tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-85860986794468619202024-03-05T04:22:45.511-08:00Olive OilA blog on integral theory, the web, and things in betweenAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-50454345422333120372012-04-30T20:51:00.000-07:002012-05-02T22:06:49.539-07:00Translated Excerpts from a French Integral Theorist<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSovMPl5ZfbDFs1iKlowAlE6JRm23JbnaW4qc_M7q7D4Ys8PipwSAJ0Pmr9j6FxGxmasg_PbQSMGvivjkmAW3c5YoHJUnD8HuiFx4izQdBqiqLRT-mHpuybjd-me5aOLEnUN_Amd1_FXWs/s1600/EdgarMorin40%25.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="297" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSovMPl5ZfbDFs1iKlowAlE6JRm23JbnaW4qc_M7q7D4Ys8PipwSAJ0Pmr9j6FxGxmasg_PbQSMGvivjkmAW3c5YoHJUnD8HuiFx4izQdBqiqLRT-mHpuybjd-me5aOLEnUN_Amd1_FXWs/s320/EdgarMorin40%25.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Edgar Morin, French sociologist/philosopher</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I often found that the best way to understand a complex idea is to understand how it's different from other similar ideas. Understanding what something is <i>NOT </i>is an essential part of understanding what it is: it clearly delineates the boundary. It's an aspect of Integral Theory that was immediately appealing to me, it emphasizes differentiating between things that are <i>seemingly </i>identical, looking deeper than the surface of things.<br />
<br />
It's a quality I discovered recently in the French philosopher Edgar Morin, and it made me want to offer you a few translated excerpts in this post. Morin is a contemporary integral thinker that Sean Esbjörn-Hargens compared to Wilber and Roy Baskhar (unpublished source). Sean suggests that while Wilber's work focuses primarily on psychology and spirituality (Upper-Left quadrant), and Bashar's on the intersubjective realm (Lower-Left), Morin's "Complex Thinking" finds coherence in systems of systems (Lower-Right).<br />
<br />
Here are some chosen excerpts<sup>1</sup> that integralists might find, if not familiar, at least relevant to how they think about Integral Theory. Enjoy! (all emphasis below are mine)<br />
<div>
<h3>
</h3>
<div>
<br />
<a name='more'></a></div>
<h3>
Organisationism vs. Organicism</h3>
It is important to notice the difference of level between <b>organisationism </b>which we believe necessary, and traditional <b>organicism</b>. Organicism is a syncretic concept, historic, confused, romantic. It starts from the organism seen as a harmoniously organised whole, even when it carries within itself antagonism and death. Coming from the organism, organicism makes of it a model of either macrocosm (organicist conception of the univerrse), either human society; Thus, an entire sociological movement of the last century tried to see in society an analogy to the animal organism, minuciously looking for equivalences between biological life and social life. <br />
<br />
On the other hand, instead of trying to find phenomenal analogies, organisationism looks for common organizing principles, the evolving principles of these principles, the characteristics of their diversification. <i>From there, and from there only, phenomenal analogies can possibly find some meaning.</i> [...]<br />
<br />
This conception, we just denounced its romantism. It is only fair now to correct ourselves. Romantic organicism, like during theRenaissance, like in Chinese philosophy (Needham, 1973), has always thought that the organism behaves according to a rich and complex organization, that it cannot be reduced to linear laws, to simple principles, to clear and distinct ideas, to a mecanist vision. Its virtue is in foreseeing that the living organization cannot be understood according to the same logic than the machine, and that the logical originality of the organism is best translated by the complementarity of terms, which according to classic logic are antagonistic, repuslive, contradictory.<b> </b><i>In a word, organicism supposes a rich and complex organization, but does not propose it. </i>(p. 39-40)<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWjkTlhwF2nq_hSd8Of16DIqMquG9v1BvQ4FzrhiQr9OQGLCHXmsDXTWQI09FzUVWvluhlj71JauJ-eKYE5gSFIfEuebPEeYJwBHMkWCuTO0XM_dbRxf-BmxW1082tLC_ZpN-bfb51kwNK/s1600/drawing-organicism-organizationism.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWjkTlhwF2nq_hSd8Of16DIqMquG9v1BvQ4FzrhiQr9OQGLCHXmsDXTWQI09FzUVWvluhlj71JauJ-eKYE5gSFIfEuebPEeYJwBHMkWCuTO0XM_dbRxf-BmxW1082tLC_ZpN-bfb51kwNK/s1600/drawing-organicism-organizationism.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Holism-Organicism vs. Complexity-Organisationism</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br /></div>
<div>
<h3>
</h3>
<h3>
Complexity vs. Holism</h3>
On the way to complexity, we see that classic alternatives lose their absolute character, or rather change their character: to "either/or" we substitute both a "neither/neither" and a "and/and". Such is the opposition between unity/diversity, chance/necessity, quantity/quality, subject/object; Such is, let's say it now, of the holism/reductionism alternative. In effect, reductionism has always elicited a "holistic" opposing movement rooted in the preeminence of the concept of globality, or wholeness. But every time, wholeness has been no more than a plastic bag wrapped around anything in whatever way, and wrapping around it too well: the more wholeness becomes full, the more it becomes empty. Instead, <i>we want to reveal, beyond reductionism and holism, the idea of a complex unity, which connects analytic-reductionist thinking to wholeness thinking in a dialectic</i> that we will further define later. (p. 72)<br />
<h3>
</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Complexity vs. Formless Metaphysics</h3>
There is such a complexity in the universe, we have found so many contradictions that some scientists think of going beyond thiscontradiction through what we can call a new metaphysics. These new metaphysicians look into the mystics, in particular from the East, and in particular buddhists, the experience of the void which is the whole, and of the whole which is nothing. They perceive here a sort of fundamental unity where everything is connected, everything is in harmony, we could say, and they have a reconciliated - even euphoric - vision of the world.<br />
<br />
<i>In my opinion, by doing so they escape complexity.</i> Why? Because complexity is where we cannot overcome a contradiction, or a tragedy. In some respects, current physics is discovering that something escapes time and space, but it doesn't negate that at the same time, there is no doubt we are also in space and time.<br />
<br />
We cannot reconciliate these two ideas. Do we have to accept them as is? Accepting complexity, it is accepting a contradiction and the idea that we cannot bypass contradictions in a euphoric vision of the world.<br />
<br />
Of course, our world includes harmony, but this harmony is connected to disharmony. It is exactly what Heraclite said: there is harmony in disharmony, and vice versa.<br />
<br />
<br />
---<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #666666;">1. These excerpts are translated from <a href="http://www.amazon.fr/Introduction-pens%C3%A9e-complexe-Edgar-Morin/dp/2020668378" target="_blank">Introduction à la pensée complexe</a> (E. Morin, 2005)</span></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-28578943977168238172012-03-03T18:13:00.004-08:002012-03-03T18:25:59.528-08:00No, it's not "in" a quadrant<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhtNKalLbcvomqk9sgNSZksWgw21bE8paioqtoeSWLbNWMdoy8fSk5eFBOVQin37fadqS__qXurY6nbeCqhdz0DC7YBEjsL4Krc9DKtj2IixQSYdtMY1WdzD2gjIjTIw0XjwZeH-SjEUXI/s1600/mind-brain-mystery2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhtNKalLbcvomqk9sgNSZksWgw21bE8paioqtoeSWLbNWMdoy8fSk5eFBOVQin37fadqS__qXurY6nbeCqhdz0DC7YBEjsL4Krc9DKtj2IixQSYdtMY1WdzD2gjIjTIw0XjwZeH-SjEUXI/s1600/mind-brain-mystery2.jpg" /></a><br />
I'd like to debunk a simple mistake that some early enthusiasts of Integral Theory tend to make: <b>the idea that we can sort actual things in the quadrants</b>. It's not what Integral Theory says, even if Wilber himself can often make this linguistic shortcut.<br />
<br />
The mistake is to consider the quadrants as reified categories within which one can sort things:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>ideas are in the Upper-Left quadrant (UL), </li>
<li>my body goes into the Upper-Right (UR), </li>
<li>our culture in the Lower-Left (LL), and </li>
<li>our political system is Lower-Right stuff (LR). </li>
</ul>
<br />
This simplification is useful at first to explain the quadrants, but really it's more complex. <b>For Integral Theory, quadrants are <i>dimensions </i>of holons</b>, and every holon has four - except for groups, which have only two. So it doesn't mean anything to say that an entire object "is in one quadrant." Saying that is a reification of our own perspective on that object. It is reducing the object to only one of its dimensions, and reifying this dimension as if it was a thing in itself.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<b>Take the <i>mind</i>, for instance</b>. It's okay to say that the mind is "in" the UL quadrant, as long as we know that "the mind" is a mental construct that we humans created to refer to something mysterious that we experience. Defining the mind as a UL object only shows that we are looking at "it" from the UL lens.<br />
It's a UL perspective on a mysterious object, which naturally reveals (or enacts) its UL dimension. Looked at it from a UR perspective, we see its UR dimension, which we happen to call <i>brain</i>. And this thing in the middle is, in many ways, a mystery.<br />
<br />
As we use these conceptual tools, let's never forget that our constructs are useful distinctions to think about things, they are not the actual things<sup>1</sup>. The world really is mysterious.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
