|
Columbia
School of Education
|
Notes
in support of
December 15, 2003 Presentation and Dialogs
|
| For
me, libraries have always represented the epitome
of the idea of civilization [link].
They are, at the least of it, the warehouse of
the accumulated knowledge of humankind. They
are where this knowledge can be organized, researched
and made into greater knowledge than the parts
alone possess. They can become the neutral places [link] -
hubs [link] in
a global network - where the great creative dialog,
that determines our world to come, takes place.
They are the keepers of our commonwealth - past,
present and future. |
| Some
argue that the role of the library in modern
times is lessened. That the general distribution
of information, the virtual world of the World
Wide Web make them no longer relevant. You have
clearly rejected this notion. I agree. I will
argue, however, that those same conditions and
considerations that gave rise to the discussion,
in the first place, have to be incorporated into
the concept the library going forward;
and that, while the physical aspect of the library
as a place is more important than ever,
each physical library that exists now has to
become an active agent [link] in
a greater network [link] that
spans a globe. |
| Further,
in a world of knowledge-work [link],
the old distinctions between class room, library
and work-place no longer hold. Learning and creativity
- the entire cycle of concept to use - has to
be seen and practiced as a single integrated
process. |
| In
theory this can seem reasonable and easy enough.
In practice, it means an entirely new approach
to how the environment, work processes and tool-set [link] of
the library are configured. It is about the extreme integration and
inner-operability of these three elements in
environments dedicated to learning, designing,
rapid prototyping [link],
planning, incubation and project management - as
a single enterprise that I am here to talk
to you about today. Environments that augment
individual and, what we call, GroupGenius [link] thereby
creating ValueWebs [link] capable
of dealing with complex systemic problems and
opportunities and that can execute projects in
radically reduced time frames. What I have to
say is based on 25 years of designing, building
and operating - and transferring to other organizations
- these kinds of environments. We call
them NavCenters implying a heuristic approach
to the future as
is appropriate for the facilitation of complex,
emergent systems [link].
Our ValueWeb members call them by many names,
as example: the Learning Zone (Detroit
Edison) [link],
the General Gossick Leadership
Center (Arnold
Engineering and Development Center - USAF) [link],
the Learning
Exchange (VA with several under development)
[link], the Innovation
Center (Vanderbilt
Center For Better Health - Vanderbilt University)
[link] and
the 20 Accelerated Solution Centers (CapGemini-EY)
[link].
NASA [link] and
the Borgess Health Care system [link] calls
them NavCenters. Over thirty of these environments
are working
today and over a quarter of a million people
from education, government, industry, research,
high
tech, the military,
financial services and social institutions of
all kinds
have employed them. This user-base is global
representing almost every nation in the world.
The experience
we have gathered for these Centers provides clear design
criteria for the creation and management of environments
for
learning
and
innovation - and, for sustainable project execution. |
| The
may factors that go into the making of these
environments are outlined on the MindMap, below. |
|
| click
on MindMap for larger version |
p
450 - November 7, 3003
Matt Taylor Notebook [series started 9-11-01]
|
| This
MindMap diagrams what I want to say to you in
regards making a viable 21st Century Library
for the School of Education at a major University.
I may be able to cover this material in 12 hours
or so. Given that we do not have that kind of
time, instead, I will cover key aspects and
leave time for dialog
to
take
us
where it
will.
Over the next two weeks, I will continue to add
to this documentation, annotate it with references
and link it to other areas of my web site, as
well as, other sites. These links will reference
thousands of pages describing experiences, experiments,
designs, built environments, research, models
and speculations about possible futures. I am
reporting over 46 years of work product of my
own and how that relates to the work of many
others. You can use this as a resource to further
explore the many ramifications of what we talk
about here today. |
| As
always, I add this caveat: while I am passionate
about this work and committed to its fulfillment;
and while I have carefully researched the work
of others to reinforce the validity of these
findings, this presentation is not about conclusions
- it is about an ongoing program of Design/Build/Use [link];
it is about systematically boot-strapping our
way to remarkably better environments - each
one that works while providing key insights
to guide the development of the next. I am not
trying to convince you of anything. I am doing
my best to challenge hidden design assumptions
and to stimulate your thinking - I am hoping
to significantly raise the bar of your ambitions
in the realm of making environments fit for humans [link].
