Links Within This Publication:
Gathering '11
Edward Harran 
Breakthrough to Cures 
award for innovative ideas related to collaboration
highlighted the design thinking approach 
inside the game
Arthur Brock  
MetaCurrency Project 
Jerry Michaelski
MetaCurrency Collabathon 
Michel Bauwens 
P2P Foundation
Mark Frazier
Eli Gothill 
#punkmoney
Ecosystem Diplomat post

*Thought Contributors:  
Edward Harran, Jay Standish, Jerry Michaelski, Arthur Brock , Eric Harris Braun, Michel Bauwens, Eli Gothill, Alban Leveau-Vallier, Jay Standish, Jean Russell, Seb Paquet, Simon Huber, Elleke Landeweer, Graham Leicester, Dominik Wind, Sharad Jain, Helene Finidori, Mark Frazier, Mushin Schilling, Daniel Hires, Bobby Fishkin, Lauren Higgins, David Hodgson, Jessica Margolin, Jordan Greenhall, participants of the MetaCurrency Collab session, participants of the Breakthrough to Cures game, participants of the Next Edge (and its various offshoots) and if I am missing you, so pls ping me!  

After an afternoon visit with the fabulous Game Designer Marigo Raftopoulos, we cross-pollinated ideas at the intersection of games, fun and ethics... and identified this challenge: 

Awareness
Genuine
Integrity
Leadership
Excellence
Trustworthiness
Humility
Interdependence
Collaboration
Service

.... have other ideas for what guiding "principles" might apply? 

Step 1: Proposed Model Equation + Optional Equation Elements
Step 2: Player Modifies the Equation 
Step 3: Modifications reveal scenarios
Step 4: Player sets Equation
Step 5: Results 
Step 6: Loop back/Follow up for feedback & evolving equations (leave room for second and third thoughts...)

How do we value collectively created knowledge? [FULL]                                                                                                                                                                                 Hacking Attribution [1 of 3]
                                                                                                                                                                                    Hacking Academia [2 of 3]

I met Arthur Brock of the MetaCurrency Project at SOCAP '11  at the suggestion of the dynamic Jerry Michaelski, whose work uncovering the relationship economy informs and enriches this topic.  Arthur explained the MetaCurrency framework and its aim to build tools and capacities that enable one to see the currents of value flowing through a system. The MetaCurrency Collabathon in Oct 2011 was the perfect place to propose this topic with others curious and interested in this topic.  For the openspace, I proposed the topic:

How do we value collectively created knowledge?
For example, a group of 6 people decide to undertake a research project together.  They brainstorm a shared framework, methodology and then each takes those materials and researches a specific area to complete the study.  Each person writes a chapter pertaining to the research at their institutions, but how does the core material- the framework and methods- get attributed?  Do the 6 people create a group name? Is the instigator the primary author?  The person who writes that chapter?  The person who contributes 'the most' (is that measured by time, value, attention)

Two other topics proposed included:

How do we value collectively curated knowledge that benefits the commons? proposed by lovely, insightful Michel Bauwens of the P2P Foundation.  Michel and others co-curate one of the most comprehensive web-based resources on the P2P movement.  Michel and I had already touched on these topics in June when we met at Gathering '11 and the challenge that the curators of the commons face is how to support their livelihood while creating "commons."

How do we recognize the value and build personal currencies? proposed by enthusiastic polymath Mark Frazier.  Mark was championing the potential for personal currency tools, such as Eli Gothill's #punkmoney, a twitter-based currency that enables people to make gifting transparent as a way to build a basis for community amongst strangers. (Apologies Eli if I've botched that).  It's a brilliant tool that's fun to use, issue some #punkmoney today!  

All three topics joined together in a session that opened the day and drew a majority of the Collab participants! 

