“Saving the world differently…”

“Saving the world differently…”  was the title of an event, last February, which I’ve been waiting for with joyous anticipation. It was organized by the RSA (Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce), of which I am a Fellow. RSA bills itself as “an enlightenment organisation committed to finding innovative practical solutions to today’s social challenges.”

The joy in my anticipation came from suspecting that the social innovation vision that we will be introduced to, will be radical enough to my taste; not merely treating the symptoms of the multiple, intertwining crises of which our world is suffering, but addressing their common root cause.

The patient has multiple, interdependent, and systemic dysfunctions, and medical specialists focusing on only one or another organ can’t understand, let alone change its conditions. Watching the news, we’re treated to a steady diet of the signs of our multiple economic, financial, social, ecological and ethical crises, signs of a world in turbulence. All that is only symptoms. The deep structural problems, such as hunger, poverty, climate crisis, access to drinking water, human rights abuses and terrorism, are reflection of the deeper crisis of global leadership. To paraphrase Einstein, no structural crisis can be solved from the same neoliberal stage of global leadership that created it.

The good news is “Today, there are myriad fresh new collaborative models that are self-organizing to address twenty-first century realities. These models have various names including global action networks, multi-stakeholder networks, global alliances and stakeholder webs. In fact the entire concept of social innovation—new thinking and action for the public good—is being extended beyond communities and nations to the global stage.” (Global Solution Networks, program prospectus)

Screen Shot 2013-04-13 at 9.28.16 PMThe featured guest of the evening at RSA was Don Tapscott, a Canadian futurist, advisor to heads of states and global organizations, who specializes in business strategy, organizational transformation and the role of technology in business and society. He is the author of Wikinomics, an international bestseller that was #1 on the 2007 management book charts and translated into 20 languages.

His books on the implications of emergent technologies for organisational strategies shaped my thinking over the years. Needless to say, I was thrilled to meet him the first time at RSA, and learn about his latest project, the Global Solution Networks (GSN) initiative. Watch the video of his talk, and you may get a glimpse of what enthuses me about the possibilities that this radically new model of global cooperation, problem solving and governance opens up.

At the core of the model there’s a taxonomy 9 types global networks, as follows, each having a significant impact in the world:

1. Policy networks, such as the International Competition Network

2. Operational and delivery networks like Crisis Commons

3. Knowledge networks, for example, TED or Wikipedia

4. Advocacy networks, like Kony 2012

5. Watchdog networks, e.g. Human Rights Watch

6. Platforms like Ushahidi, thesojo.net

7. Global standards networks such as the Internet Engineering Task Force

8. Governance networks like the Marine Stewardship Council

9. Networked institutions, e.g. the World Economic Forum

Don mentioned that any of the global networks can overlap with other network types, but each one belongs primarily to one of these categories. The characteristics of a Global Solution Network are:

  • It consists of diverse stakeholders
  • It addresses a global problem
  • It makes use of transnational networking
  • Its membership and governance are self-organized

Another is that it’s not based on alliances of nation states that are protectors of the national ego with a too narrow band of interest to successfully tackle our global challenges. As Don said:

“Often national self-interests take priority and make little room for the inclusion of authentic citizen voices, ignoring the self-organized civic networks that are congealing around every major issue. By slashing transaction and collaboration costs, the Internet is changing the deep structure of most institutions… Dispersed volunteers can create fast, fluid and innovative projects that outperform the largest and best-financed enterprises.”

Another intriguing observation that I picked up from his presentation was his point about cities that are becoming, in a sense more important than nation states. “Some of the most important governments in the world today are cities… That’s not to say that national or regional governments will go away…” His assessment is resonant with some of the observers of our global affairs, who talk about a shift in the center of gravity from a planet of nation states to a planet of cities. They include Shlomo Angel, author of the Planet of Cities and Marilyn Hamilton, author of the Integral City, whose work I referenced in my blog about Living into the Master Code of the Human Hive.

One more thing. In the Q&A following his talk, I asked Don what can happen when the 9 types of global solution networks start synergizing? He replied, saying that each of these networks is a tool to tackle a global problem, and mentioned the global monetary system that would need the involvement of all. In the Q&A, we didn’t have much time to unpack the meaning of my question, so I use this space for that.

If I am looking at each of 9 kinds of networks, what I see is a platform for developing an organ (and associated capacities) of the emerging, global metabeing. For example the policy and standards networks perform important coordination function of the global nervous system. The operational and delivery networks, like the Crisis Commons that connect people to help those in need, exercises a healing function. Platforms are nodes specializing in capacity building for the metabeing’s self-organization that can take emergence to scale.

Knowledge networks that create and deliver mission-critical new knowledge, play the role of the sensing, learning, and meaning making organs. They evolve using the same mechanism of the “neurons who fire together, wire together,” as our knowledge and memory do in our biological brain. Of course, those sensing, learning, and meaning making organs exist inside any of the 9 types of networks, otherwise they couldn’t perform their function. But knowledge networks are specialists in developing those capacities for the whole, even if they may not (yet) see themselves in that way.