If I am successful, when we are done your level-of-ambition
in regards what your library can be will be significantly
raised. At the same time, I hope that your confidence
that you achieve an extraordinary result will
be equally enhanced. |
| The
genius to do this already exists at your institution
and in its ValueWeb. At the core of what I have
to say is to help you define the principles of
the 21st Century Library - the specifics cannot
be determined outside of a design process - and
to point out a path - a process - for
accomplishing such
a result.
The result
is
the
consequence of the process and cannot
be separated from it. |
| What
follows is a basic overview of the MG Taylor,
method and system, built work, the components
that make up our environments, projects that
did not make to to completion and some ongoing
projects that will be realized in
the
next year. From this body of work a set of principles
are offered for your consideration as you develop
your project. |
|
Basic
Threads of MG Taylor System |
 |
Rate
of Change and Complexity
link
|
|
| Our
work began when we started exploring the
nature of complex, systemic problems in
the mid 70s and discovered that, while
there were many solutions available to
society, society had few processes in place
for creatively applying them. Many voices
have to be heard in order to understand
a systemic problem let alone solve it in
a way that leads to a sustainable result
not over-burdened with unintended consequences.
The collaborative processes in place back
then thwarted what we call GroupGenius.
We decided that an integrated approach
to environment, tooling and work processes
was necessary if solutions were to be found
and if the time to actualizing designs
was to be radically reduced. Really large
systemic
problems that rely of dynamic, complex
emergent solutions will, of course, require
an effective network of these environments.
So... building a global ValueWeb of what
today we call NavCenters became our plan
in 1982. We have been at it ever since. |
|
|
 |
ValueWeb
Architecture
link
|
|
| In
the traditional Business Model, the
relationship between the Investor,
Producer, Customer, Manager is passive-aggressive;
their interests do not line up and
never can. Good management works hard
to ease these inherent conflicts but
structure wins in the end. This is
a major reason why businesses are perpetually
being reorganized. The ValueWeb architecture
is a completely different
way to organize these constituencies.
The ValueWeb architecture puts the
Stakeholders of an enterprise into
a fundamentally new kind of relationship
governed by a different set of rules.
This architecture supplants inherent
conflict with a natural synergy. Technically,
it is also sophisticated enough to
deal with the variety and complexities
of modern organizations the many different
kinds of relationships that make up
the extended enterprise that must both
compete and cooperate can be administered. |
|
|
 |
|
| NavCenters
are
neutral places where rigorous and open-ended
work processes support Group Genius.
They are places of systematic collaboration,
innovation, incubation and project
management. They are the lab in which
an organization can experiment, prototype
and take measured risks that do not
disrupt the larger enterprise while
they are in incubation. NavCenters
contain many traditional resources:
library, leaning center, knowledge-work
production capabilities and so on -
they are based on a new way od working,
and while representing a focused resource
to these capacities, navCenters are
a means to systematically introduce
new method in the organization and
its greater network. NavCenters also
function as a ValueWeb Integrator weaving
an organization’s usually ad-hoc network
into a community of greatly enhanced
power. |
|
|
 |
|
| In
order to understand this work and communicate
accurately when doing it, we had to
create a new language because what
existed did not accurately define what
we were seeing; we call this a Modeling
Language and
it
is
one of
six layers of language necessary for
fully describing the system. This Language
now consists of about two dozen Models
and nearly ninety “words” that
are represented by Glyphs. In total,
these
words address key elements of systems
behavior,
organizational processes and group
interaction. The Modeling Language
provides a “chunked” shorthand
that facilitates stating a complex
situation in a brief statement, connecting
the situation to a body-of-knowledge
that offers diagnostics, and the ability
to communicate alternative courses
of action to co-workers in precise
terms. Glyphs from one model and be
transported to other contexts by employing
visual language techniques, thereby
making connections not supported by
traditional language means. This is
a step towards the “Glass Bead Game”
[link] and
the representation of complex relationship
in simpler formats. |
|
|
 |
Process
Architecture
link
|
|
| At
the root of it the MG Taylor process
is multiple levels of iteration, recursion
and feedback within a set of prescribed
boundaries resulting in emergence.
