| Forward Thinking Blog
Move FORWARD: explore the issues. Learn about the latest in innovation, design, and philosophy here. From high-tech possibilities, to no-tech solutions, to exciting new ways of living… we’ve the bases covered. Got a topic you would like to see explored? Get in touch with us and send the details. And of course, feel free to leave us your thoughts.
Forward Thinking content has been featured on many highly regarded websites, including:     ... and more.  |
|
|
|
Articles from September 2009 It’s probably happened to you. Someone in the company gets a bright idea that the company needs more bright ideas-- a new product or service; some new angle to catch the public’s interest; a marketing gimmick or brand extension that will “revolutionise the industry.” Blah blah blah. You’re dragged to an offsite “brainstorming” session and a day full of sitting on beanbags and drinking abusive amounts of coffee ensures. Plenty of talk takes place. White boards get decorated. Perhaps some creative juices flow. A barrage of new initiatives get slated for further development… but how many of these are actually goodies?  From SME’s, to big corporates, to community organisations, and the big ole’ city council— all of us at some point or another have to innovate what we are doing in an attempt to grow capital of one kind or another. Problems arise when creativity overtakes practicality and we lose sight our operating context. According to extensive research by Doblin Group based in the U.S., a 2007 survey of over 3000 projects in 400 businesses across 4 continents over 10 years revealed some startling conclusions: over 95.5% of all innovation fails. Painful but true. That’s a lot of wasted days on a beanbag chair. So what are professionals in the sustainability space to do? We’re trying to solve some big issues, from climate change to the viability and social cohesion of our communities. We also don’t have the luxury of time and cannot afford to let our actions be outstripped by the issues we face. How do we deliver value from the ideas we generate to solve these problems? We need to battle test them, critically examine their design, and make sure they hold up. Going back to Doblin Group, they note that 95% of change should focus on improving the everyday. It’s about being quick and incremental. Think battery powered lawn mower. Another 5% of the change needs to be more disruptive, radical, and outside the box. Think iTunes.  Keeping that balance is essential as often there are big gains to be made in improving on something already exists, rather than trying to be too revolutionary and producing a solution the world isn’t ready for yet. Peter Salmon of Moxie believes that problems need to first address the human condition. “After all, it’s like my dad used to say: everyone’s an environmentalist until the lights go out. If we aren’t looking after people’s basic needs, how can they care about bigger worldly issues?” he says. Moxie’s been around a while, and under Peter’s leadership, recently developed a programme they call Next Plays. After years of presenting thought provoking research and hearing "So what's next?" from clients, they sought to help companies answer the question. It goes like this: use carefully developed strategies to design a positive future. Everyone from Air New Zealand to the World Bank and governments in charge of Hanoi are getting in on the action. So, how’s this thing work? Up front, there’s consideration taken for the big picture issues. What will be affecting the industry or city? A critical examination takes place of the key factors that will be shaping the future, from shrinking capital markets, aging populations, climate change, peak energy production, and collapse of ecosystem services and so on. “There are no ideal answers,” Peter says. “It’s about creating a general and realistic scenario of the future rather than trying to be overly predictive.”  From there, Next Plays moves into the ideas necessary to start tackling these problems. Knowing what we know from the scenarios developed, what needs to be developed? Is it rejigging the business model? Developing a new product or service? How the widget gets made? Changing the way theorganisation operates to influence its stakeholders? In this stage of the process, all ideas are on the table, no matter how left field. “Most people innovate around their core competence,” Peter says. “There are often other opportunities out there around finance and delivery— and those are likely to be the revolutionary ones. Sometimes it’s as simple as recruiting a new industry partner or pairing up two promising, disparate ideas. There’s a lot that can be learned from biomimicry that translates into how we can successfully do business. We need to move away from linear thinking.” With some promising ideas on the table, the scrutiny begins. Alongside the Next Plays guide that features case studies from around the world, ideas are critiqued across numerous categories (or “Plays”) including: - Improving communications transparency (authenticate)
- Creating broader value nets—not chains (engagement)
- Considering longer term impacts in decision making (go long)
- Closing loops on material inputs and outputs-- waste is a resource (loops)
- Mixing and broadening boundaries together to increase chances for rapid evolution (mix)
- Filling unmet needs and gaps in the system (needs based- what do people want?)