A few themes that struck me from our discussion include:

• Clarity on the basic unit of attribution (individual or collective) is a critical and distinguishing feature of the system 
• Collectively curated knowledge and collectively generated knowledge have similarities in the challenges they face for reflecting value in a way that strengthens and maintains the collective. 
• Collectively curated knowledge and personal currencies can work together because the unit of curator can be tracked and contributions monitored; thus, their work can function like a personal currency.
• Personal currencies, which rely on the unit of reward/recognition valued at the individual level may conflict with the underlying ethos of collectively generated knowledge.
• Who will fund the development of new commons, "the future in the present" remains an open question (also raised by Ecosystem Diplomat post)
• Attribution has many reasons that include: Recognition for one's work (value provided); recognition  for reputation (future work/compensation/pride); recognition for self (feels good to be acknowledged);  heuristic for value that can be translated into revenue (present/future livelihood); honor the evolution of an idea and contributions of others to the idea (integrity in systems). 
• .... others may resurface on further reflection... if you were there, what struck you? 

What ideas do you have about how to approach valuing collectively created knowledge?


Thought Contributors** Michel Bauwens, Eli Gothill, Edward Harran, Alban Leveau-Vallier, Jay Standish, Jerry Michaelski, Arthur Brock , Eric Harris Braun, Jean Russell, Seb Paquet, Simon Huber, Elleke Landeweer, Graham Leicester, Dominik Wind, Shard Jain, Helene Finidori, Mark Frazier, Mushin Schilling, Daniel Hires, Bobby Fishkin, Lauren Higgins, David Hodgson, Jessica Margolin, participants of the MetaCurrency Collab session, participants of the Breakthrough to Cures game, and I am missing a few people, so pls ping me if I missed you!  This topic jumped to the front of the loopback queue due to a tag on a FB thread that semi-relates to this topic. 

*March blogging sprint: #b03 Day 4: I am participating in a pledge to blog daily during March initiated by Steve Hopkins of the Squiggly Line blog. Follow the daily work of all participants on twitter under #b03 

**Thought Contributors have participated in the evolution of the ideas expressed in this post. I am prototyping a new method of attributing collectively crafted ideas. To learn more, see the post on Hacking Attribution: Thought Contributors.

How do we value collectively created knowledge? [FULL] 
                                                              Hacking Attribution [1 of 3]
                                                                                                                                                                     Hacking Working Together  [3 of 3]                                                                                                                                                      

                                                                                                                      
My experience around the academic world, which uses a system of attribution based on a hierarchy of authors and emphasizes the individual, was in sharp contrast to my experience in product design/innovation, which was flat (no hierarchy), team-based collaboration and best idea driven. The academic approach emphasizes individual recognition, which translates into a 'reputation' currency.  This reputation currency operates on name recognition, number of papers as well-ranked author (first, second and last), and "peer review" which necessitates referencing well known names in papers and grant applications to associate oneself with 'reputable' and accepted work.  Reputation based upon these traditional methods of attribution seems to mask the inherently collaborative nature of idea development in the academic context and limits radically new ideas, in part because acceptance depends upon building upon the already established and because if they do not gain traction it lessens one's reputation.  Since people's livelihoods depend upon their reputation currency, they become competitive rather than collaborative or they pursue incremental rather than innovative ideas in order to preserve their reputation.  New tools of technology such as number of times an article is referenced, reader feedback/ranking on merit and open access to publications may crack open the reputation paradigm.

I have wondered, if we could hack academia, how would we build it? The first step would be to make the foundation collaborative and structured to nurture radical innovation and the best ideas.  Last June after Gathering '11, Edward Harran and I began a collaboration to brainstorm what a research lab for the 21st Century would look like, how it would operate and what it would do. One element of what we discussed was how attribution would work for people participating in the research lab. Details of ideas and findings from that project, Macroscope Labs, will be included in future posts.  

My experience in product design/innovation demonstrated the value and radical potential of collaborative idea development.  The factors that I see as different: all participants perspectives are valued equally (everyone has a seat at the table), the focus is on ideas (not egos), the unit of attribution is team (people put their energy toward building the larger unit).  I have wondered whether attribution for papers and grant awards at the department level might remedy some of the challenges of the current academic approach though it would likely stifle inter-institutional and inter-departmental collaboration.  Solve one problem, create another.   It was only while playing the Breakthrough to Cures game sponsored by the Myelin Repair Foundation (MRF) using the Institute for the Future's Foresight Engine Game in the fall of 2010 that I realized how strongly I felt that the current paradigm for research, both corporate and academic, fails innovation in medical research.  During the MRF game round I, I won an award for innovative ideas related to collaboration and wrote a post that highlighted the design thinking approach in round II when I was a game guide. Have a peek inside the game.

