THE major global challenge

Happy soon-to-be 2016!  

I feel sure that no one held their breath waiting for the second half of the blog reporting the October 2013 'Mapping the Systems of Science and Technology,' and that cliff-hanger ending paragraph: "Next I will be writing about what I believe THE major global challenge is, how we are addressing the major chasm we have discovered, and how the Bauhaus movement of last century has valuable input for our current generations."

However, much has happened since then, and I like to finish off the end of the year by cleaning up unfinished tasks....

THE major global challenge is best painted by Absence of Mind  by Marilynne Robinson, where the author astutely observes the quandary of having reality separated into 7 billion human brains, where we can have no way of knowing, for sure, if our view is truly in sync with another's.  The result:  really 'knowing' one another, having sensitivity to another's truth, point of view, and mental model, is dependent on trust and communication....and can never be verified. 

 Add to this the unstable foundation of 'truth' in science, and even math, at this juncture in history. 

The Blind Spot: Science and the Crisis of Uncertainty by William Byers, gives a good reason to question the absolutism assigned to mathematics - and the ideal of 'one truth' that is ultimately discoverable through the human lens of interpretation.  All mental models are facsimiles of what they describe, and only the original captures all reality.  But models are useful, and give access to predictions that allow bridges to be built, airplanes to fly, and moon shots to hit their target.

However, in this age of major changes in our ecosystems on the planet, it is a wonderful time to soften our edges as scientists, becoming more 'porous' so that we can have access to the closest possible representations of reality during rapid changes. 

Mapping Ourselves in Science

Mapping our Place on the Planet while Stepping Away from Solutions 

Some of our Open Space work from the conference

Our October (2013) exercise in systems mapping prompts us to suggest that science will be better served by stepping away from solutions.  Rather than finding solutions, we invite scientists and engineers to step toward creating community, embracing the art of communication, and re-integrating into society.  Because we are in sore need of new approaches, which we are convinced will lead to new solutions.   

'Mapping the Systems of Science and Technology' working conference, held in San Francisco California at the Presidio Oct 28-30^th, 2013, had the goal of creating a physical 'systems map' of science and technology, built by a vibrant cross-section of the scientific, academic, non-profit and corporate domains[i].

Our conclusion from the event: we need to generate scientists as participatory change-agents.  We'd like to engage our community in a clear self-assessment of where we are, choosing where we want to be, and nurturing a place for science within the fabric of society. 

 

A Strange Back-drop 

In order to help us fund this hands-on conference at the Presidio, we submitted a small NSF conference grant just hours before the government shut-down on Sep 30th, 2013.  Submission of a formal grant by a small non-profit such as ourselves is no small feat, as the National Science Foundation is positioned for large academic entities with grants offices.  We were required to attain a DUNS numbers, our own CCR code, and all manner of artifacts symbolic of bureaucracy.  Our secretary of the board at the time, Amy Asleson, was able to navigate with me through the many layers to get ‘into the system’ – a system not designed with social entrepreneurs such as ourselves in mind.  In general, we find the organizational structures of science are grappling with innovative approaches, and finding a foothold for such can be difficult. 

Emails we sent to the National Science Foundation to check on the status of our application bounced back with ‘Due to a lapse in government funding, National Science Foundation staff will not be receiving or responding to email until further notice....'  

I believe this is an early warning sign of system failure.  I feel strongly that our larger system – the planet we live on – shows signs of similar systems failure.  We ran a last-minute call to action with the invitation Tired of Things that Don't Work?  Join Us for Mapping the Systems of Science and Technology:  Assessing Tools for Teamwork.
 
The time seems ideal for getting a group of visionary, committed, caring scientists and technology folks into a room to map out our current system, and to perhaps even create a path to a desired future.  What we found instead was a deeper chasm of questions. We’ve spent the months since the event on a learning cycle.  

Mapping our Future 

Our conclusion:  a movement, as well as (potentially) a map to get there, is needed.  How do we come to this?