- Finding a niche and simplify a way of doing things (simplify)
 The possibilities are then examined across the business or organisation structure, from the business model, to the larger operating environment, to the processes of the company, to the individual products and services, to larger communications and engagement strategies. Inevitably, some of the ideas fall out at this point. This is not a bad thing as it’s likely they didn’t have the sticking power first anticipated. Others ideas combine into larger initiatives, or broader themes for action. An overall response to the problem starts to emerge. Everything that’s left is vetted across three major results criteria: are these refined, new, or shifted ideas? The purpose of this stage is to help examine whether there’s enough of a balance in the response to the problem. If it all start’s looking like reinventing the wheel, then it’s time to start over. If it looks like there are substantial social and environmental wins, and that the organisation is at least starting to shift how it operates, it’s a sign of progress. What about the financial bottom line? It’s implied the whole way along that any ideas produced are of financial value in some way, or they wouldn’t be included.  Finally, the remaining ideas are weighed up against time and the scenarios that were discussed at the onset. What takes priority is determined by the organisation’s unique situation. Discrete initiatives might be polished off in a matter of weeks. Strategic business changes might roll out over a 5-10 year stretch. In either case, implementation should begin as soon as possible. “Future enterprise value will be measured by the benefit to society and the environment,” Peter stresses. “We need to do less, do it better, rigorously test ideas and designs, and get them more viable, rather than try 50 things that fail.” With these guiding principles gaining traction, let’s hope the solutions we develop going forward are intelligent, considered, and ultimately solving the problems we face. Time is not on our side. What matters most to New Zealanders? It’s a pretty worthwhile question to ask, and the answer is gets us to the heart of what’s important. However, what would seem like a pretty straightforward connecting of dots in reality isn’t so simple. Policy leaders at all levels of government look to such statistics as OECD rankings and how much the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) went up or down as keys to our success. But are these measures really an accurate portrayal of prosperity and wellbeing in the country, or are they in some ways standing in the way of genuine progress? Take GDP for example. What was originally intended as a nice easy number for economists to get a sense of the economy’s volume has become synonymous with the health of a country. To economists, if the GDP goes up, then we must be doing well, right? Growth is good. It’s the mantra we live by.  Well, have you had a car accident? Gotten really sick? Been hospitalized? Lose your house in a mudslide and will have to rebuild? Congratulations, you're doing good for the economy. That doesn't sound so good to you? Some expenditure measured by GDP really signals decline in wellbeing. Thing is, there is no distinguishing good from bad. A simple fact about GDP is that one of its key architects, Simon Kuznet, gave a warning about its use: never use it as a measure of a country’s welfare. We seem to have strayed from its intent of purpose, yet it continues to misguide actions and policy to this day. While GDP may oversimplify a complex situation, there thankfully are alternatives. Enter something called the Genuine Progress Index (GPI). It is a system of 20 components across social, economic, environmental, and cultural areas that’s been researched and created over the last 13 years by Canada’s Dr. Ron Coleman. Cutting down trees and turning them into houses might be good for GDP, but what about the value of the forest in terms of ecological services that will be lost? This is exactly the economic reality that has been ignored to date, and aided humanity in outstripping nearly ecosystem on the planet. As Rod Oram said, “There’s no central bank to bailout a bankrupt ecosystem.” The idea of GPI is to get a comprehensive view of what’s going up, what’s going down, and make conclusions from a more comprehensive set of data—in other words, a full-cost accounting.  Last week, as part of a nationwide speaking tour sponsored by Anew New Zealand, Dr. Coleman briefly discussed the GPI in a candid interview, and then gave a thought provoking presentation on how the index might be used to predict disasters such as the economic meltdown we’re still wading our way through. “It’s too hard and impractical to try and roll up such disparate things as employment, community cohesion, and fisheries stocks into a single number,” Dr. Coleman says. “We need integration to show the links between the different areas we are measuring of the Genuine Progress Index. An index gives us a holistic view and can better inform our policy decisions.” From his native Nova Scotia, to the government of Bhutan, to New Zealand’s capital of Wellington, Dr. Coleman’s ideas have been internationally well-received. The new government in Nova Scotia has adopted GPI, and locally the Maori Party has embraced the principles as part of their platform. The Wellington Regional Council is implementing GPI to monitor indicators across the community. Its goal is maintaining Wellington’s competitive advantage as a good place to live. As there is flexibility with GPI, the indicators have been tailored to suit their local needs, rather than blanketing a one-size-fits-all strategy. Back in Nova Scotia, Dr. Coleman’s GPI has been successfully used to predict several significant shifts: - a decline in volunteerism (and negative social changes as a result),
- collapsing fish stocks after a record boom period (and subsequent loss of thousands of jobs in a key local industry),
- a steady decline of local farming economies (it’s no longer viable to work the fields, so farmers are inclined to sell land to developers),
- and the substantial growth of consumer debt versus income— and the financial crisis that followed.