What ideas do you have for hacking academia? Strategies for bridging the academic and corporate sectors to advance radical innovation? 


Thought Contributors** Michel Bauwens, Eli Gothill, Edward Harran, Alban Leveau-Vallier, Jay Standish, Jerry Michaelski, Arthur Brock , Eric Harris Braun, Jean Russell, Seb Paquet, Simon Huber, Elleke Landeweer, Graham Leicester, Dominik Wind, Shard Jain, Helene Finidori, Mark Frazier, Mushin Schilling, Daniel Hires, Bobby Fishkin, Lauren Higgins, David Hodgson, Jessica Margolin, participants of the MetaCurrency Collab session, participants of the Breakthrough to Cures game, and I am missing a few people, so pls ping me if I missed you!  This topic jumped to the front of the loopback queue due to a tag on a FB thread that semi-relates to this topic. 

*March blogging sprint: #b03 Day 4: I am participating in a pledge to blog daily during March initiated by Steve Hopkins of the Squiggly Line blog. Follow the daily work of all participants on twitter under #b03 

**Thought Contributors have participated in the evolution of the ideas expressed in this post. I am prototyping a new method of attributing collectively crafted ideas. To learn more, see the post on Hacking Attribution: Thought Contributors.

                                                             How do we value collectively created knowledge? [FULL]
     Hacking Academia [2 of 3]
                                                                                                                                                                     Hacking Working Together  [3 of 3]

                                                                                                                                                                               
On this month's blogging sprint*, I am experimenting with a new strategy that plays with an idea we explored in the Macroscope Labs project.  On each post, I include a Thought Contributors** an acknowledgment that lists people with whom I have discussed this idea as it was evolving.  

*Thought Contributors: These ideas have been percolating and evolved in conversations with many people.  I am prototyping a new method of attributing collectively crafted ideas.  In academia, whoever writes the grant or publishes the paper gets "credit" but in reality the breakthrough idea may come from a colleague in the work-in-progress phase or comments on a draft.  It's time that we begin to develop better systems that reflect and honor the collective participation in the formulation of ideas. Those I mention here are people who have informed, influenced and participated in the evolution of ideas herein.  I am grateful for their perspectives which have helped to enhance my thinking on these issues. I'll be curious for feedback whether that works and seems sufficient, insufficient, confusing, overwhelming.  

How one chooses to see the source of ideas and how one chooses to attribute will be subjective. Some of the justifications for less/no** attribution: many ideas are emerging at the same time. There are no new ideas.  With information everywhere it is nearly impossible to keep track of all the sources of input and influence. We are all part of a global brain, there is no "I".  While I am not attached to the ideas that I have,  I endeavor to practice attribution holistically and rigorously (partially attributed to residual side effect of legal training) though mostly due to my aim that any recognition flows back to original sources and influencers as much as possible; I see attribution as essential to integrity in a system because it honors the depth and breadth of others' contributions to the value that I create.  

What do you do to acknowledge the influencers in your work?  

What have you seen others do that inspired you? 



*Thought Contributors:  Edward Harran, Jay Standish, Jerry Michaelski, Arthur Brock , Eric Harris Braun, pls ping me if I missed you!  This topic jumped to the front of the loopback queue due to a tag on a FB thread that semi-relates to this topic. 

**modified 3.7.2012 from less rigorous to less/no to better reflect intended meaning which was not a judgment rather the degree/amount of references to sources.

***March blogging sprint: #b03 Day 4: I am participating in a pledge to blog daily during March initiated by Steve Hopkins of the Squiggly Line blog. Follow the daily work of all participants on twitter under #b03 

A government post reads:

 "Upgrade Education To Meet The Needs Of The 21st Century: Harness new technologies to transform the way teachers teach and students learn. Ensure all public school children are equipped with the necessary science, technology, engineering, and math skills to compete and win in the 21st century economy."

