giving credit

Gail Taylor recently posted an essay on “rip off artists” to her Tomorrow Makers blog concerning intellectual plagiarism in the knowledge economy. I have no doubt it was a difficult post for her to write, as she is one who tends overwhelmingly to see the positive in peoples’ intentions and ideas. It is an important post for members of The Value Web - as well as other individuals and organizations who use the MG Taylor methods legitimately and with integrity. Honoring the work and ideas upon which our work and ideas have developed brings honor upon ourselves and to the clients and partners with whom we work. This is perhaps as important as the legal agreements and licensing fees we have put in place; demonstrating our acknowledgment not just the body of knowledge we have inherited, but the spirit behind it as well.
~Todd Johnston

GRASS– global responsible accountable sustainable stewardship

Lucky me! I recently had the good fortune to work with Matt Taylor and Lisa Piazza (MGTaylor Corporation). The way that they designed reminded me to add a little GRASS to my life. Unfortunately, this homonym is laden with heavy meaning that will likely force us to drop its use, at least officially, before we are labeled potentially dangerous and have our phones tapped!

For definition sake in this blog I use the term GRASS to mean: global, responsible, accountable sustainable stewardship. It was coined during an event called L5, as part of a parallel process design challenge to distill the characteristics of members in an emerging value web, or community. The characteristics, and the catchy name, have loosely guided the Value Web Association since its inception, and loosely guided my design tenants. I see, though, that it would be easier to be GRASS, and apply it, if we have an agreed-upon definition and a few simple rules.

slow design, accelerated solutions

Going through my archives earlier in the week, I uncovered “Slow + Design” a manifesto of a “slow approach to distributed economy and sustainable sensoriality” that was published in preparation for a 2006 seminar on the subject taking place in Milan.

Using the Slow Food movement as a starting point, the authors first outline the slow approach as

the simple, but in current times revolutionary, affirmation that it is not possible to produce and appreciate quality if we do not allow ourselves the time to do so, in other words, if we do not activate some kind of slowdown. However, slow does not only mean this. It also means a concrete way of actually putting this idea into practice. It means cultivating quality: linking products and their producers to their places of production and to their end-users who, by taking part in the production chain in different ways, become themselves coproducers.

Turning to “design”,

we can observe that a “new design” is emerging: a design that adopts a systemic view, that looks at the complexities of social networks, develops a capacity for listening and interrelates with the creativity and diffuse entrepreneurship that characterise contemporary society. In so doing it becomes an active part of the transformation processes underway and in those that must take place, confronted as we are with the enormous issues at stake.

These passages — and many others in the 27-page document — resonate as strongly with me today as they did when I first encountered the manifesto a year and a half ago. From my perspective as a Process Designer grounded in the practices and methods of MG Taylor, my fascination is in seeing how “slow design” can enable groups, organizations and communities to accelerate their path toward solutions.