---<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #666666;">1. Actually, it's even more complex than that. According to Integral Theory, actual things are not simple objects existing independently of us engaging them. For more of that, see Wilber's <a href="http://books.google.com/books/about/Integral_spirituality.html?id=i3goAAAAYAAJ" target="_blank"><i>Integral Spirituality</i></a> (2007), especially appendix III on "The Myth of the Given", or for an even more advanced inquiry, see <i><a href="http://www.kenwilber.com/blog/show/677" target="_blank">An Ontology of Climate Change: Integral Pluralism and the Enactment of Multiple Objects</a></i> (2011), by Sean Esbjörn-Hargens.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline" />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-87810970274400320922012-02-17T12:11:00.000-08:002012-02-25T14:43:09.573-08:00Integral Scholars: Let's Bring Scholarship To The WebA few days ago I discovered an article in the New York Times about "<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/science/open-science-challenges-journal-tradition-with-web-collaboration.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all" target="_blank">Open Science</a>" that strongly resonated with me. It covers a topic that I have been chewing on for some time: the potential for scholars and specialists of all sorts to leverage the power of the Internet to revolutionize the way knowledge is created, accessed and legitimized. Then a question came with it: <b>why isn't the integral community more active on the open web</b><sup>(1)</sup><b>?</b><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.coreywdevos.com/about/" target="_blank">Corey DeVos</a> from Integral Life <a href="http://www.integralchicks.com/2011/11/ic-04-allowing-yourself-to-come-online-with-corey-devos/" target="_blank">says to Integral Chicks</a> that before Integral Naked (2006), the Integral community had trouble finding itself and interacting with each other, whereas today the problem has changed: dialogue happens mostly within the community and we need more dialogue with the exterior. We can find Integral content online—mostly "pop integral" I would say—but in many ways the Integral discourse is <i>de facto</i> closed due to obstacles like monthly fees and premium memberships. Technically it's on the web, but not openly so. As to the <i>scholarly </i>discourse<sup>(2)</sup> in particular, it seems almost absent<sup>(3)</sup>. And this is the discourse I'm interested in for this post.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMeVB8CaM802QSnf50o1kXspyOwKKiEVirRES_eMU-XQkNXoQTNXvP8JXNuxa0hG09pu23Uw9UbR9_FEBynrQvyEH9UY4-yePo9_-perlM6RjV6IUG98DNKRH17vv0i532zFQ4LH851y_g/s1600/integral-community4_650px.png" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;" /></div>
<br />
<br />
This situation is not specific to the integral discourse. It illustrates a deeper current in the academic world and there are reasons for it. Such a closed system makes sense given the (outdated) technological structure it was designed for, and the conventional business model deriving from it. But it carries serious drawbacks too. Think compartmentalization of disciplines, lack of innovation, or the ivory tower effect dissociating the scholar from the "real world". For the integral movement, which prides itself for being leading edge, trans-disciplinary by nature, and open to meeting people "where they are", it is a disappointing state of affairs.<br />
<br />
I would love to see that change, and I think it's becoming more and more possible. The technology supporting a more open scholarly discourse is developing and science is likely heading in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/science/open-science-challenges-journal-tradition-with-web-collaboration.html?_r=3&pagewanted=all" target="_blank">that direction</a> anyway. Jason Priem has an interesting blog about the growing <a href="http://jasonpriem.org/2011/11/twitter-and-the-new-scholarly-ecosystem/" target="_blank">scholarly use of social media</a> and a manifesto for <a href="http://altmetrics.org/manifesto/" target="_blank">new scholarship metrics</a>—both of which shed some light on this trend. I would really like to see the Integral community a bit more open to—if not invested in—this evolution. <b>Would it not only be consistent with its overall purpose?</b><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<a name='more'></a>I get the feeling that integral scholars turn their nose up at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0" target="_blank">Web 2.0 (and 3.0)</a>. Do they just not understand it? The web is not a Gen Y fad. Let's not forget that 20 years ago, <a href="http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/" target="_blank">Tim Berners-Lee initially invented the World Wide Web</a> as a global information sharing platform for... scientists.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<img 1em;"="" 1em;="" border="0" clear:="" float:="" left;="" margin-bottom:="" margin-right:="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhqT_Vdx_01rQ36dn-boSc9ag1VcH96uKmAGHshEFNRGjRHFErg5BhQa-TjID-DE9G6qlUNcHmTvhzKMnaNfUbBGGbPAly45i1V5invz4pblR8J8X6BQl25VMnsUy9NFHcPCFW1CdH9g7BC/s1600/scale-vulgarization-to-scholarly-v2.0.png" /></div>
<br />
<h4>
The New Rules of The Game Push Toward Openness</h4>
The Internet asks for a shift in the way we conceive the creation, control and sharing of knowledge. Below are some mechanisms inherent to the way the Internet works—some current, some emergent—that I see pointing at this evolution.<br />
<h5>
The web is vast: there is room for everybody, especially niches</h5>
Unlike TV, the web provides room for everyone. Niche communities can thrive. Nothing really prevents us from using open web tools to share highly specialized content, if only between us, but on platforms that allow traffic across different communities and fields. Simple examples are:<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnHUFl6Y3OVHyVb0oDJ1KZiWLGrcbRdpApZvn1bcZWrfQTvPAPlVjdzQLNWWpoGU8nhqWW2UoDaF7Yd3Dr6cThZx2uVQ_7JGHczgYhKbO33d1poYpxpBSRQAaxurYv5jxKtPBSDUoZ2aKG/s1600/stack-exchange.png" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Borrowed from <a href="http://stackexchange.com/" target="_blank">Stack Exchange</a>.<br />
The middle star represents<br />
what Stack Exchange is about.</i></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/" target="_blank"><b>YouTube</b></a>: why not create videos to discuss epistemology and metaphysics? It doesn't have to be perfect (more on that below), you can embed it on your Integral-Something website if so inclined, and you also get the openness and exposure of being on the YouTube platform.</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/" target="_blank"><b>Wikipedia</b></a>: There is an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_Theory" target="_blank">Integral Theory page</a> that could use some work.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.quora.com/" target="_blank"><b>Quora</b></a>: this Q&A site allows everyone to ask and answer questions with a system of credits and community votes to promote quality content. There is an <a href="http://www.quora.com/Integral-Theory" target="_blank">"Integral Theory" topic</a> with a few questions and 80 people (!) following it.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.researchgate.net/" target="_blank"><b>ResearchGate</b></a>: a social networking and Q&A site for academics and scientists. So far I'm not impressed with the level of the content. It lacks a good peer-regulated process to control content, but I will keep an eye on it.</li>
<li><a href="http://stackexchange.com/" target="_blank"><b>Stack Exchange</b></a>: By far my favorite Q&A site about most topics. It has a complex hybrid system of peer-regulated and automatic control to promote helpful content and helpful users. You can get an idea of the level of discourse with this question in the Philosophy forum: <a href="http://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/442/is-science-about-truth-or-adequate-models">Is Science about Truth or Adequate Models?</a></li>
</ul>
<h5>
Open access is a competitive advantage</h5>
The Internet is all about linking and sharing. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_syndication" target="_blank">Syndicated content</a> and <a href="http://creativecommons.org/" target="_blank">Creative Commons</a> make more sense in this space than locked content and Copyright because the system encourages and <i>advantages </i>sharing (think SEO, social sharing, etc.). Embedded content, <a href="http://www.whatisrss.com/" target="_blank">RSS</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_programming_interface#Use_of_APIs_to_share_content" target="_blank">APIs</a> are technologies that are rapidly but imperceptibly remeshing the web. It doesn't mean you should not have a website centralizing all this information, but you should not have it <i>only </i>on your website, or it will be an isolated island on the vast ocean that is the web.<br />
<h5>
Peer-regulated reputation</h5>
The web is becoming less wild, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/27/randi-zuckerberg-anonymity-online_n_910892.html" target="_blank">less anonymous</a>, and online reputation is increasingly relevant for 'real life' credibility. <a href="http://techcrunch.com/2011/02/20/quora-vs-stackexchange/" target="_blank">Jon Evans writes for TechCrunch</a> that the online identity war is over, Facebook won—anywhere we browse we can be identified via our Facebook account. The next stake is our <i>online reputation</i>, based on how much our online peers trust our contributions. For example, the <a href="http://stackoverflow.com/" target="_blank">Stack Overflow</a> <a href="http://stackoverflow.com/faq#reputation" target="_blank">reputation</a> is quantified with an index. For programmers it is an index that tech companies look at for new hires. It is true too for mathematicians with the <a href="http://mathoverflow.net/" target="_blank">Math Overflow</a> forum, according to a comment to the <a href="http://techcrunch.com/2011/02/20/quora-vs-stackexchange/" target="_blank">same TechCrunch article</a>. The key here is that online reputation, if reliable, allows for a different kind of online discourse, which is peer-regulated and of higher quality.<br />
<h5>
Knowledge can be peer-controlled</h5>
Decentralization may most profoundly impact the way knowledge is controlled, i.e., which piece of content accesses to recognition and public reward. We currently have a system with a few gatekeepers whose expertise we trust to filter the content worthy of our attention (e.g., journals). There is no question that we need control, truth is not a democracy. But we can imagine other ways to assert control than the traditional top-down system of publication gatekeepers and appointed peer-reviewers. For one, they inevitably are a bottle-neck in the flow of information, and they are simply humans with biases, subject to politics.<br />