GREAT START .... I would build on it this way:

Upgrade Education to Meet the Needs of the 21st Century:
Harness new technologies to transform the way that teachers learn.
Engineer environments that maximize student learning.
Ensure all children are equipped with the necessary critical thinking, creative problem solving, and collaboration intelligence to excel in the 21st century and to ensure a 22nd Century.

#bo3 [Day 2]

On the learning journey, I served as an Ecosystem Diplomat- an essential but as yet unrecognized diplomatic service.  If traditional diplomats are servants of their governments, then an ecosystem diplomat* serves our global interest in the advancement of knowledge and fulfills her/her duties through learning, pollinating ideas and connecting people. 

In the last century, we discovered vast amounts of knowledge and with advances of technology, the pace is accelerating.  To demonstrate one's competence with a subject and to push the frontiers of knowledge to ever deeper levels, expertise was essential.  This depth remains essential, and a complementary role is emerging that bridges between the silos of expertise and looks at the spaces-in-between as a boundary spanner** or knowmad, as Edward Harran's  discussed in his TEDxBrisbane talk: Knowmads. 

An ecosystem diplomat focuses on the learning edges of knowledge.  Traveling between and among what is established and what is far off mainstream radars. Ecosystem diplomats learn with experts in their areas of unknown and bring humility, curiosity and credibility to encounters.  As quick studies of diverse disciplines, an ecosystem diplomat can rapidly grasp the meta-aspects of a field or issue while also understanding the granular elements and challenges; she spots lateral applications, recognizes patterns and expands the expert's thinking by listening and infusing insights from completely different fields of study.  Ecosystem diplomats do not pretend to be experts, rather their skillful questions invite an expert back to their beginner's mind and reveal to the expert a view of his/her problem from 'outside the discipline.'  Because of their multi-disciplinary travels, ecosystem diplomats offer relevant ideas and dissonant approaches that stimulate, challenge and enrich the work of experts and expand domain/region specific knowledge. 

As global travel is increasingly accessible, technology like smartphones and the internet enable a kind of proximity and multi-national corporations overtake the nation-state, the ecosystem diplomat becomes an agent of our global human interest that transcends geo-political boundaries. The nation-state serves an important function for managing societies on a local scale and traditional diplomats fulfill a vital role as conduits for connecting and bridging local interests with those of other nations.  An ecosystem diplomat engages in this way around knowledge, and like traditional diplomats needs to have capacity to adapt in diverse situations, to be at ease in many cultures and to blend in with the ability to both be a part and to observe. An ecosystem diplomat is a road warrior, bridge builder and barricade buster. This work is rigorous, requires discipline and thrives from intrinsic motivation, a love of ideas, people and learning.  It is hard work though personally rewarding and hopefully, the benefits to others is exponential.  

Subsequent accounts of this learning journey will reveal concrete examples of this pollination of ideas and people across disciplines and geographies.  It was my most frequent source of shared learning and tangible value.  The irony is the absence of someone to sponsor and fund a vital role, like the ecosystem diplomat.  While traditionally diplomats, academics and corporate business development professionals might fulfill this role, there were benefits of being an unaffiliated learner. There was no threat of competition or other economic and geo-political bases for hostility and fear.  Removing the filter of a specific discipline, particular country/region, particular institution (academic or corporation) facilitated the ability to advance knowledge without the burden of conflicting interests. This open flow of knowledge allowed for deeper learning that enriched all sides.  If we want to accelerate learning for global human benefit, the opportunity to formalize this role and fund this niche is essential.

What if there were an Ecosystem Diplomatic Corps:  Who will fund the needs of the emerging global commons like an Ecosystem Diplomatic Corps? To whom would the Ecosystem Diplomatic Corps be accountable and how? 


Stay tuned for more Field notes from the Ecosystem Diplomat, including: 
- A Snapshot of the Ecosystem Diplomat in Action
- Tools for the Ecosystem Diplomatic Corps
- What Every Ecosystem Diplomat Can't Leave Home Without... 
- and more field notes: What do you want to know more about? 

