Possible roads for our lives to take– Part 4: Flourishing of democracy or Erosion of political power

By Juha Saukkonen
JAMK Senior Lecturer

Last but not least of the potential bifurcation (development crossroad from which the development can start going to two different directions) points is about what will happen to the decision-making systems in our societies. More exactly: Is participatory democracy about to be replaced by some other systems or even gaining more strength?

Pros for “Flourishing democracy”?

The proponents of democracy state that:

1)      Democracy when exercised in a right way is:

• one of the central and natural values we share
• is a way of deciding
• is a way to discussion of things of importance
• believed in by the people (70 % (Finland) of people are interested in politics + 90 % believe that you can affect the future development by voting

Believers in Erosion of political power say that:

• Participatory democracy was founded on the mental model of industrial era, it has not corrected itself when world around has changed (quoting Mika Mannermaa)
• The democracy as exercised today is going for majority vote. But there are no more majorities in our society, but a collection of minorities that change in size and shape dependent on the issue at hand
• Democracy has been very slow/ inefficient tool in solving the most nasty problems around

Which group do you support? Is participatory democracy taking its last breath, or just on low mode waiting for new revival?

In the next blog post I will present the summary view – the most-likely scenario that the members in the summer seminar of Finnish Society for Futures research voted for. You can start creating your own “World view” along these 4 issues we have talked about. (Hint:  In many cases a synthesis of the two opposite views was created – combining the best parts of both ends of the axis. You can start creating them also yourself). Coming to the blog next week….

Possible Roads for our Lives to Take– Part 3: Systemic Intelligence or Move to Simplicism

By Juha Saukkonen
JAMK IB Senior Lecturer

The world of today is complex and systemic, no doubt about that. We have all seen how events e.g. in one nation’s economic climate starts a chain of events on many fronts. The intellectual and technological tools to model, forecast and steer these systems is an area of constant and even accelerating development. Believers in Systemic Intelligence have lately been confronted with views from opposite school: Simplicists, as the (sadly) late Finnish Futures thinker Mika Mannermaa put it. Both have their arguments, and I challenge you, IB Blog readers once again to think what is your “futurible” – image of future – in this respect.

Why systems and system intelligence?

The proponents of continuing era of system understanding (very short version) say that:

1. If we do not even try to understand systems and their operating logic, we are hiding our heads in the sand. The world is made of complex interactions, and our understanding of them should and could be improved.
2. System models built by economists and politicians are not perfect, admittedly, but their motivation is sound and healthy. By using certain reasonable pre-assumptions and limitations, we can approximate what course of action in a bigger system will follow when a certain decision is done by one member in the system. The system is a simulation that tries to predict or explain that if we do A then B will follow, using some assumptions and simplifications, but still trying to maintain “wisdom of the system”, so be able to show relations between different actions and actors in the marketplace, political system etc.

Simplicism as an alternative?

The school of simplicism (it is not – at least not yet – a formal group of thinkers or movement) say that believing in the wisdom of the system intelligence creates risks. Automated stock trading systems can be seen as part of that risk creation? And in order to reduce risks we then create new and better systems…the cycle is never-ending. Mannermaa even saw as one future profession being “simplicism consultant”, who helps people and organisations to reinvent the core, the truly essential things to concentrate on instead of trying to create understanding of a very complex whole we call system. Some of the principles that would step in would be such as 1) leaving out some factors 2) forgetting the past 3) being satisfied with mediocrity etc. Interesting, but is it possible? And would it mean abandoning the value of vast information gathered and created over the decades and centuries in our societies…

How do YOU stand in respect to these possible futures on this line between Systems and Simplicism?

Creating Future Wheels – The Proverbial Crystal Ball for Business or Life in General.

While taking courses for the IB management masters programme, I ran into something that intrigued me.  This thing is called a futures wheel.  The idea is that you take a trend that is likely to affect your business/life/whatever and you stick it in the middle.  See the picture on the right.  Then you try to brain storm and think of all of the things that might happen because this trend or event happens.  The first layer of circles (red) are what happens due to the trend.  The third (green) level is what has happened due to the second level changes.

Let’s take rising gas prices as an example.  If gas prices rise the following things might happen:

• People might walk more
• Because they walk more they may want new shoes
• They buy socks too
• People buy smaller more fuel-efficient cars
• Trade in older cars
• More junk old cars
• price of large cars drops
• Niche revival of old cars

The list can go on and on and you can go as deep as you want.  It’s like the “tree falls in the woods” thing.  I found this so intriguing!  It gives you a great way to think about the future and how you might change your strategy when possible change is coming.  Give it a try and apply it to your own business and life.