<br />
<b>Here again, in the last few years web platforms like Stack Exchange have been <a href="http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2011/12/building-social-software-for-the-anti-social.html" target="_blank">exploring peer-regulated ways</a> to control the quality of content.</b> Such decentralized systems can process massively more information and the knowledge thus produced is openly accessible to anyone on the web. Over 35 million monthly visitors are <a href="http://stackexchange.com/about" target="_blank">reported</a> by Stack Exchange. How many are we to read <a href="http://aqaljournal.integralinstitute.org/Public/" target="_blank">JITP</a>?<br />
<br />
The key to mass peer-regulation is to have a reliable system that promotes helpful contributions and helpful contributors. So, is there a reliable one? As of now Stack Exchange seems to be doing the best job with a sophisticated system of <i>votes </i>and <i>privileges </i>based on a quantified <i>reputation</i> index. Is it perfect? Probably not, but I have little doubt that they are learning from their shortcomings. In any case, it's already significantly better than any other system I have seen.<br />
<h5>
It's okay if it's not perfect...</h5>
<b>It is a lesson that the tech world is (re)teaching the world through movements like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agile_software_development" target="_blank">Agile</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lean_Startup" target="_blank">Lean Startup</a>: there is tremendous value in opening the doors of our creative process</b>. It allows us to iterate and learn from our actions in order to continuously refine both action and learning. Those more versed in <a href="http://developmentalobserver.blog.com/2010/06/09/an-overview-of-constructive-developmental-theory-cdt/" target="_blank">developmental psychology</a> than software development may recognize the principles of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_research#William_Torbert.E2.80.99s_Developmental_Action_Inquiry" target="_blank">Torbert's double- and triple-loop feedback action-inquiry</a> baked in the Lean Startup process. The web culture and the platforms I mentioned encourage this open processing of ideas. Let's not cook our ideas in a corner in the hope of presenting to the world the most perfect final product. Instead let's cook together, that's what the web is here for.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizymCkr4e-whJoc-Vk5X0DHB6YMelEUNhswd-dLF6ewOZWZW4USbsnNolZWjuexIGZbGYnOYXniWqqHaE-KT_Ra_78nfQT1YOvcJaXJRJP-qwGFMzRC57pJszEnORkoWwJqtB7zWnnX_KI/s1600/Tri_loops.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="165" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizymCkr4e-whJoc-Vk5X0DHB6YMelEUNhswd-dLF6ewOZWZW4USbsnNolZWjuexIGZbGYnOYXniWqqHaE-KT_Ra_78nfQT1YOvcJaXJRJP-qwGFMzRC57pJszEnORkoWwJqtB7zWnnX_KI/s320/Tri_loops.gif" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Developmental Action-Inquiry's feedback loops.<br />
Borrowed from <a href="http://encycl.opentopia.com/term/Action_Research_for_Personal,_Group,_and_Organizational_Development" target="_blank">Opentopia</a></i></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOgXjWYKC1uRf4tU-viIVuar2FmZoa0Uz_4KblqT-uqs8JrMWfhImlD_y8VmBjH7y1KPLhRY80hwhiRYJdoHMN29QW2x14ovoY36nCW4SUt60aTfDHc1ABu7wTmqRiHnkNOoSyueUHPtvu/s1600/lean_startup_white4-e12946709027881.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; display: inline !important; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><img border="0" height="158" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOgXjWYKC1uRf4tU-viIVuar2FmZoa0Uz_4KblqT-uqs8JrMWfhImlD_y8VmBjH7y1KPLhRY80hwhiRYJdoHMN29QW2x14ovoY36nCW4SUt60aTfDHc1ABu7wTmqRiHnkNOoSyueUHPtvu/s200/lean_startup_white4-e12946709027881.png" width="200" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Lean Startup's Build-Measure-Learn cycle.<br />
Borrowed from <a href="http://www.jenniferarguello.com/tag/lean-startup-2/" target="_blank">Jennifer Arguello</a></i></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<h4 style="clear: both;">
Still Not Ripe For Human Sciences?</h4>
<div style="clear: both;">
Now if Integral scholars—and scholars at large—are not participating in the open web, there are probably good reasons. Here are some of the possible obstacles that may prevent this evolution.</div>
<ul>
<li><b>Controlling the quality of content with a system of votes and reputation a la Stack Exchange may be easier with hard science than human sciences.</b> Topics like mathematics or programming rely on more indisputable facts than human sciences, which are more interpretative. Biases in interpretative disciplines are harder to identify and will sneak in the voting more easily.<br />
I think it's a valid concern, but not specific to the online platform. This problem is already present in academia, and it might actually be lessened on an online forum, since control is less centralized in the hands of a few. There is already a <a href="http://philosophy.stackexchange.com/" target="_blank">philosophy forum</a> on Stack Exchange with 211 visitors every day, which may illustrate how much this problem is (not) showing up.</li>
<li><b>Most online platforms I mentioned are still in the building and aren't solid institutions</b>. There is a risk that they won't work, and all the content and the meta-content (reputation, votes) could be lost. So it's a somewhat risky investment of time. It's also why early adopters who are not in an advantageous position in the current system may find an advantage here. Barriers to entry are very low, and there might be a mid-term/long-term pay off.</li>
<li><b>One downside of Stack Exchange is the specialization and clear separation of topics</b> in somewhat independent forums, which can be detrimental to discussing the relationships between topics (an endeavor dear to Integral theorists). That said, there is also a "meta" forum with ongoing discussions on these concerns. Not ideal, but it shows that the community is very aware of what is at stake in the definition of the categories. Still, it is a real question.</li>
<li><b>Last but not least, scholars themselves have their own blocks when it comes to using the web.</b> Many of them are boomers or older, and the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_divide" target="_blank">digital generation divide</a> is fully at work when it comes to emerging web trends like the one I describe. In addition, I wonder if some scholars (all ages) may not have a snobbish attitude toward tools viewed as entertainment media or just a waste of time<span style="background-color: #f9f9f9; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small; line-height: normal; text-align: -webkit-auto;">—</span></span>an understandable defense mechanism in the face of what may be felt as a competitive <i>dis</i>advantage. </li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigfi4Tbho4imfQMonb-dDPVw1SnZlFF06Jz9RmhJE4YbSUeKYKiEpOBSo6xiPV3QW1RkpWMJZFFr3BvZg3CNa0KtNh51VitoE8jIERhzTlxQMelq6HYMK5M5CcD8GM4F0GgySJQa7An3wN/s1600/edu84.gif" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Cartoon displayed with special permission from <a href="http://www.glasbergen.com/">Glasbergen.com</a></i></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<h4>
Journals AND Forums</h4>
Maybe it will take the Gen X/Y to come to power in the scholar culture to make this shift. But we're talking about Integral theory here, can't we expect some avant-gardism in the technology too?<br />
<br />
<b>I'm not suggesting that we replace scholarly journals by Stack Exchange forums</b>. They serve different—yet overlapping—purpose and can both co-exist. I'm only suggesting that scholars, and in this case Integral scholars, invest in these new media platforms. How cool would it be to have a public forum where profound knowledge can be openly shared and useful to people in and outside the field? It is a space ripe for the cross-pollination of ideas.<br />
<br />
On the long term, I see a tremendous potential for science in general—"Open Science" or "Science 2.0" as some would put it. But on the mid-term, I see so much alignment between Integral principles and those implicit to these emerging arenas of discourse that I can't help but want to push us toward them.<br />
<br />
If you know other good trans-disciplinary web platforms than the ones I mentioned, feel free to share them in the comments!<br />
<br />
<i><span style="color: #b45f06;">UPDATE 02/21/12: While discussing this over the weekend with my friends <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/ericdgraham" target="_blank">Eric</a> and <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/mattjcollins" target="_blank">Matt</a>, they encouraged me to create a Stack Exchange site on Integral Theory. Thanks for the nudge, guys, it's a great idea. If you consider yourself an Integral geek (or are interested enough!), come follow the new "Integral Meta-Theories" site on Stack Exchange. We need a critical mass to make it live!</span></i><br />
<a class="button stackexchange" href="http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/38452/integral-meta-theories?referrer=x5IkguY79zMp5FnEyKuObA2" style="margin-top: 10px;" target="_blank" title="Follow the proposal for a Stack Exchange Q&A site about 'Integral Meta-Theories'">Integral Theories</a><br />
<br />
<br />