Thought Contributors*** Edward Harran, Mushin Schilling, Alban Leveau-Vallier, Jay Standish,  Christine Egger, Lee Ryan, Seb Paquet, and many others (please ping me if I missed you).

*Hat tip to Edward Harran from whom I discovered the term "ecosystem diplomat."  Please consider being a micro-patron for Eddie's next learning journey in San Francisco. 

**Hat tip to Seb Paquet from whom I learned the term "boundary spanner"

***Thought Contributors have participated in the evolution of the ideas expressed in this post. I am prototyping a new method of attributing collectively crafted ideas. To learn more, see the post on Hacking Attribution: Thought Contributors.

#b03 Day 3: I am participating in a pledge to blog daily during March initiated by Steve Hopkins of the Squiggly Line blog. Follow the daily work of all participants on twitter under #b03 

As I begin a series of posts that "report" from an 18 month learning journey, I wonder: are there tools for structuring the output from a learning journey?

Each learning journey seems tailored to the participant(s) and designed for specific purposes.  Wouldn't it be awesome if there were a commons toolbox for designing learning journeyers.  With templates of designs previously used for various purposes that could be recycled, reused and repurposed depending upon one's journey objectives.  This template DIY approach enables an emergent curriculum while integrating robust design that would confer credibility on the learning journey. 

As traditional education is challenged to address a rapidly changing landscape of skills and competencies for 21st Century living and as we see an increasing need to learn and hone new skills/abilities at a rapid pace, the learning journey and alternative curricular approaches are increasing.  I have two friends who are currently fundraising for learning journeys.  Weezie Yancey-Siegel of The Eduventurist Project is fundraising on IndiGoGo and knowmad Edward Harran for Please Help Me Get to San Francisco Pretty Please.  They are both inspiring, passionate social entrepreneurs. 

Here are my experiences with alternative learning and some of the approaches that I took to share my learnings.  

In 2005, I also endeavored on an independent study to deepen my foundation in ethics, conflict resolution and sustainable leadership.  The learning was self-defined, and many of the skills learned were life skills for communication, conflict resolution and leadership yet the tools to assess the learning, competence, fluency with these vital skills was absent.  In 2008, I wrote three papers to accompany talks on the findings and ideas that emerged from that inquiry.  The paper have depth but I did not pursue publishing them in any traditional manner. They are available on my blog: Passive Participation in Conflict, Mind the Gaps and Capacity Building for Inclusive Problem Solving: I + U HALT injustice.

For my recent learning journey, I will write blog posts with the hope that smaller digestible concepts will invite more interaction around the insights and ideas. I may eventually merge the posts together into short topic briefing papers. I have seen others approach independent learning by posting their research proposal, promising to share their reflections and experiences as blog posts along the way, and asking their community to serve as the "dissertation" review board of their blog posts. I opted for offering a reflective, synthesized view of the learnings, but in the moment posts might have yielded more of the discussion and refining of ideas that I have sought.  Perhaps, next time, I'll use a hybrid approach. 

{Idea} Designing a basic toolkit for the self-directed learner could be an invaluable resource.  Design it with corporate HR people who approve the product as credible for a new hire and whose companies would use it for existing employees' professional development for a sustainable revenue source to support a commons toolbox of DIY resources.  

The ideal learning journey toolbox would allow for:

• self directed curriculum
• emergent serendipity
• accountability 
• credibility/review  

What else would you want to see in it?  What have you used for your learning journeys?  

If you know about resources, please tell me.  I would very much like to have a more rigorous approach to emergent learning!  I have a hunch that I will be taking a deep dive into new subjects every couple of years as a life learner.

In early 2010, wondering whether there might be a way to bring together my work in health care ethics consultation-mediation with my prior love working in product/service design for e-health ventures (social enterprises before there was a social enterprise sector), I attended Unite for Sight's annual Global Health & Innovation Conference- a fantastic event overflowing with passionate social entrepreneurs doing great work around the world. 

Three questions emerged for deeper exploration:

1. Observation: Multi-stakeholder partnerships will be an increasing necessity to realize desired social impact.  In traditional corporate partnerships, there are lawyers advocating for their respective clients' interests when a partnership is established.  In non-profits, I surmised that failed partnerships meant an abrupt refocus and loss of the impact, since the use of donations for a lawsuit would not align with many non-profit's impact-focused missions.  