For effectively dealing with the global mess we don’t only need all of those networks in the Tapscott taxonomy, but also, their synergistic collaboration. Only then we’ll have a chance to match the complexity of the “global problematique” (coined by the Club of Rome) with the requisite variety in humankind’s connected intelligence. (In that context it may be interesting to glance through the answers I received to my question on Quora about What are the key factors to consider in cultivating collective sentience at increasing scale?)

Before humankind, the global metabeing, can awaken to its sentience, the global solution networks need to become holoptical. “Holopticism is a combination of Greek words holos (whole, holistic, holography…) and optiké (vision)… A holoptical space is a space in which each participant gets a live perception of the Whole. Each player, thanks to his/her experience and expertise, relates to this Whole in order to adjust his/her actions and coordinate them with others’ moves. Therefore there is an unceasing round trip, a feedback loop that works like a mirror between the individual level and the collective one.” (Jean-François Noubel)

If we replace the “individual and collective” levels in the sentence above with the level of “network types and the Global Solution Networks, as whole,” then we open the possibility to envision the emergence of a global-scale connected intelligence. Nothing less will suffice to navigate our beautiful Spaceship Earth, through the turbulent times of today, to a tomorrow of higher-level complexity, harmony and prosperity for all.

This entry was posted in Collaborative Sense-Making, Local to Global to Local, Visualizing Our Ecosystem and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to “Saving the world differently…”

  1. This is very exciting George – I see parallels in the living systems that were identified by James Grier Miller at all sytems of scale, and that I identify as necessary for the Human Hive. Also these systems are probably emerging through the metapatterns of Tim Winton’s PatternDynamics??? The stages of synergy are evolving … tbc


    • George Pór says:

      Thanks Marilyn for reminding us of Miller’s “living systems” theory http://www.panarchy.org/miller/livingsystems.html ! I think one of the strengths of Tapscott’s 9-fold taxonomy of GSN is that it’s based on empirical observation. However, it would be interesting to see what could become visible if a systemic framework, such as Miller’s or the integral theory would be applied to it, as one of the dimensions of further GSN research.


  2. Barry Kort says:

    “There is a Cancer on the Presidency.” ~John Dean, 1972

    “There is a Cancer on the Republic.” ~Larry Lessig, 2012

    Solving systemic problems requires systems thinking.



  3. Jon Husband says:

    Finally .. something synergistic, integral and perhaps practical to look forward to. George, thanks for this concise, enthusiastic and optimistic summary.

    PS .. thought of you fondly whilst going for a couple of long walks recently whilst in Amsterdam.


    • George Pór says:

      Yes it fits, in a complementary way. While the Global Solution Networks is focused on global problem solving and governance, the Ethical Economy that you referenced above provides a new theory of value and a political economy of the era of “wikinomics” (Tapscott), or “commons-based peer production” (Benkler) or and “peer-to-peer society” (Bauwens). The Ethical Economy (that I had a chance to read and comment on while in manuscript) is a foundational work that adds more depth to our understanding of Tapscott, Benkler, and Bauwens. I wholeheartedly recommend it to all serious students of the epochal transition that we’re in the midst of.


  4. CoCreatr says:

    Thank you for the summary, George. Don Tapscott points out a ways of working together with potential to raise organization effectiveness and health. I relate it to “Organizational Physics”.
    This white paper was earlier named “The 3 Structures of an Organization”, addressing the attention and cost balance of, Informal, Value Creation and Formal Structure. In my view it is pointing out root causes for organizational inefficiency and confirms Tapscott’s call to action.

    http://www.betacodex.org/node/896 Quote:

    “Theories abound about why organizations have so far not systematically and broadly moved away from command and
    control management and structure. One is that managers at the top are simply addicted to power. We do not believe in that theory. We are convinced, instead, that broad understanding of the alternative to management and hierarchy is missing, and that we urgently need to develop it, in order to stop the massive waste of resources that management thinking inflicts.
    We do not need different, or better people. We need different, and better organizational thinking, design, and effective action.”


  5. Thanks for the article. I have had a link to your blog in a sub section of my library with similar links. http://tinyurl.com/TMI-Creativity-KM

    Here’s a link showing a platform I’ve been building for over 20 years, even before the Internet. It focuses on a specific social category, hosts a library of information, plus a library of service providers within that category, within a specific geography, and includes advertising-based efforts intended to a) draw more people to the platform, and b) motivate more of those people to go directly to the service providers to offer needed time, talent and dollars. I’ve not found many local, or global networks, that combine all of these features, including the effort to draw continuous resources through the platform to all of the organizations in the geography that need to be involved in solving the problem the platform focuses on. http://tutormentor.blogspot.com/2012/01/platform-for-collective-actions.html


  6. Geroge, It’s interesting that he mentioned the global monetary system as being one of the outcomes when the 9 types of global solution networks start synergizing. You didn’t touch on that in your response and I wonder if you have any thoughts on the matter.


Leave a Reply to George Pór Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s