-----------<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">(1) I admit that "Open Web" has a loose definition here. My short definition is: any service that only requires a web browser to be accessed, without prior registration or subscription, and which facilitates sharing content with other sites. For the purpose of this post, I would even include Facebook's content, because Facebook is so broadly used and sharing-friendly. A more detailed definition is a mix of <a href="http://tantek.com/2010/281/b1/what-is-the-open-web" target="_blank">Tantek Çelik</a>'s and <a href="http://scripting.com/stories/2011/01/04/whatIMeanByTheOpenWeb.html" target="_blank">Dave Winer</a>'s definitions.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">(2) I use the term "scholar" on purpose to designate people who have profound knowledge of a particular subject, regardless of whether they are academics affiliated to higher education institutions, independent scholars, or other kinds of specialists.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">(3) There is a notable exception with <a href="http://www.integralworld.net/" target="_blank">Integral World</a>, but the platform is outdated, hard to navigate, and fails to exploit the interactivity of the Internet. It is mostly a digital repository of articles written with the "paper paradigm" in mind. Nothing wrong with that, to the contrary, but it is not what I am looking for.</span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-83118244209060694272012-01-13T13:45:00.000-08:002012-02-21T00:03:19.961-08:00Why We Need More Spiritual Discrimination<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIy056Mf4C3pRyi4IzUeWKkWc6tqyloJCZCfKhgMVm9NFBJZk0QYyRlemFgCDIUuWXI-R5seis63-ZhI8ZsdyC4x7yvI0XdR5jp5v-2TmIpCj6avlEdVn5AEC6eRtmF2R-FkZZnAoxK_iY/s1600/signs_birdie.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIy056Mf4C3pRyi4IzUeWKkWc6tqyloJCZCfKhgMVm9NFBJZk0QYyRlemFgCDIUuWXI-R5seis63-ZhI8ZsdyC4x7yvI0XdR5jp5v-2TmIpCj6avlEdVn5AEC6eRtmF2R-FkZZnAoxK_iY/s1600/signs_birdie.png" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Borrowed and adapted from <a href="http://hnucampusministry.blogspot.com/2011/01/called-gifted-workshop.html" target="_blank">Campus Ministry</a></i></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Today, I could have benefited from a so-called "Integral Awakening Skype Session" to foster my "transformational process"... But I chose not to, just like I choose not to attend to <a href="http://www.awakening360.com/events" target="_blank">the plethora of spiritual events available in the Bay Area</a>, and here is why.<br />
<br />
You would think that the Bay Area is the best place to nurture your spiritual side given the vivid subculture and the diversity of practices available. And yet I find myself rather closed to the spiritual market here, as if too much exposure to it had made me dull. Is it a personal disposition? Maybe, after all I grew up in a quite secular environment. But really, the red flag to me is <b>the lack of discernment by spiritual teachers about spirituality itself</b>.<br />
<br />
Spirituality is an intimate relationship with reality, it requires observing and experiencing this relationship directly, exploring the territory by yourself before relying on maps others have drawn before you. So it produces an interesting paradox when you live in a culture imbued with spiritual concepts. You are called to encounter them in discussions and readings, and even though you're talking about existential and ultimate concerns, you end up sometimes using them more or less casually.<br />
<br />
I don't know you, but I find it difficult to keep giving a special meaning to a spiritual concept like "awakening" or "epiphany" when I read about it in promotional emails.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<h4>
The Disenchantment of Spirituality</h4>
A high demand for spirituality inevitably means a spiritual market, in which you necessarily find lower quality offers. And maybe because spiritual people don't seem too good at marketing, you also find a lot of low quality marketing. Flyers and ads flourish on coffeeshops pinboards for spiritual workshops, you receive weekly Facebook invitations for a new sangha or a sacred something. Terms such as "consciousness," "integral" and "awakening" become marketing buzz words. Spiritual lingo is used over and over to sell tickets to workshops and talks by otherwise interesting people who promise you the moon.<br />
<br />
But spiritual concepts are elusive enough that if they're abused, I get completely lost in what becomes meaningless verbiage. Language is one of the few ways - though slippery and fragile - spiritual seekers can relate to the object of their search. When language is used loosely and words mean different things, they loose their significance. What does "spiritual growth" exactly mean? Among <a href="http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&q=spiritual+growth" target="_blank">Google's 33 million results</a>, I would bet there is a wide range of interpretations. Terms that for me used to carry a potent transcendental meaning, I now hear them perverted for mundane feel-good experiences. The <a href="http://www.praetrans.com/en/ptf.html" target="_blank">pre-trans fallacy</a> is particularly at play in the popular use of spiritual concepts.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjltrpUxFyNao5LYMJmGpgu-Gg-ibDb-8gfQEm9Y1PR-uwq8jSdZllAdLQNwJu_ZxobiaQAospoGrDmur70I6xCkC3rSRyfS-1oi7Xa3Ure58JekVMJJ9V6ASHLkM9AMKvVvQlwM5CmOEzf/s1600/words-cant-describe.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjltrpUxFyNao5LYMJmGpgu-Gg-ibDb-8gfQEm9Y1PR-uwq8jSdZllAdLQNwJu_ZxobiaQAospoGrDmur70I6xCkC3rSRyfS-1oi7Xa3Ure58JekVMJJ9V6ASHLkM9AMKvVvQlwM5CmOEzf/s1600/words-cant-describe.png" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Borrowed from <a href="http://www.toothpastefordinner.com/archives/2009/Apr/" target="_blank">Toothpaste For Dinner</a></i></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
It's okay to take on a practice or gather for any kind of group experience, but we get lost as to what we're really doing if we use the same concepts to refer to radically different experiences. You may argue that people have different interpretations, and that it's not a problem in itself. I agree, but the problem is<i style="font-weight: bold;"> when they don't recognize that they do</i><b>.</b><br />
<br />
It's a problem because it results in little dialogue about the actual meaning of spiritual ideas - why bother? It looks like we're all talking about the same <i>thing</i> anyway. This lack of reflection is reinforced by a trend in the spiritual world against mental endeavors; discussing the meaning of concepts would be falling prey to ego's tendency for mental masturbation. Here notice the self-justifying loop reasoning. So we're left with a sea of words with loose meaning floating around, unsure of how they relate to 1) each other and to 2) empiric experience.<br />
<br />
How to share with others about these experiences when we have no clear language to communicate? I find that even for myself, words have lost their power. "Awakening" evokes less the inspiring mystery that it used to, and more the colorful ad for an <i><a href="http://www.awakening360.com/business/mike_brabant/service?serviceid=23" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Integral Awakening Skype Session</a></i> that passed by me today.<br />
<h4>
Discriminate!</h4>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/discrimination" target="_blank">Discrimination</a>: a distinction; discernment, the act of discriminating, discerning, distinguishing, noting or perceiving differences between things.</blockquote>
I'm not saying these spiritual services don't offer a valuable service. But if their mission is to raise consciousness in the world, I wish they would lead by example and reflect on what it is exactly that they're selling. The psycho-spiritual market might be the only market where this integrity is so directly a token of credibility.<br />
<br />
What do I suggest? To discriminate!<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnnVhSrIwRzDdJGO8J8yC_Yj0rn-VL68UAd2N9Co1iGUSmOZltfBrKOicuVwGydrV0TmbMp3g3cGHBnXtUCeID0rSTWeY_D0SIZaM4GD3pj7XlKLfuMVo_PEwRC3ORoYc-sA-vJh3z_BvW/s1600/snake-oil-salesman-big.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnnVhSrIwRzDdJGO8J8yC_Yj0rn-VL68UAd2N9Co1iGUSmOZltfBrKOicuVwGydrV0TmbMp3g3cGHBnXtUCeID0rSTWeY_D0SIZaM4GD3pj7XlKLfuMVo_PEwRC3ORoYc-sA-vJh3z_BvW/s400/snake-oil-salesman-big.jpg" width="334" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Illustration borrowed from <a href="http://planetpov.com/2011/04/22/the-republican-snake-oil-salesmen/" target="_blank">PlanetPov</a></i> </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Before science had clear regulative institutions and standardized review processes for what is good and bad science, you could buy a miraculous elixir from a nearby alchemist who, I'm sure, used a lot of savvy scientific words to explain how his elixir would cure you. Does it make it good science? Does it make it an effective elixir?<br />
<br />
In the absence of a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Wilber#Wilber_on_science" target="_blank">scientific approach to spirituality</a>, spirituality will stay stuck in the era of miraculous elixirs. More problematic, it will fail to gain any credibility in our rational world where rational minds are prompt to throw the baby out with the bath water. The good news is that scientific approaches to spirituality already exist - or at least, are in the building. I'm not very familiar with his work, but having encountered some of <a href="http://www.ahalmaas.com/" target="_blank">Almaas</a>' writings, this guy is rigorously specific about the actual experiences that he builds his concepts upon. Of course we need a broader definition of science to allow for such a work to be considered science, which <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Wilber#Wilber_on_science" target="_blank">I find most readily in Ken Wilber's Integral Theory</a>.<br />
<br />
But not everyone is interested in theorizing. So from here I see only two options to be spiritually legit.<br />
<ol>
<li><b>Either you choose to study spirituality and to clearly define the spiritual concepts</b> you use when you're preaching. Here <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Wilber" target="_blank">Wilber</a> and <a href="http://www.ahalmaas.com/" target="_blank">Almaas</a> are my models.</li>
<li><b>Either you choose to not bother too much with these concepts and you avoid using them, translating your experience in your own words. </b>Or you use them cautiously, making only soft claims about them. It's totally fine as long as you have the integrity not to abuse spiritual concepts to sell more. My favorite example in this trend is the spiritual teacher <a href="http://www.adyashanti.org/" target="_blank">Adyashanti</a>, who is the first to demystify spirituality - generally a good sign!</li>
</ol>
<div>
Do you have other recommendations?</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-57295848214039879082011-12-26T11:39:00.001-08:002012-05-07T19:19:04.619-07:00The Latest Developments of Integral Theory - Video of Nick's Presentation<div>
</div>
I recently attended <a href="http://pccforum.wordpress.com/2011/12/14/nick-hedlund-de-witt-integral-theory-in-the-wake-of-wilber/" target="_blank">a talk by my friend Nick Hedlund-de Witt</a> (video below) at the PCC forum (a student group at the California Institute of Integral Studies) in San Francisco.<br />