The idea of ‘Maps’ is becoming more popular as a way of characterizing a complex systems or problems.  The National Science Foundation-funded program, Places and Spaces (http://scimaps.org/), has maps that are designed to make sense of massive amounts of data.  Ours is different.  We were creating a “mess map.”   

Mess maps are systems maps built for wicked problems; areas too complex to see through a single lens.  According to Robert Horn (the originator of this mapping approach, and a participant at our working conference) wicked problems “…are not … merely problems. Problems have solutions. Messes do not have straightforward solutions.”  A brief background on the development of mess maps by Robert Horn and Elsa Roberts can be seen at http://stanford.edu/~rhorn/a/recent/spchKnwldgPACKARD.pdf).

While maps with a global focus were drafted as a result of the conference, it appears that for the younger scientists in particular, the focus on their own survival in building a long-term career in science was such an overwhelming challenge that the larger picture, and the risks to our planet, blurred into the background.  We did not create a ‘mess map’ able to capture those larger connections.  We seemed caught in the weeds, with single-item solutions popping out all over the place.  We're not alone.  
 
In April of this year, Bruce Alberts, Marc Kirschner, Shirley Tilghman and Harold Varmus published "Rescuing USbiomedical Research from its Systemic Flaws" in PNAS, publicly declaring a major breakdown in the way we train scientists.  A stakeholder meeting convened shortly after, on April 27th 2014 as part of the ASBMB annual meeting, was rife with 'instant fixes.'  Suggestions such as limiting the number of students going into graduate school, or making post-docs leave their positions after 'aging out,' were band-aid fixes to much more complex issues.  And a major player - the health of the human population, and the health of the planet - were not even on the docket. 

 

Why Urgency? 

Me at the Mapping Wall; Presidio, San Francisco CA Oct 30 2013

For our mess mapping exercise, we convened at the Golden Gate Club (a former enlisted men's club from when the Presidio was a premier army base), overlooking the Golden Gate Bridge and San Francisco Bay.  We feel it was a perfect setting, as the Presidio is now renovated as a mixed base public/private sector collaborative of residences and organizations, offering both stunning views and the creative atmosphere of an incubator.

We wished to explore current systems-wide trends in science, including the call for more STEM-ready workers juxtaposed to the breakdown in job availability for STEM workers at the PhD and post-doctoral level; the need for more STEM teachers juxtaposed to the high turnover rates for teachers, especially STEM teachers, in their first four years on the job.  Our goal was to begin connecting the bigger picture.
 
Our map-maker brings to the fore what I call the “Bob Horn Effect.”

Whenever I visit with Bob, he has yet another article about rapid changes to the planet. He is dogged in his passion and bluntness about the trouble we’re in.  Along with scenario-building exercises on pandemics, nuclear waste disposal, health-care, terrorism and geopolitical issues, Bob was part of a visionary scenario building project called Vision 2050 lead by 50 world business leaders.  This group put their considerable informed knowledge and concerns on the table.  Bob is aware that nine planetary boundaries have been identified. Of those three have been dangerously exceeded and we are moving toward toward the dangerous thresholds of four more. [ii]

Science and technology have everything to do with tipping points.  Some may be attributed to our current technology-driven practices.  Many, if not most, are recoverable from new technologies.  I believe scientists and engineers can be central to society’s effective stewardship of the planet.

But over three days at the Presidio, no clear connections were being discerned.  A young scientist shared with us after the event that with so many distinguished and influential people in the room, we should have come to answers. 
The desire to get to that solution space quickly appears to be a human compunction.
Bob Horn and I had a follow-up meeting with the Science Policy group at UCSF, a group of concerned PhD students and post-docs.  UCSF has been at the forefront in assessing current trends and outcomes for the Life Sciences (see for example www.lifescied.org/content/10/3/239.full.pdf).
 
The young scientists who gathered in the room to speak with us about the mess map were not clear on its purpose.  Further inquiry indicated they were clear on the solutions they proposed for the country’s scientific future. More and better science education in our public schools.  More (and reliable) funding.  A deeper appreciation for science from the American public. These solutions are familiar to members of the scientific community…yet they do not seem to be making much headway. 