This “container” is the
total environment: physical, mental,
informational, emotional, technical,
that is deliberately created (by using
the process itself) for each exercise
that takes place within it. Emergence
cannot be predicted, controlled or
caused - it cannot, in the moment,
be understood.
It is possible, however, to create
an environment in which emergence is
what
happens far more often than not. How
to do this, systematically, is the
basis of our system and method and
patent. While others focused on trying
to find out what intelligence, creativity
and emergent behavior was, we focused
on finding out what environmental factors
consistently give rise to these desired
attributes. While not simple, this
was the easier path - it is an engineering
approach to to the subject: built it,
test it, use it, evaluate it, rebuild
it. There is a great deal of art to
the managing of these environments
and this art is highly congruent with
the science and engineering. |
|
|
 |
|
| The
making of StrongMemory is at the heart
of the process. The mind is organized
in paths of association. We remember
something in context of many similar
and connected
memories which evoke emotions, physiological
responses, and if stimulated, other
cascading strings of memories. This
experience can be rich or impoverished.
An example of impoverishment is adults
sitting in a darkened room looking
at a Power Point presentation with
a voice
that drones on at a bit rate about
5% of everyone's capacity; of richness
is these same people, moving around
in a stimulating environment full of
art, toys, information objects and
tools, while engaging in multifaceted,
rich dialogs with
their
peers - learning
while in
the process of solving real-word problems.
The first experience conjures up dull
days at school being told what to believe
and think; the second, real life engagement
with the freedom to be and to act -
a combination of sports, hobbles and
productive work.
Which of the two would you like your
Annual
Report
information
to be
associated?
It is memory that stays after an event;
it
is memory
that leaves a NavCenter. The “NET”
that makes up the neurons in a single
human mind, or the common shared
experience of a group, the transactional
pathways of a ValueWeb, can be considered
as similar systems; this can be “acted
upon” in ways that build effective
memory across organizational barriers. |
|
|
 |
|
| Every
action taken while facilitating a group
process is an intervention into their
natural process. Every intervention
has consequences - often
negative one.
Ours are limited to making the habits
of creative people the dominate operating
system of the group. This makes it
possible to balance the requisite variety
equation while minimizing negative
unintended consequences. What we get
is emergence - not controlled, not
predictable but overwhelmingly positive
in result.
Studying what creative people do -
not what they say they do - or what
the
myths of creativity insist that they
must
or should do - we discovered that across,
time, cultures, arts and sciences and
educational experiences there are a
number of remarkably consistent habits
shared by most of those generally
regarded as genius class people. We
do not talk about these. We embed them
into the operation of the environment
- they become just how people interact
and work. These habits, then, are the
bias of the NavCenter environment and
its processes and make up the total
“container” in which the work is done
and memory is created.. |
|
|
 |
“There
to Here” - Rapid Prototyping
link
|
|
| In
1982 we illustrated our “THERE” environment.
It is made up of large electronic read
write walls that are connected to the
knowledge-base system and individual
team member’s wireless laptops
and PDAs; in the background there is
an electronic wall that is connect
to a remote team; the team shown in
the picture is working together and
in small sub-groups - they are interacting
with each other, the remote team and
the knowledge-base; when they are finished
working, their documentation will be
complete in real-time and communicated
per the “Ten Step Process” Model [link].