<br />
<i style="text-align: left;">UPDATE 01/07/12: The video permissions have changed and it is not publicly available anymore. I'll try to find out why.</i>
<br />
<i style="text-align: left;">UPDATE 01/09/12: It turns out the folks at the PCC Forum are waiting for Nick's authorization to re-publish it and he's on vacation at the moment. Stay put!</i><br />
<i style="background-color: #fff2cc; text-align: left;">UPDATE 05/07/12: Well well... it seems that Nick doesn't want to keep that video up - shame on him. He said he might do another one, a better one. Hah! Be sure I will share it when it comes along.</i><br />
<br />
I'm hungry for such presentations for two reasons:<br />
<ol>
<li>First, Nick is an Integral scholar deeply immersed in Integral Theory (IT), in other words he knows his stuff, so whether we like or agree with what he says, we can trust him to tell us when he is <i>describing</i> <abbr title="Integral Theory">IT</abbr> and when he's <i>building</i> <i>upon </i>it.</li>
<li>Most importantly, he is distinguishing between the different phases of Integral Theory (IT) and presenting its latest development. Finally an in-depth presentation of <abbr title="Integral Theory">IT</abbr> and of its place in the overall philosophical discourse.</li>
</ol>
Nick's target audience are the philosophy students of <abbr title="California Institute of Integral Studies">CIIS</abbr>, so even though he's trying to keep it simple, you got to like the topic! But if like me you've been looking for a middle ground between the Pop-Integral culture and academic articles, this video might be just what you need.<br />
<br />
Oh did I mention it's 2 hours long? Here are some time cues:<br />
You can skip Nick's presentation
-> jump to 0:03:00.<br />
'Internal' critiques of Integral Theory -> jump to 1:01:55.<br />
'External' critiques of Integral Theory -> jump to 1:11:10.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='640' height='385' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/57oN8JElcuE?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-9881033639047903312011-11-23T00:26:00.001-08:002012-02-21T00:04:25.955-08:00Lean Startup & Holacracy: How Do They Fit Together?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhY87AO3qYfQ9rcldbOreptcmlRwK8uFGwz-8Ti5hcuIdyMt2IEKog6Fcgm5HJox6KjQPVmZ9BFuxYrNXSizr61j9seWlFjYgW7aaj8KxLhojM35J2HLPwrZeN2F__5t3Orb7wzh0c0gc6X/s1600/LeanStartup-Holacracy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="393" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhY87AO3qYfQ9rcldbOreptcmlRwK8uFGwz-8Ti5hcuIdyMt2IEKog6Fcgm5HJox6KjQPVmZ9BFuxYrNXSizr61j9seWlFjYgW7aaj8KxLhojM35J2HLPwrZeN2F__5t3Orb7wzh0c0gc6X/s640/LeanStartup-Holacracy.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
I just finished a book: <a href="http://theleanstartup.com/" target="_blank">The Lean Startup</a>. It's a model for building successful new products/startups extremely efficiently, developed by startup entrepreneur Eric Reis. No genius needed, just a method. I have to say I'm impressed: the theory and the case studies are very convincing.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Fairly quickly into the book, I started to draw mental connections with another lean model: <a href="http://www.holacracy.org/" target="_blank">Holacracy</a>. No surprise here, both share a similar <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agile_software_development" style="text-align: -webkit-auto;" target="_blank">Agile</a> inspiration. They both emphasize a "dynamic steering" management style based on direct feedback from reality, as opposed to grand strategies based on assumptions. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
How about putting Lean Startup and Holacracy side by side to see how they compare? That's the fun exercise this post is about.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
</div>
<ol>
<li>Let's start with a quick and dirty overview of each model, </li>
<li>Then I'll suggest a way Holacracy and Lean Startup fit together</li>
<li>Then I'll give a table comparing characteristics of each model</li>
</ol>
<h4>
Lean Startup: Learn What the Market Want</h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.lucidchart.com/publicSegments/view/4ecd2cb2-1250-4a57-8065-05930a78de14/image.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="353" src="http://www.lucidchart.com/publicSegments/view/4ecd2cb2-1250-4a57-8065-05930a78de14/image.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Fig 1. The Lean Startup "Build-Measure-Learn" Feedback Loop</i></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
The starting assumption of the Lean Startup is that nowadays, with products being more and more informational and immaterial, the key question is not "Can we make it?" but "Will people buy it?" For Reis, most startups fail because they build something that nobody wants.<br />
<br />
So the goal of the Lean Startup is to learn as fast as possible, with the least resources possible, what product we need to build to sustain a thriving business. How to do that? By carefully testing our assumptions, as shows the Build-Measure-Learn feedback loop depicted above (Fig. 1).<br />
<br />
The process goes as follow:<br />
<ol>
<li>You get ideas for a new product. Identify the most risky assumptions that you're making about the market.</li>
<li>Build the "minimum viable product" that will allow you to test your assumptions, and <i>release it</i>.</li>
<li>Measure how users interact with your product to learn how valid are your assumptions.</li>
<li>Based on real data, come up with new ideas to improve or change the product, and run them through the same process. And so on...</li>
</ol>
<div>
The Lean Startup builds new products incrementally, each iteration fine-tuning the product according to real feedback from the market (or changing strategy — "pivot" — if necessary). Overall, The Lean Startup brings together Agile development and <a href="http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2008/11/what-is-customer-development.html" target="_blank">Customer development</a> methods in one model.</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<h4>
Holacracy: An Organizational Practice to Surrender to Reality </h4>
<div>
Holacracy is defined by its creator <a href="http://www.holacracy.org/profiles/brian-robertson" target="_blank">Brian Robertson</a> as an "organizational operating system." It differs from a traditional organization in that it offers, among other things:</div>
<ul>
<li>Another way to structure the organization (organigram), </li>
<li>Another way to <i>govern</i>, i.e., to distribute the <i>roles, authorities </i>and <i>accountabilities</i> between teams and between individuals within teams.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6biJUCIdwwjOXwNURChBEeXDYIzjXBPoPUUBEyA5SbE9wbogTbvGmDv_iraMP81SHocFUrun3Vtph6o_k8Dq3Ui48kXaEEWRbYU33I1n05Lq2oSfMIEkM1xSxxdyzxWCG4aioLA_hbPHQ/s1600/Holacracy.Hierarchy_to_Holarchy.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="322" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6biJUCIdwwjOXwNURChBEeXDYIzjXBPoPUUBEyA5SbE9wbogTbvGmDv_iraMP81SHocFUrun3Vtph6o_k8Dq3Ui48kXaEEWRbYU33I1n05Lq2oSfMIEkM1xSxxdyzxWCG4aioLA_hbPHQ/s640/Holacracy.Hierarchy_to_Holarchy.png" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Fig 2. Hierarchy to Holarchy. "Circles" are holarchically organized. Source: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Holacracy.Hierarchy_to_Holarchy.JPG" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a></i></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Holacracy considers that in today's uncertain and rapidly changing world, organizations need to be more flexible, agile, in constant sync with reality. How does Holacracy achieve this? By <i>processing tensions</i>. The model regards members of the organization as "sensors" of reality; the tensions they experience are clues for organizational deficiencies. Holacracy's remedy is a system that guarantees that every tension has a place to go and be processed.<br />
<br />
In processing those tensions, the organization makes small, frequent, iterative changes to adapt to reality in order to be more relevant, effective and efficient. All changes are made based on actual present tensions, not on assumed problems or needs.<br />
<br />
I don't claim to be an Holacracy expert<sup><a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8586098679446861920#1">1</a></sup>, but the most obvious benefit of Holacracy for me is the <i>adequately distributed governance</i> that results from the <a href="http://www.holacracy.org/resources/video-integrative-decision-making-simulation" target="_blank">highly effective <i>governance</i> meetings</a>. Governance meetings are where authorities and accountabilities are distributed based on <i>organizational needs</i>. And Holacracy has strict rules to make sure that politics and egos don't get in the way.<br />
<br />
Holacracy is much bigger than that. Here are some other important aspects that I'm not covering here, but that you can <a href="http://www.holacracy.org/resources/organization-evolved" target="_blank">read more about</a>:<br />
<ul>
<li>The organizational unit is the "Circle," and circles are organized holarchically (Fig 2. above)</li>
<li>The "double-linking" between circles: replacing a middle manager with conflicts of interest by two roles.</li>
<li>Strict rules for each of the 3 types of meetings you can have (Strategy, Governance, and Operational meetings). They're designed for efficiency and effectiveness - and from experience, they work!</li>
</ul>
<h4>
How They Fit Together</h4>
Due to their common heritage, Holacracy and Lean Startup naturally share a lot of principles (see <a href="http://www.blogger.com/#comparisontable">Comparison Table</a> below), but could they be used together beneficially in one organization? Based on theory, I don't see why not. Let's see how it could work.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The main reason is that the two models do not deal with the same level of management. Holacracy's breakthrough is as a <i>governing </i>framework that answers the question "How do we organize?", Lean Startup's main contribution is <i>operational</i>, it answers the question "What product should we make?"</div>