 

Going Upstream 

So now we are looking at what might be missing, to fill the spaces between individual needs (as represented by career issues), and humanity’s and the world’s needs (as represented by a sustainable planet).
 
Next I will be writing about what I believe THE major global challenge is, how we are addressing the major chasm we have discovered, and how the Bauhaus movement of last century has valuable input for our current generations.

---

[i] Individuals from NSF, NIH, NAS, universities, foundations, as well as next-generation scientists (graduate students and post-docs), IT specialists, educators, technologists and program leaders from industry and government participated.

[ii] Nature Vol 461|24 September 2009 pp 472-475.

---

 ~~

October 28-30th, 2013

The Presidio, San Francisco
~musings on our third conference~

Yámana Science and Technology held its third National working conference ~ 'Mapping the Systems of Science and Technology' ~ in San Francisco on Oct 28th-30th.  It was our first event outside of the beltway.  Our 2010 and 2012 'UnSummits' were held in the Washington DC area, and were an official part of the USA Science and Engineering Festival.  We called ourselves the 'think tank' part of the festival. 

This event was held in sync with the Bay Area Science Festival -- yet it is telling that we were not part of that festival.  Though we had made inquiries into becoming an official part of that event, the question of who can make that decision became a barrier that was not overcome.  In the end, we were 'stand-alone.'

I feel like a manifesto of some sort should come out of this event.  The complexity, emotion, diversity and new ground seem to call for a large 'aha!' that can be captured in a rallying cry.  Several of us at the event spoke of a 'birthing' .... a pivotal point in time where new life is breathed into something precious.

Perhaps it was.

First a nod to the festivals.  Larry Bock has been a gracious and generous supporter of our work, even as he may be working at slightly different parts of the 'system' of science.  We (the founders of Yámana Science and Technology) are scientists and technology specialists - several of us with PhDs, and all of us with many years' experience in academia, medicine, or industry.  Larry is hoping to inspire more children in the USA to become interested in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math).  

Larry's desire to take on the monumental task of running a festival is born of being a serial entrepreneur of life science companies, and looking far and wide (often overseas) for good talent to hire for STEM jobs.  

We, however, are part of the industry that is 'super-saturated.'  The PhD and technology worker population that is over-qualified and that feels we need to be working on different things in science, in different ways.  Yet Larry sees enough overlap in initiative, derring-do, and vision, that he gave a 'yes' in 2010 to support our cause and let us be officially included in his event.

I myself am a graduate of the University of California, San Diego, as are two of my co-founders of Yámana Science and Technology.  We've had a long history with UC San Francisco, which is the grantee for the Bay Area Science Festival.  I knew of that festival before it was born - on the first year, when NSF did not fund the grant application, and on the subsequent year, when it did.  I attended the first International Public Science Event Conference in 2011, in Washington DC, where festival officials gathered and shared best practices and ideas in this burgeoning field.  Our conference venue was due to the suggestion of the wonderful Rebecca Smith, who was part of the granting process that got the Bay Area Science Festival going.  

When I wanted to know if we could partner-up here on the West Coast, there was no 'go to' person like Larry Bock - at least not one that I could identify.  

I only mention this because this was the beginning ground-rumble of what was writ large in the dynamics of our conference.  

The conference was a wonderful thing.  People were engaged, dynamic, happy to be there, and sometimes not.  There was excitement, energy, new learning, and even some very emotional parts.

Why?

Because of two dominant dynamics.

One - the planet is in trouble.  One session, where we outlined desired headlines from a future we wish to create, spoke of overcoming issues such as bee colony collapse, CO₂ emissions, and trash in the Pacific gyre. Notes from the working sessions are captured here.

 

Yet the scientists from academia and basic research were engaged in discussions about their careers.

The two worlds seemed quite separate.  Some people got angry.  Angry that the scientists were 'belly button gazing' when the world's ecosystems are collapsing(!).  

Yet I can attest as to one reason why this disconnection has occured. 

