. IASDR is a mechanism for shared communication between
> and among the five member societies. IASDR holds a conference every
> two years in the off year to the biennial conferences of the other societies.
> >
> > How precisely should Stafford Beer’s Variable Systems Model work for
> > a
> society comprised of membership organisations that has no direct
> function in strategic planning? Who is to do “international strategic
> planning about design practices, research and education” using Beer’s
> VSM? How are they to use and apply it?
> >
> > I might be wrong, but I think that this is what Carlos’s questions
> > ask
> by implication.
> >
> > While I am aware of Stafford Beer’s work in management and such
> > books as
> The Brain of the Firm, Beer’s proposal seem to work for organisations,
> social systems, nations, or entities that have some organised basis of
> interaction for their constituent parts and units. I can see that
> individual organisations might be able to apply Beer if they have
> on-going functions. IASDR’s one main functions is a single conference
> every two years, and each conference is organised by a different host
> organisation. I do not understand how you propose to use Beer to solve
> the problems of an entire field.
> >
> > For those who wish to see Beer speak or read Beer’s work for
> > themselves,
> a commemorative site provides useful links to other sites and links to
> Beer’s books on Amazon.
> >
> > http://ototsky.mgn.ru/it/beer_menu.html
> >
> > Perhaps you — or some other list member — can explain the issues you
> raise in a discussion-list post rather than a comprehensive article.
> I’d welcome the explanation for which Carlos implicitly asks.
> >
> > How are we to use Stafford Beer’s Viable Systems Model to solve the
> problems of the design field? It would help to have a few clear
> definitions along with way.
> >
> > What is Stafford Beer’s Viable Systems Model as you see it? I have a
> sense of what Beer meant by VSM in The Brain of the Firm, but he
> applies his model to coherent, bounded organisations. I can’t see how
> to apply VSM to a system that has no managerial function or governing
> system. Perhaps you can define Beer’s VSM in a way that explains how
> to apply it to the design field as a field.
> >
> > What do you mean by the proper noun [D]esign as distinct from the
> > design
> field?
> >
> > Which agencies or organisations are responsibility for
> > “international
> strategic planning about design practices, research and education”?
> >
> > How do you propose that these organisations apply Beer’s VSM?
> >
> > Or, to put it another way, what do you (Terry Love) see as the
> > “specific
> cultural and organisational failings or organisational illnesses” of
> the design field? How can we use Beer’s VSM to change this situation?
> >
> > Stafford Beer was a genuinely interesting thinker. Nevertheless, his
> work does not seem to apply to the design field. It is hard to see how
> to apply VSM to the eco-system of an international profession with
> hundreds of thousands of practitioners for which no one organisation
> has responsibility or even licensing capacity.
> >
> > There design field has no unified forum for research or for
> > education,
> either. There are at least 20,000 organisations, universities,
> colleges, design schools, publishers, member societies, museums,
> archives, and the like in over 100 nations that deal with some
> combination of design education, design education and design research,
> or design research. Hardly any of these communicate in any significant way with more than a few others.
> >
> > How is one to use Beer’s Viable Systems Model in this situation?
> >
> > Yours,
> >
> > Ken
> >
> > Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The
> Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Elsevier
> in Cooperation with Tongji University Press | Launching in 2015
> >
> > Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and
> Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University
> Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne
> University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
> >
> > Email [log in to unmask] | Academia
> http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I
> http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
> >
> > —
> >
> > Terry Love wrote:
> >
> > —snip—
> >
> > I was suggesting something different - that Beer's work gives a
> different kind of insight into how to improve Design. This is at the
> level of IASDR and international strategic planning about design
> practices, research and education, rather than concerns of individual
> designers, but it has potential implications through the professional
> design network
> >
> > Beer's work indicates there are specific cultural and organisational
> failings or organisational illnesses that emerge over time for
> eco-systems such as Design if they do not appropriately contain all
> the elements of the Beerian Viable Systems Model. The VSM is
> considered a well established approach in organisational systems
> field, with Beer himself having a substantial reputation in that area
> >
> >
> https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Anthony_Stafford
> _Beer.html
> >
> > Beer's VSM seems useful in developing the Design field as a whole as
> > it
> offers a sort of checklist of what might be missing, how to check
> whether the missing bits cause the problems, and what to do to fix the situation.
> >
> > —snip--
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of
> > PhD
> studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD
> studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|