<div>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.lucidchart.com/publicSegments/view/4ee2aa27-9f8c-493c-92b6-1e720a2e55c1/image.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://www.lucidchart.com/publicSegments/view/4ee2aa27-9f8c-493c-92b6-1e720a2e55c1/image.png" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Fig 3. Different Focus for Holacracy and Lean Startup</i></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br /></div>
<div>
<dessin></dessin></div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
To be fair, the distinction is not so clear cut. Yet, each model is more or less specialized at each level.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Holacracy is specialized in Governance</b>. The model makes suggestions at the operational level too, but their focus is different than the Lean Startup's.<br />
<ul>
<li>Holacracy's operational methods are aligned with typical Agile development, and they're allegedly inspired by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getting_Things_Done" target="_blank">David Allen's <i>Getting Things Done</i></a> and <a href="http://www.tablegroup.com/books/dbm/" target="_blank">Patrick Lencioni's <i>tactical meetings</i></a>, among other sources. </li>
<li>Actionable operational recommendations focus on <i>effective operational meetings </i>and <i>tasks management</i><sup><a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8586098679446861920#2">2</a></sup>. (<a href="http://www.holacracy.org/sites/default/files/resources/Organization_Evolved.pdf" target="_blank">Robertson, 2009, p. 5</a>). Does it contradict the Lean Startup's methodology? On the contrary.</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Lean Startup is specialized in Operations</b>: it's about rendering operations as lean as possible. Staying grounded in real data at the operational level, this is precisely where Lean Startup excels. Two things to notice here:<br />
<ul>
<li>Lean Startup's focus on operations is slighly "above" Holacracy's one. It's oriented toward the product development strategy, a sort of "operational strategy", if you will. As far as I know, Holacracy doesn't specify anything particular at this level.</li>
<li>Lean Startup does include an important suggestion for Governance: teams should be organized cross-functionally, not in specialized departments<sup><a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8586098679446861920#3">3</a></sup>. This is a classic tenant of Agile development. Holacracy's philosophy embraces it, even though the system does not necessarily enforce it. In any case, there is functional concordance on this point between the two.</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.lucidchart.com/publicSegments/view/4ee2bc89-4ecc-4aca-acb3-046a0a57125c/image.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="326" src="http://www.lucidchart.com/publicSegments/view/4ee2bc89-4ecc-4aca-acb3-046a0a57125c/image.png" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Fig 4. (Loose) Representation of Lean Startup integrated with Holacracy</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br /></div>
<div>
The two models both focus on management processes, but they specialize in different levels of management<sup><a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8586098679446861920#4">4</a></sup>. What's more, their strengths and weaknesses seem rather complementary. Putting Holacracy and Lean Startup side by side, I see an exciting combo for a "Lean Learning Organization."</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I'm playing with ideas here, but I'm curious what people with more experience with either or both models would add to this discussion?</div>
<h4 id="comparisontable">
Holacracy and Lean Startup - Comparison Table</h4>
<table border="1" class="customtable" style="width: 100%;"><thead>
<tr> <th scope="row"></th> <th scope="col">Lean Startup</th> <th scope="col">HolacracyTM</th> </tr>
</thead> <tbody>
<tr> <th scope="row"><div style="text-align: left;">
Inspiration</div>
</th> <td><a href="http://agilemanifesto.org/" target="_blank">Agile Development</a>, <a href="http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2008/11/what-is-customer-development.html" target="_blank">Customer Development</a>, etc.</td> <td><a href="http://agilemanifesto.org/" target="_blank">Agile Development</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociocracy" target="_blank">Sociocracy</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_Theory" target="_blank">Integral Theory</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_Organizations_(Peter_Senge)" target="_blank">Learning Organization</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getting_Things_Done" target="_blank">GTD</a>, <a href="http://www.tablegroup.com/pat/articles/article/?id=21" target="_blank">Lencioni's Tactical Meetings</a>, etc.</td> </tr>
<tr> <th scope="row"><div style="text-align: left;">
Purpose</div>
</th> <td>Develop product-market fit with the least amount of time and resources</td> <td>Provide organizational flexibility to change and uncover the organization's purpose</td> </tr>
<tr> <th scope="row"><div style="text-align: left;">
How to reach purpose?</div>
</th> <td><div style="text-align: left;">
Test assumptions with the "Build-Measure-Learn" feedback loop</div>
</td> <td>Distribute roles and 'sense' reality by processing members tensions</td> </tr>
<tr> <th scope="row"><div style="text-align: left;">
What data?</div>
</th> <td><div style="text-align: left;">
Data from the market (product tracking)</div>
</td> <td>Data from people within the organization (tensions) (governance) and from the market (operational)</td> </tr>
<tr> <th scope="row"><div style="text-align: left;">
Ego's power moves</div>
</th> <td><div style="text-align: left;">
Regulated by reliance on actionable, accessible and auditable data</div>
</td> <td>Regulated by clear roles that distribute power, and by strict rules in decision-making processes</td> </tr>
<tr> <th scope="row"><div style="text-align: left;">
System level focus</div>
</th> <td><div style="text-align: left;">
Mostly operational, very little governance</div>
</td> <td>Mostly governance, some operational</td> </tr>
<tr> <th scope="row"><div style="text-align: left;">
Designed for what context?</div>
</th> <td><div style="text-align: left;">
Fast changing environment and conditions of great uncertainty.</div>
</td> <td>High complexity and increasing uncertainty</td> </tr>
<tr> <th scope="row"><div style="text-align: left;">
Functional emphasis</div>
</th> <td><div style="text-align: left;">
System effectiveness (at operational level)</div>
</td> <td>System effectiveness (overall)</td> </tr>
<tr> <th scope="row"><div style="text-align: left;">
Management</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
principle </div>
</th> <td><div style="text-align: left;">
Dynamic steering, fast iterations</div>
</td> <td>Dynamic steering, fast iterations</td> </tr>
</tbody> </table>
<br />
<div>
<br />
---<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8586098679446861920" name="1">1)</a> My experience with Holacracy mainly comes from volunteering for one year at Bay Area Integral, an organization that introduced Holacracy as its new organizational system when I was there. I have been interested in Holacracy since then, I have been reading HolacracyOne's material and have listened or watched several of their online publications. However I've never taken an actual training.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8586098679446861920" name="2"></a></span><a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8586098679446861920" name="2"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">2)</span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"> That's my understanding based on my experience as well as on HolacracyOne's <a href="http://www.holacracy.org/sites/default/files/resources/Organization_Evolved.pdf">documentation</a> (p. 5) on Holacracy</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"> and <a href="http://community.holacracy.org/topics/tributaries-of-holacracy">a video</a> </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">available to registered users. <i>UPDATE 12/25/11: the audio recording of the video just mentioned is <a href="http://www.holacracy.org/resources/dialog-the-history-of-holacracy" target="_blank">available to everyone</a> (thank you</i></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i> Alexia Bowers for letting me know).</i></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8586098679446861920" name="3"></a></span><a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8586098679446861920" name="3"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">3)</span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">For example, teams should include coders, designers, user-experience experts working together on the teams' projects, instead of having specialized departments of designers, coders, and user-experience experts serving different projects.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8586098679446861920" name="4"></a></span><a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8586098679446861920" name="4"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">4)</span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"> It's true that Lean Startup is adapted to product innovation, which doesn't reflect all contexts of operations. In more steady contexts where the market is known and stable, different operational processes would be more adapted. On the other hand, these steady contexts may be more and more rare today.</span></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-39048020611424088712011-11-17T14:50:00.001-08:002012-02-21T00:05:37.729-08:00The Power of TheoriesI was recently reminded of how much anti-intellectualism is present around me (how naive of me). Some find it cool to reject models and theories as mere mental masturbation. Abstractions would make unnecessarily complex what is otherwise straight-forward. I believe <a href="http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/" target="_blank">Eric Reis</a>, who recently published the book <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Lean-Startup-Entrepreneurs-Continuous-Innovation/dp/0307887898" target="_blank">The Lean Startup</a></i> (2011), must have encountered a similar resistance when preaching for his product development and innovation model. Here is an excerpt of his book:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Knowing Lean Startup principles makes me feel like I have superpowers. Even though I'm just a junior employee, when I meet with corporate VP's and GMs in my large company, I ask them simple questions and very quickly help them see how their projects are based on fundamental hypotheses that are testable. In minutes, I can lay out a plan they could follow to scientifically validate their plans before it's too late. They consistently respond with 'Wow, you are brilliant. We've never thought to apply that level of rigor to our thinking about new products before.'" </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