For scientists, their own ecosystem is collapsing.  I maintain that many, if not most, have entered science as a career to make a difference on the planet.  I believe they are striving with great heart to do exactly that.  But the extreme competition, the exponential growth of PhDs without concomitant growth of jobs for which they've been trained, the hyper-competition for grants and extreme pressure for 'high impact' publications makes their career a seeming battle for survival.  When you're so concerned about your own existence, the needs of the planet become fading and existential.  Perhaps.

I say that a new conversation potentially emerged from our event.  The daunting challenge of the 'Ivory Tower' emerged full force from the back-ground.  The urgency of crashing populations of various dominant species, such as salmon, played full throttle for me.  And the urgency of addressing livelihood and sustenance for our scientists-in-training came on like a train on greased rails.  This was accentuated by the presence, on the first day, of both Michael Teitelbaum - who is clear that we don't need more PhD scientists in an already saturated workforce population - and my son, who is applying for PhD programs in physics, because of an inner drive to 'do' science at the level only now possible, in our current explorations of the Universe.  Who wouldn't want to know the things one learns while obtaining a PhD.  But then what to do with that knowledge....

It will take a birthing for these two worlds to drop behind, and a new world to emerge.

Innovate + Educate: Bringing Inspiring Conversations about through TEDxLivermore

Alex Eckert of Livermore High during rehearsal

 When Yámana Science and Technology hosts our Science 'UnSummits' (first in 2010, most recently in 2012) one of our goals is to share new ideas and emerging trends on how work gets ‘done,’ especially in the scientific and technical sector. 

I believe people have a natural desire to contribute and a built-in wish to thrive (shared by all living things).  I also believe that our current evolution and opportunity is to envision a way for all to thrive.  That’s my theory, and I’m sticking to it.  And I’ve been spending a good bit of time looking for places that this is happening.  The scrum environment is one of these trends.  ‘The Starfish and the Spider’ points to this too.  Tribal Leadership, the rise in non-profits, the ‘Blessed Unrest’ that drives us forward, with the goal of mutual thriving on the horizon.

I got to participate quite heavily in bringing this message to a warm and engaged audience at the June 8^th TEDxLivermore event at Las Positas College. This intense day of stage and speaker management capped a year and a half of weekly meetings with one of the most fun teams I’ve ever been on:  Roz Hamar, Director of Valley Montessori School, Stacy Drury, our project manager (truly wonderful in this position!), Kathy Ohm as speaker coach, Michelle Eastman, Jill Miller for PR, Kate Mullen who was heavily engaged at the outset, and the list goes on.  We had so much fun!  As we got close to the event day, we gave up the idea of carrying out efficient and matter-of-fact meetings, as we were having too much fun in the covering of every detail and sharing our minds and opinions while we were at it.

How did I find this wonderful opportunity for spreading ‘ideas worth sharing?’  In a word, Dale Kaye (ok, make that two words).  When I met Dale she was the very forward-thinking President of the Chamber of Commerce in Livermore CA.  Almost immediately she shared with me her vision for an 'Idea Festival' in Livermore - to share emerging trends and innovative practices in high tech.  Now the Executive Director of Innovation Tri-Valley Leadership Group, Dale has not stopped thinking about ways to connect people, ideas and vision.
I’m thinking about the TEDx approach through the lens of complexity and self-organization.  Unlike our bootstrapped events at the Science ‘UnSummits,’ where we have 1-2 cameras, one person doing all the streaming and projection, me as host, and everything done from the ground-up, TEDx provides a format that requires a highly evolved village.  People do the jobs they are trained to do, with heart and soul, while improvisation and bootstrapping still operated for our all-volunteer planning team.  For me it’s a hybrid and a reminder of how exhilarating it is to work with people who are really good at what they are doing.

I suspect one of the major benefits of the more highly organized TEDx events is the online talks after the event.  The speakers spent considerable time making this ‘the best talk of their lives,’ which to me is a bit of hyperbole and a really big dash of pressure.  But, that being said, it also brought out clear, succinct messages that have vision and weight behind them.  This is likely a highly effective lever for change through inspiration.

Jeremy Brown (@SocialJeremy) tweeted this photo capturing our opening innovators - The Basement Boys featuring Matt Roads, Marshall Williams and Andrew Wilke