It’s a noteworthy track record, and with many questioning what got us into our current mess, it’s not surprising Dr. Coleman’s ideas are gaining interest. So far the stimulus packages developed by governments worldwide are fighting off the worst edge of what could be happening. “But taking on government debt to fight the collapse of insolvent banks and faulty industries is a bit like fighting fire with fire. There are issues out there, the big ones including climate change, peak energy, and resource depletion. What will we do when the chickens come home to roost, and we’ve already thrown our trillions at the problems we’re facing today?” Dr. Coleman says. Using climate change as one example, what happens when a disastrous weather event causes havoc to the scale of what happened in New Orleans? Decades of economic gain in the form of infrastructure can be destroyed in a matter of just a few hours. Even proponents of GDP should be able to see the logic: we need better measures and better decisions.  Dr. Coleman reckons that interest in a new system of will grow in the coming months as bailouts lose their steam and people become more vocal about changing the system that created the problems to begin with. Priorities will inevitably shift. Dave Breuer, the Founding Director of Anew New Zealand agrees. “We need to challenge the misuse of GDP and use a GPI to strengthen democracy independent of partisan politics,” Breuer says. “Increasing the wellbeing of our country should be the chief outcome of our actions at every level.” Along with Statistics New Zealand, Breuer has hosted a series of nationwide workshops aiming at developing a nationwide GPI for the country. So far, there’s been significant public engagement and a strong interest in how we go forward in the future. And what exactly does the future look like? “Creative adjustment to a smaller economy is the way forward,” Dr. Coleman says. “If there is any growth area of the future, it should be aligned with solving big threats like climate change. This is where stimulus is a good investment.” Events over the last year have made clearer than ever before how we equate unchecked growth with progress and wellbeing, and how unrealistic that assumption is. Either we revisit the decisions we’ve made and the tools we’ve used to make them, or we flirt with a future that, with the recent course of events as a painful example, looks less than bright. The time for a new model has come. Check out more from Dr. Ron Coleman on GPI in this video clip: 
Join us for yet another great edition of Forward Thinking Thursdays. Chill out and have a chat with other switched on people and share what you're up to. No cost, RSVP's appreciated. See you there! PS: Have you gotten on www.Celsias.co.nz yet? Check it out and join the many other people involved on this great kiwi website! What: Forward Thinking Thursdays Where: Mezze Bar and Tapas Restaurant, Durham Lane (between High St. and Queen St., behind Whitcoulls) When: 24th September, from 5:30 onward Why: Relax and mingle with a group of switched on professionals about the issues that matter. Enjoy good food and drinks and great conversation!
 I saw conservationist David Bellamy speak earlier this week at Auckland University. If you've never heard him deliver a talk before, he wanders a bit. Okay more than a bit. He delved into the mating habits of turtles and wandered across other highlights/stories from his extensive career in the field for nearly an hour.
Props to the guy, it certainly sounds like an interesting career filled with a wide range of conservation activities: from helping farmers in Australia to guiding the children of Nauru recover parts of their stripped island in foliage. Restoring the wildflowers in England was the bit that gave me the warm fuzzies. He spoke quite strongly about the conservation ethic here in New Zealand and how over 4500 organisations in the country are "stitching their bit of the world back in order," restoring biodiversity. Aww shucks.
I was nodding along to everything I'd expect the guy to talk about. Then came the bombshell. "Climate change is poppycock." I sat up in my chair blinking, wondering if the accent had gotten me, or if the man was talking through his beard a bit much. No, he definitely said poppycock.
Well, that was my WTF?! moment of the day. Now, I'm not going to go all Elizabeth Kolbert on the guy, but what is a patriarch of environmentalism doing spouting such drivel? I'm not going to go on about the guy for 4 pages like Dr. Kolbert did towards Colin Beavan, (there's far better candidates for that sort of effort) but baby I've got an issue with this. I'd expect this line of drivel from Rodney Hyde or a less than forward-thinking government. I'd expect excuses like this from a coal company, or industry lobby group astroturfing their way around the place. I would not expect this from a man who restores wildflowers in Britain. And Mr. Bellamy's rationale for climate change being "poppycock", a problem not associated with human behaviour? Well he mumbled on another two minutes about volcano eruptions correlated to CO2 and temperature drop historically over time, and oh wait, he's got a graph somewhere he could show us, but he's not going to show us. Plop back in chair, next question from the youth panel. Sorry buddy, that's just not on. You do not stand on a otherwise legitimate career of doing good things to drop some misleading, unsubstantiated comment on a generation of people who is going to have to deal with the mess of global warming long after you've checked out. It's bloody irresponsible and an insult to the people in developing countries already feeling the brunt of these shifts. You can discuss the rate at which it's happening, explore the different consequences of human behaviour and the degree to which it might be affecting the bigger picture, but the reality is still the same: humans have a role in our current swing of the climate. Saying anything else but puts you not in the echelon of the people working to change things for the better, but in the dingy with the naysayers. Check your conservation credentials at the door please. I'm afraid I've lost much respect for a man with an otherwise noble career. I can only hope it was early onset Alzheimer's doing the talking. Also appears on Celsias.co.nz  Last night at LATE at the Museum, we witnessed a spirited discussion from some very intelligent minds. In a discussion focused on environmental and economic impacts of migration in a global age, eminent speakers Rod Oram (left) and Dr. John Merson (right) gave a worthwhile summary of how New Zealand is likely to stack up in the era ahead marked by climate change.