As a result of these interactions, [this junior employee] has developed a reputation within his large company as a brilliant employee. This had been good for his career but very frustrating for him personally. Why? Because although he <i>is </i>quite brilliant, his insights into flawed product plans are due <b>not to his special intelligence but to having a theory that allows him to predict what will happen and propose alternatives</b>. He is frustrated because the managers he is pitching his ideas to do not see the system. They wrongly conclude that the key to success is finding brilliant people like him to put on their teams. They are failing to see the opportunity he is really presenting them: to achieve better results <b>systematically </b>by <b>changing their beliefs about how innovation happens</b>. (p. 276) (bold emphasis mine)</blockquote>
The key question is not whether you adopt a belief system or not, it is whether you consciously choose one or stay subject to the one you've been inculcated.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-74464677751853613602011-11-13T14:49:00.000-08:002012-02-21T00:06:10.655-08:00Intro sur la Théorie Intégrale de Ken Wilber (en français !)Ça faisait un petit moment que je pensais à faire une vidéo en français pour expliquer la théorie intégrale. Pour un ensemble de raisons pas très claires, elle est très peu connue en France contrairement à chez nos voisins Européens — Allemagne, Pays-Bas, Espagne, Italie. Même s'il y a des facteurs culturels rendant la France peu réceptive à ce genre d'approche, je me suis finalement lancé, et voilà la première vidéo d'une série sur la théorie intégrale "AQAL" en français !<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/rpB1186YXxc?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<br />
<br />
Le potentiel de la théorie intégrale pour révolutionner notre vision du monde est insoupconné. C'est l'équivalent théorique de <a href="http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/movie/clockwork_orange/stills/3/" target="_blank">cet instrument dans Orange Mécanique</a> qui force à garder les yeux ouverts : elle nous force à regarder la réalité telle qu'elle est, dans toute sa complexité, sa richesse et son mystère. On lui attribue, à raison, un effet "psycho-actif" : pour celle ou celui qui l'a étudiée, il devient difficile de se retrancher dans les croyances étroites auquelles la société nous a habituée.<br />
<br />
C'est aussi un moyen pour moi de finalement expliquer à mes proches et amis ce que je suis venu faire en Californie. J'ai choisi un format simple qui j'espère vous plaira. L'audience première de ces vidéos est intéressée par les sciences et la quête de la connaissance en générale. C'est l'étudiante, le chercheur, qui ont soif d'un modèle leur permettant de voir au delà des clotures de leur champ d'étude.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-38608583152216202862011-06-18T19:05:00.000-07:002012-02-21T00:06:30.035-08:00Is there an Integral community?A few weeks ago I left my volunteer role at <a href="http://www.bayareaintegral.com/">Bay Area Integral</a> (BAI). As I was reflecting on this choice, it was clear that I had been on the fence for a while, if not from the beginning. I joined BAI but never wholeheartedly, and yet I staid for a year. So I wondered: how come?<br />
<br />
I joined BAI to be more involved with the "Integral community", but I realized we all have different views of what these words mean. I think it's core to why we haven't seen a community develop around Integral Theory.<br />
<br />
Integral theory has this particularity to be a meta-theory, a theory <i>about theories</i>. It doesn't have a real-life, concrete object of study. We are interested in Integral Theory (ITH), sure, but we're mostly interested in <i>applying it to a specific field </i>- e.g., "Integral Psychology", "Integral Ethics", "Integral Spirituality", etc.<br />
<br />
In a nutshell, the problem is that Integral Theory (ITH) is not about a <i>thing</i>, it's about <i>a perspective on things</i>. Biologists are all into how the body works, Architects can contemplate buildings together, but unless your passion is Research itself, you're not likely to chat about ITH for hours on a Sunday potluck. And it makes sense. We are attracted to ITH because it's a new way of looking at our favorite <i>thing</i>. But ultimately, we're really interested in theorizing about our <i>thing</i>, more than ITH itself. Sharing an interest for an approach is not enough to create kinship.<br />
<br />
Now, it's true, the Integral model is psychoactive - it brings your attention to the lens you're using to look at the world. That's one thing all Integral fans share: an interest in psycho-spirituality. No wonder it's the topic attracting the most people, it's inherent to the model itself.<br />
<br />
Doesn't rallying around what's our most common denominator translate our need for community? ITH can talk about many other things than spirituality. And it will have to, if it wants to be taken seriously outside of the spiritual seekers of the Bay Area.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-76031509769417792872011-05-30T17:36:00.000-07:002012-02-21T00:06:42.681-08:00Tech mix...<div style="font-family: inherit;">
For memorial day weekend, before it becomes old news.</div>
<ul style="font-family: inherit;">
<li><a href="http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2011/05/google-tasks-api.html" target="_blank">Google Tasks API is released</a>, finally! After all this time without any improvement, I wasn't hoping anymore to see GTasks become a useful Task management tool. <a href="http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2009/07/organising-secrets-of-a-google-tasks-developer/" target="_blank">Initially designed to be as simple as a piece of paper</a>, it was definitely simple - too simple. Although it's still lacking key features, at least with an API, other developers can build on it.</li>
<li>A few weeks ago at <a href="http://www.faccsf.com/civicrm/event/info?reset=1&id=162" target="_blank">an event on Silicon Valley Trends</a>, I briefly chatted with Yvan Castilloux from <a href="http://www.peoplepowerco.com/" target="_blank">People Power</a>, a startup creating a cool product to monitor the individual energy consumption of each electrical appliance in your office/home. It works by placing a chip in each appliance, which then sends the data to the clouds, where you access it via a website. It's more oriented B2B than B2C for now, but they want to reach end customers soon. I thought about it again when I <a href="http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2011/05/android-past-present-and-future.html" target="_blank">read</a> about "Android@Home, a framework that allows Android devices to communicate with home appliances and other devices," which was presented at <a href="http://www.google.com/events/io/2011/index.html" target="_blank">Google I/O 2011</a>. I don't know you, but I'd love to be able to monitor my energy consumption.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.justin.tv/startuplessonslearned/b/262671499" target="_blank">Programming only when it's too ineffective to do it manually</a>: a 23 min video of Manuel Rosso, CEO of Food on the Table, at Startup Lessons Learned 2010.<br />
</li>
<li>I just discovered <a href="http://storify.com/" target="_blank">Storify</a>, a really cool web app to make a story out of social media feeds. Or, put pieces of news together to make actual news. </li>
<li><a href="http://verifyapp.com/" target="_blank">Verify</a>: A web app to quickly test your design and interface with real users. <a href="http://www.usertesting.com/" target="_blank">UserTesting.com</a> goes further by having users experience an interactive interface, as opposed to Verify which just shows images.<br />
</li>
<li>It's everywhere in the tech news, <a href="http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2011/05/chromebooks.html" target="_blank">Google releases the Chromebook</a> in June, a netbook with Chrome OS: Google's very simple and fast OS entirely dedicated to web surfing. Don't want to buy a netbook to try out Chrome OS? No worries, you can <a href="http://lifehacker.com/5801328/make-your-own-chromebook-on-the-cheap-by-installing-chromium-os-on-any-netbook" target="_blank">geek around and install Chromium OS</a>, its open-source version, on any notebook. Google develops an OS for PCs (Chrome OS) and an OS for mobiles (Android), yet the difference between the two industries is fading - when will Google unify the two?<br />
</li>
<li><a href="http://letslunch.com/" target="_blank">LetsLunch</a> for networking during lunch. Ah, even lunch time is being productive now :)</li>
</ul>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-33729108923309884672011-05-17T16:02:00.000-07:002012-02-21T00:07:21.750-08:00Hackers' developmental "action-logic"When <a href="http://blog.vivekhaldar.com/post/5542454900/the-perils-of-closed-worlds" target="_blank">Vivek Haldar writes that hackers love "closed worlds"</a>, I can't help thinking of adult developmental psychology. Although I'm not familiar with the "early lips systems" and "SmallTalk" he refers to, his description of experiencing such systems reminds me of my teenage years and my dreams of becoming a real hacker. Since I've started studying developmental psychology, I have often looked back at these years as an illustration of the <a href="http://www.cook-greuter.com/Detailed%20descrip%20ofaction%20logics%20updated.pdf"><i>Expert</i> action-logic (p.15) (pdf)</a>. And I think it's true of many (pseudo-) hackers. In fact, closed-world-loving hackers are another good illustration of the <i>Expert</i> action-logic. Why is that?<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://xkcd.com/619/"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizU1dGl0FA6GoWRn_NU_FlAkRozhtwxLYlErbSawjC1ig1nkqUyd0g3mPE6v6h_7Y0JI_qM1BxGhBk0niEHVu0DDtJdGE6CaUubsV_NYoPOfKMnkx6NgtY_HBJmODuF8pIF6k7syjOPvvJ/s320/supported_features.png" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="315" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://xkcd.com/619/">Web comics from the excellent xkcd.com</a></span></i></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br />