In the foreground is “CyberCon” the
knowledge augmentation tool. It can
be operated by a human or run by its
own routines. In this rendering, it
is “self-directed” and “engaged” with
the teams doing searches by visual
patterns, word patterns and by concept
patterns
(the three small screens to the left).
The larger screen is reflecting the
automatic
documentation of the dialog, which
is being sent to the the remote team,
with each person’s
individual contribution going into
the knowledge-base searchable
by person, time, keywords and content.
The synthesis of all this is directed
by the interaction between CybeCon
and the team members with each individual
free to select, use and publish as
they see fit. Everyday, with every
project, we work to bring this
“There” to the “Here” made
possible by the project. This is systematic
rapid prototyping which
is an integral
part of our process. Today, 20 years
after this picture was drawn, nearly
everything featured in it is possible. |
|
|
 |
|
| We
believe that, in an knowledge-economy,
the place of work and
the place of learning have to be the
same place; that learning and creativity
are, essentially, the same process.
Creativity is learning aimed outward
- at the making of something or idea;
learning is creativity aimed inward
- at the transformation of the self.
Just as individual wealth and commonwealth,
in the economy, are co-dependent, what
are called creativity and learning
are co-dependent - one cannot exist
without
the other. By employing what we call
the CapacityGuide, the NavCenter can
be a means of integrating three modes
of learning that are too often separated:
computer-aided learning; peer-to-peer
learning; and, learning through work.
These three have to be integrated by
a curriculum that is focused on the
21st Century citizen and implemented
by the development of individualized
year-to-year study guides collaboratively
developed by student and teacher. This
process has to involve - as an integrated
experience - what we call the “5 Es
of Education:” Experience; Example;
Expectation; Explanation and Exploration
[link].
Clearly, this now is a life-long habit
not just something that happens during
a period of life dedicated to schooling. |
|
|
 |
|
| The
patent is presented in 6 sub-systems
which describe the interaction of AGENTS
and the use of AGENCY in environments
with emphasis on: work processes, the
physical environment, technical systems
augmentation; the transporting of Agents;
the economy of Agent exchanges; and,
the facilitation of Agents within a
knowledge-economy. Agents, in this
context can be any entity that makes
up the environment or is brought into
it, transformed by it and leaves it.
The patent describes the technical
means by which Agents of all type,
and who exist on multiple levels of
recursion, are facilitated and augmented
in the process
of creating
knowledge
and
employing
it in a knowledge economy which is
assumed to be essentially different
than an industrial economy. People
participating in a collaborative process
in a NavCenter have to know nothing
of all this to be highly successful.
It is a weak process that has to teach
first before it can be used. And, those
providing the environment can be successful
in their work without deep knowledge
of the core system and method that
underlies the design and work processes
of any given environment. To recreate
these environments, however, does require
the deeper knowledge and this is accomplished
by a combination of experience and
study. The body-of-knowledge involved
is equal to a degree program in several
fields. The emphasis is on the synthesis
and integration of these fields which
is unusual in today’s academic environment
and another reason why NavCenters are
important for dealing with complexity. |
|
|
| Joseki
Offices were built in 2002 by SFIA
student architects as a design/build
exercise. |
|
|
| The Acacaia Center was built, in
1982, on the 7th floor of their home
office building across the street from
the Capital Building in Washington DC. |
|
|
 |
Cambridge
knOwhere Store
1997
link
|
|
| The Cambridge environment was built
in 30 days over Christmas and New years
1996. |
|
|
 |
Orlando
Management Center
1985