Moderated by Finlay Macdonald (centre), the talk explored far more than the title suggested and delved into the complex economic, social, environmental, and political relationships that are pivotal to understand when addressing climate change. In front of a standing room only crowd, Dr. Merson took a strong position that much of the challenge ahead lies in challenging our social norms and changing our everyday habits and views. He noted that economics and the markets they spawn are directly responsible for the environmental consequences of what business does-- in many cases, the pollution/distruction of our environment. Mr. Oram made the case that from a government point of view, market drivers play a big part in making change happen, which is why there has been contentious debate around the proposed Emissions Trading Scheme (or ETS). While an ETS is only one part of the equation, Mr. Oram raised the point that we only pay attention to what we value, and if carbon has a measured value, it can be managed throughout business models. He gave a rather interesting snapshot of how this would be likely to effect New Zealand's prominant dairy industry: each year, according to Fonterra, for every litre of milk, 1 kg of greenhouse gasses (GHGs) are generated. This amounts to a whopping 15 million tonnes of GHGs annually. While attributing some cost to these GHGs has the farming industry up in arms squealing apocalypse, Mr. Oram seems to think they're missing the point. Each kg of GHGs equates to wasted nutrients.  If farmers could farm more efficently, close the loop on many of their farming practices, they could actually save an incredible amount of money in the longer term and manage their land better. He noted that in New Zealand we have huge potential to be world leaders in redefining how ruminants are farmed, but our research budgets in this area to date have been really small. We could be developing some leading technology and proprietary know-how, but so far have missed the bus.
Dr. Merson, while optimistic to a point on technology helping save us, he noted that technology and ETS are just tools in a larger toolbox. Markets are crtically important, but not the only tool, and unfortunately the main focus to date has been on mitigation of climate change effects. Due to a 30 year lag time on emissions and the reality they present for us, time is not no our side. The way we live is not sustainable and with each day that passes we are affecting the hroizon of what will face our children and grandchildren. More than a reliance on mitigation is needed. With it, the conversation turned more towards adaptation and some serious questions were raised. He noted that in the years ahead, a likely 1.5 metre rise in sea levels would take place, affecting many crowded population centres worldwide from New York to Bangkok. What happens to all these people living coastally? What are our moral implications in New Zealand? Are we to take them in? What is the scale of confrontation that we are facing? He emphasised that we do not have the luxury of disconnecting ourselves globally from what is happening around us, and especially not from our neighbours on Pacific atolls. Unfortunately, planning for this likely monumental shift in humanity in the coming years and the migratory challenges it suggests has barely surfaced on the radar of policy makers. Mr. Oram confirmed that climate meetings later this year in Copenhagen are unlikely to yield a full blown climate treaty, but should hopefully help get countries worldwide on a better trajectory, especially if the U.S. is involved to any serious level. Painfully absent at the Kyoto negotiations, U.S. involvement is critical to the adoption of any worldwide agreement as it amounts to a credible shift in values.  Quick to make sure that the emphasis was not left on governments to do all the work, Dr. Merson shifted footing to personal responsibility, and also noted that the time has come to move beyond functioning as independent nation states for issues that cross all international borders. With or without governments, people around the world need to embrace the ideals of equity, mutuality, and interconnectedness. As time is running out and we are already behind the 8-ball, it is of vital interest to take personal action, to lobby government, and to send signals to the market that a shift is needed.
He cited several recent corporate incidents with GE and GM that have been in response to consumer behaviour and investor lobbying, as well as the Montreal Protocol on CFCs as success stories in how people have come together worldwide to make big shifts happen. Confirming the position, Mr. Oram noted that governments follow people, and that we each must help drive the change forward. We are going to need to get comfortable and excited about changing, understanding economic and social pressures, and get a better appreciation of the interdependence of the global scene. Success in combating climate change will come with a significant movement of human ingenuity and creativity to tackle the problems we face. It was a really positive point to end with, and a really great segue to the rest of the evening's programming, which included musical appearances from New Zealand's Ladi6 (right) and King Kapisi. It was some good food for thought with a positive soundtrack to help it all sink in. For more on upcoming events at Auckland Museum, check out www.lateatthemuseum.com | |