| This
Concept Paper was written by Gail, myself and Langdon
Morris in 1988 in response to a non-profit in Washington
DC that was interested in the RDS.
It is a revision of an earlier version, drafted in
1985 and updated at the beginning of 1988, which
was based on my 1983 concept as documented in my
Notebooks. [link].
The icons used throughout this proposal were developed
by Bryan Coffman [link]. |
| What
follows is the 1988 paper [version
1.5] with new
annotations that further expand on the concep and
set it in today’s context. |
click on the pages to get a larger
view |
|
| I
always liked the icons that Bryan did,
esthetically, however I have always felt
that they presented the the concept in
too narrow of terms. In fact, this entire
paper does this. Everything it says is
valid enough but it does not convey the
scope
of the systemic global issues that the
RDS can
- and must - deal with. We crafted this
Paper to the times and the requirements
of the proposed non-profits, in Washington
DC, that were to be the host organizations.
These was nothing wrong with their focus
or concerns, it is just that they do not
approach the full scope of the RDS Concept
and possibility. This Paper is best read
in the context of
the MG
Taylor Mission [link] and,
of course, taking into account what has
happened in the 16 years between its writing
and today [link]. |
|
|
| The
article on the left is from the NY Times
and it is what sparked the original
RDS concept [link] in
1983. The critical aspect cover in the
page is that the RDS has
to have a standing office and the capability
to deploy within
24 hours. As will be covered elsewhere,
in time this capability will integrate
prior deployment experience with Weak
Signal Research [link] to
create an anticipatory capability. |
|
|
| These
functions are done routinely today in
commercial RDS deployments. The practices
are well established. |
|
|
The
stewardship of theRDS concept
remains in MG Taylor hands. This Concept
paper
was originally written in response
to an indication that several non-profits
were interested in sponsoring the program.
As it turned out, nothing happened.
There
were two “almost” deployments in the
following years. One was for the baseball
strike and the
other
to look at ecological consequences
of the first Gulf War. Both stopped
one
phone call short of the final decision
maker.
The RDS still
needs a home. I believe the MG Taylor ValueWeb
is ready to take this on and that there
are non-profit and for-profit opportunities
given today’s circumstances and marketplace
[link].
The Consortium of Knowledge Workers
remains a dream and there are several
hundred KnowledgeWorkers dispersed around
the globe who do this work on a regular
basis. |
|
|
| The
value model for participation is as valid
today as in 1988. Today, there is a great
deal more data to back it up. |
|
|
| These
numbers are 15 years old. Depending on
scale and scope they can be double these
today. It would not necessarily take
all of this investment up front. When
the Pater was written, there was no functioing
MGT Center at the time. Now there are
over 30 MGT client NavCenters and ASEs
in the US, Canada, Europe and Asia. There
are several RDS units
although none are configured for the
kind of scenario described
in this Paper and none are the current
state-of-the-art. The RDS being
prepared for the WEF Annual Meeting [link],
and
other events in Europe [link] will
be the closest to what is required and
what
was envisioned. In other words, the investment
will be higher today but some portion
of it has aready been made. |
|
|
go
to
APPENDIX for the last 9 pages of this Paper |
Matt
Taylor
At
Elsewhere
October 23, 2004
SolutionBox
voice of this document:
INSIGHT • POLICY • PROGRAM
|
|
posted:
October 23, 2004
revised:
October 26, 2004
• 20041023.345000.mt • 20041025.342981.mt
•
* 20041026.700128.mt •
(note:
this document is about 55% finished)
Copyright© Matt
Taylor, 1982, 1983, 2000, 2001, 2004
IP
Statement and Policy
|
|
|