link
|
|
| The Orlando Management Center was
considered to be outrageously expensive
when it was built in 1985. 15 years and three
lease cycles later, three entirely different
corporations employed the space successfully
without modification. The environment
was painted once and looked and worked
great. Adaptability and high quality
materials proved to be the best economy
over the long haul. |
|
|
 |
Hilton
Head knOwhere Store
1996
link
|
|
| Hilton
Head was the first of the three knOwhere
Stores which operated between 1996
and 2003. |
|
|
 |
Gossic
Leadership Center AEDC
1992
link
|
|
| The
Gossic leadership Center was built
for the Air Force at Arnold Engineering
and Development Center in Tennessee. |
|
|
 |
Vanderbilt
Inovation Center
2002
link
|
|
| The Vanderbilt Innovation Center
is part of the Vanderbilt Center for
Better health. The
time from contract to first use was just
over three weeks. |
|
|
 |
Boulder
Management Center
1980
link
|
|
| Our
first enviornment built in 1980. |
|
|
 |
The
Learning Zone
Detroit Edison
Michigan
2000
link
|
|
| Built
off the Lobby of Detroit Edison’s home
office, the Learning Zone is dedicated
to employee development. |
|
|
 |
Studio
for Gaill and Matt Taylor
South Carolina
1990
link
|
|
 |
Capital
Holding Management Center
1992
link
|
|
 |
Continium
NavCenter
1997
link
|
|
 |
Palo
Alto knOwhere Store
1997
link
|
|
| The
Palo Alto knOwhere Store, a 20,000
square foot mix use environment, incorporated
retail, group process areas, offices
and incubation spaces
all supported
by a core technology. It also served
as MG Taylor’s home office environment
for several years until mid 2003 [link]. |
|
|
 |
Armature,
Pods, Domes WorkWalls Cubes, Workstations and
pieces
1990
link
|
|
| This
drawing, a study for the Capital Holding
- Agency Group home office environment,
showed the Armature, Pods, Cube Office
systems in the metaphor of a landscape
with transportation corridors. This
started the the design quest that is
reaching full expression in the the
VCH Executive Offices [link] to
be finished in early 2004. |
|
|
 |
AI
System and Landscape
1997
link
|
|
| This
diagram shows all the elements
that make up a floor-to-ceiling, wall-to-wall “furniture” solution
that radically cuts building time,
promotes flexibility and reuse, while
accommodating the variety of work spaces
made necessary by the new learning
and work demands of the 21st Century.
The components are: Armature pieces,
Pods, Cub Office System, WorkWalls,
Domes and miscellaneous WorkFurniture
pieces. These are designed make a complete
architectural space with minimal built-in-place
construction. While the core of the
system is universal, the variety of
materials and details are endless allowing
each project to have a high degree
of individual signature. The entire
system is conceived to be re-configurable
and movable with minimum tooling and
expertise. The goal is to make an environment
that the users can completely own,
set up and operate. Each project we
bring more of that THERE to HERE. |
|
|
 |
Vanderbilt
Center for Better Health Armature
Tennessee
2002
link
|
|
| The Armature defines sub-spaces within
a larger integrated space. It
serves an a conduit for wiring. It brings
symbolism and personal character to a
space. Augmented with truly flexible
lighting, as shown here, it turns the
ceiling - the largest unobstructed plane
in the the environment - into an active
expression of the environment and its
meaning in contrast to the plain, dull
surfaces, with glaring light and bellowing
HVAC that have become so ubiquitous.
Each project can have an Armature designed
to meet its own unique requirements be
they those of utility or expression. |
|
|
 |
POD
1999 - Present
Palo Alto knOwhere Store
California
link
|
|
 |
New
Pod
Vanederbilt University
Tennessee
2003-2004
link
|
|
 |
New
Pod
Prototype
2004
link
|
|
 |
Dome
PA knOwhere Store
California
1997
link
|
|
 |
Transition
Areas
Capital Holding Management Center
Kentucky
1992
link
|
|
 |
WorkWall
Armature and Pods
Palo Alto knOwhere Store
California
1997
link
|
|
 |
User
Movable StorageWall
Atlanta
ASE Cube/Wall
Georgia
1999
link
|
|
 |
User
Movable Storage Wall
Palo Aloto knOwhere
California
1997
link
|
|
| |