Idea: A partnership builder for multi-stakeholder partnerships for social impact would mediate the negotiation among the stakeholders to optimize the interest of the partnership.  The role of a partnership builder would be as advocate and nurturer of the partnership; the partnership builder would check in with the stakeholders to early troubleshoot any potential challenges and at the point of inevitable crisis, the partnership builder would mediate among the stakeholders to facilitate action and resolve disputes. With sufficient experience, a centralized resource, like creative commons for partnerships could be created, where DIY resources tools would exist for people to build their own multi-stakeholder partnerships.  This preventative conflict resolution approach benefits all stakeholders and enhances the likelihood of achieving the desired impact, and would most likely be deemed a worthwhile investment by a funder- whose interest is to see the partnership goals realized. 

Question(s): Would the stakeholders be interested in availing themselves of such a resource if it existed?  What sort of problems, if any, are any of these stakeholders already experiencing? Would it be possible to develop a niche practice for partnership builders?  What tools, skills, capacities would need to be developed to scale and democratize the practice?


2. Observations: In business every decision has implications.  Working at the intersection of meaning and money, the implications of business decisions often involve the targeted social impact.  

Question: Would there be an opportunity to laterally apply some of the relevant tools and learning of health care ethics (clinical and organizational) consultation-mediation in the context of the social enterprise sector? What are the relevant similarities and differences? Is the social enterprise market open and curious to receive this kind of resource or not?  


3. Observation: A large amount of impact investing money is being targeted at the "bottom of the pyramid."  Following the microfinance scandals, we know that sometimes these investor initiatives are not concerned about the interests of the poor.  New health care products and services are being deployed in areas where there are no existing regulatory frameworks to protect the human interests generally, and the vulnerable specifically.  

Question: Would there be an opportunity to work with social entrepreneurs who have health care products and services being deployed in developing markets where there are no regulatory frameworks?  How might we develop robust means to protect the human interests while not stifling innovation? How can people be empowered in the process of gaining access to health care products and services?


I spent 18 months on a learning journey to explore these questions.  The curriculum was emergent.  I determined the course as I went along, followed serendipity and learning opportunities.  I embarked on collaborations with people that persisted, some that failed.  I joined networks, worked on projects and hacked conditions to enable learning.  The learnings, ideas generated, connections made, unexpected discoveries and opportunities identified have iterated in conversations.  Now, I am making them concrete; I will synthesize my learnings from this deep dive inquiry into a series of posts with the aim that the report out encourages others to explore, stimulates discussion and inspires action.  

The topics explored cover multiple disciplines- some may be more or less relevant for the primary focus on this social enterprise focused blog. The timing coincides this month with an invitation and challenge from Steve Hopkins of the Squiggly Line- create a post for 30 days. Steve is one of the insightful, spunky people I met on the journey.  He is making the world epic! Follow him on Twitter (@stevehopkins) and to follow others writing for this challenge, check out  #b03 on Twitter. 


#b03 [Day 1]

What if contacts, such as those stored in one's email, linked in or iCal/Outlook, were captured around relatedness?  

Who? 
When/where did you meet? 
When/where did you last meet? 
What are key conversation points to remember for next time?   
What are your connections?  (professional, personal, revolutions, passion, volunteer, issues, mutual friends, family, etc)

What are keywords to associate with this person?
What are his/her touchpoints (usual contact data)

Click to drop in relevant work information from linked in and personal info from FB.

The reason is that it could make connecting people much easier.  Imagine that I have lunch with Doug, who has a new project. I want to introduce Doug to Christine as a potential collaborator.  I could click on Doug's name, where we met, relevant work experience, a couple of keywords, preferred contact info and click on Christine, where we met, relevant work experience, a couple of keywords, preferred contact info.  Add one sentence and they would receive information about each other based on my relationship with each of them that would provide context to the introduction as well as each other's contact information.

I would call this app "Contaxt" It could be fun to make the business of contact info as much fun as meeting the people!