<br />
Experts have grown out of the <i>Diplomat</i> action-logic, they have an increased capacity for 3rd person abstraction and for seeing multiple alternative solutions to a problem. What better capacities can you expect from a tech guy? Whereas Diplomats are more likely to sugar-coat reality, Experts can more easily accept an imperfect present - and be cynical about it. This is in part because they can better see what <i>could be </i>in addition to what <i>should be</i>, and they identify with an ideal self and an ideal world that seem reachable. So why stick around with the crowd if they can strive for individual improvement, mastery, or even perfection?<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjI2BOmxOSJZwbI7ss9Ywkdzyq2knYqVg4qCNHpW2rasMytxUpuaMpQ4bbdd1Sw7GNk8R6pG8PXvhqjhl7UW03PTJI0yAGGthocbY97FHJYMAgKBUz2XVMlSkAYMwqb_OWf0w3nO15Ef3WS/s1600/diplomat-expert-achiever.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="216" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjI2BOmxOSJZwbI7ss9Ywkdzyq2knYqVg4qCNHpW2rasMytxUpuaMpQ4bbdd1Sw7GNk8R6pG8PXvhqjhl7UW03PTJI0yAGGthocbY97FHJYMAgKBUz2XVMlSkAYMwqb_OWf0w3nO15Ef3WS/s640/diplomat-expert-achiever.png" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.cook-greuter.com/Detailed%20descrip%20ofaction%20logics%20updated.pdf"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-small;">Adapted from <i>Detailed Descriptions Of The LDF Action Logics</i>, Cook-Greuter, 2005 (pdf)</span></a></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
That's why I suspect that computer engineering must attract a great deal of Experts. What better field than one where you get to define the rules of the reality you navigate? Is there a more perfect operating sys... world? Add to this picture the general public that considers all those hackers like little geniuses, and try not getting caught in an Expert superiority complex after that. Because yes, they can be annoying too:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
Severe criticism of how another thinks is a common form of intellectual aggression at this [action-logic]. A sense of superiority is not very well hidden. ... While Diplomats try to suppress aggression for the sake of acceptance, it now reemerges. Experts often have a hostile sense of humor. Ridiculing others is a common sport. (<a href="http://www.cook-greuter.com/Detailed%20descrip%20ofaction%20logics%20updated.pdf">Cook-Greuter, 2005, p.15-16</a>)</blockquote>
<br />
It's also precisely where the limitations of the Expert mindset reside. They will strive for improvement within a system of rules but will resist changing the rules <i>themselves</i>. They get the ultimate ego-boost from achieving mastery in a specific field, so feedback from the outside is threatening: what if you realize the measuring standard of your self-worth is flawed since the beginning?<br />
<div>
<br />
Yet they are in a catch-22 position regarding self approval. They don't yet have the <a href="http://www.cook-greuter.com/Detailed%20descrip%20ofaction%20logics%20updated.pdf"><i>Achiever</i>'s (p.16-20)</a> ability to define their own standards of self-evaluation (so as to not fear social disapproval), yet they know better than fully adopting others' standards, like Diplomats would. In essence, they need their peers' approval <i>of their difference</i> - i.e., being the best at ________ (fill in the blank).<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMTI8ZbbKQeYsWPr88R9cXMJbSPKZUE2kiA6MnutgYYMwQx4x3YR0NC6gYEF8xtz5GVDnMRQ1lqqyYwWzp9tKZZZzmziCbtH90gTS1xmn3jbGfjHfsN2rBKIGmCVZdY5KWNo5cyQWOq-JM/s1600/7-main-action-logics.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMTI8ZbbKQeYsWPr88R9cXMJbSPKZUE2kiA6MnutgYYMwQx4x3YR0NC6gYEF8xtz5GVDnMRQ1lqqyYwWzp9tKZZZzmziCbtH90gTS1xmn3jbGfjHfsN2rBKIGmCVZdY5KWNo5cyQWOq-JM/s400/7-main-action-logics.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.cook-greuter.com/Making%20the%20case%20for%20a%20devel.%20persp.pdf">From <i>Making the case for a developmental perspective</i>, Cook-Greuter, 2004, p.6</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
At least in a closed world, you limit contacts to people who come to your terrain, where you know the rules and can't be tripped up. Have you experienced that hackers who love "closed worlds" also tend to have an attitude?</div>
<div>
<br />
Before hordes of geeks jump at me, of course I'm <i>not</i> saying that hackers = Expert action-logic. It's a generalization. However, in my experience the Expert hacker does exist, it's not that rare. I certainly went through a phase in my life when my ego had a similar flavor to that of Expert, and I did dream of being <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Mitnick">Kevin Mitnick</a>, and I did watch <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WarGames">War Games</a> hundreds of time fantasizing on the power to launch a global thermonuclear war. I really thought I had it all figured out. Does it ring a bell to you?<br />
<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.cook-greuter.com/Detailed%20descrip%20ofaction%20logics%20updated.pdf"><i>Detailed Descriptions Of The LDF Action Logics</i>, Cook-Greuter, 2005 (pdf, 34 pages)</a></li>
<li>Skeptical about developmental psychology? It's a good sign, but you can also read <a href="http://www.cook-greuter.com/Making%20the%20case%20for%20a%20devel.%20persp.pdf" target="_blank">Cook-Greuter's article, <i>Making the case for a developmental perspective (pdf, 9 pages)</i></a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.enlightennext.org/magazine/j22/kegan.asp?page=1" target="_blank">An interview with Robert Kegan, </a><a href="http://www.enlightennext.org/magazine/j22/kegan.asp?page=1" target="_blank">another developmental psychologist,</a><a href="http://www.enlightennext.org/magazine/j22/kegan.asp?page=1" target="_blank"> in EnlightenNext magazine (2002)</a></li>
<li><a href="http://developmentalobserver.blog.com/" target="_blank">The Developmental Observer blog</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-30096616522798085102011-05-10T18:11:00.000-07:002012-02-21T00:07:42.559-08:00Mishmash...<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebook_deals_launches_tonight_groupon_doesnt_sta.php">Facebook Deals was released a few weeks ago</a>, and it's likely going to be a big game changer. Of course Facebook is going to tap into its gigantic user base to compete with the current leaders of the "grouped deals" market: <a href="http://www.groupon.com/">Groupon</a> and <a href="http://www.livingsocial.com/">Living Social</a>. Facebook doesn't take any cut on deals from retailers (as opposed to its competitors), and it has the most accurate data regarding its users' demographic and tastes... Groupon and Living Social will have to change their business model, and fast. Good news for the retailers, <a href="http://www.retaildoc.com/blog/groupon-worst-marketing-business/">for whom the Groupon experience hasn't always been the promised dream</a>. </li>
<li>A <a href="http://www.holacracy.org/resources/dialog-holacracy-polarities-human-maturity?utm_content=nomade0%40gmail.com&utm_source=VerticalResponse&utm_medium=Email&utm_term=Listen%20%26raquo%3B&utm_campaign=Polarities%20and%20Paradoxes%20in%20Holacracycontent">podcast on Holacracy and polarities</a>. Holacracy is an "operating system" for organizations. It aims at freeing organizations from the forces of people's egos. A sort of organizational Jedi, if you will. I love it. </li>
<li>Vivek Haldar <a href="http://blog.vivekhaldar.com/post/3614639455">blogged</a> 2 months ago about <a href="http://treesaver.net/">treesaver</a>, a HTML5 webapp designed to reading on screen. I've been waiting for a good reading interface for a long time, and Treesaver provides the best simple experience I've seen so far. It's like reading a magazine. You flip pages, the faded view of the adjacent pages gives some context to the current page, yet is unobtrusive. <a href="http://demo.nomadeditions.com/wide-screen/index.html">Here a demo with Wide Screen magazine</a>. </li>
<li><a href="http://www.linuxbsdos.com/2011/05/03/ubuntu-11-04-review/">Ubuntu 11.04 was released on April 23</a>, code name "Natty Narwhal". The big change in this release is a new desktop environment: Unity instead of the famous <a href="http://www.gnome.org/">GNOME</a>. After DOS, I've always been a Windows guy. When I first tried Linux with Ubuntu 4.10, Gnome didn't really work for me. I installed <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandriva_Linux">Mandriva Linux</a> and I liked <a href="http://www.kde.org/">KDE</a> better, but I eventually left the Linux world all together because it was taking too much time to tweak. <a href="http://www.ubuntugeek.com/ubuntu-11-04-natty-narwhal-with-unity-worst-ubuntu-beta-ever.html">While many seem unhappy about the abandon of GNOME</a>, it might be the opportunity for me to install a dual-boot on my netbook to try Ubuntu again, 6 years later.</li>
<li>Famous French web accessibility champion <a href="http://www.alsacreations.com/article/lire/1183-mockup-rough-maquette-zoning.html">Alsacréations blogs on the benefits of Mockup designs before jumping to Photoshop</a>. He provides some cool web apps to make Mockups, which can be used for any kind of sketching: <a href="http://www.mockflow.com/">Mockflow</a> | <a href="http://pencil.evolus.vn/en-US/Home.aspx">Pencil Project</a> | <a href="http://balsamiq.com/">Balsamiq Mockups</a> | <a href="https://gomockingbird.com/">Mockingbird</a> | <a href="http://cacoo.com/">Cacoo</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.igvita.com/2011/04/07/life-beyond-http-11-googles-spdy">Is there a life beyond HTTP? Google says yes: SPDY</a>, a new protocol more adapted to the modern web, and web apps that require continuous two-way connections. HTTP is already 20 years old and we all got used to it. Well it will change, and it's huge. We can think what we want of Google, they do make the web evolve.</li>
<li><a href="http://hackertyper.net/">Hackertyper</a>: type like a real hollywood hacker. But where are the annoying bleeps? </li>
</ul>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-57307406691132700082011-05-09T16:31:00.000-07:002012-02-21T00:08:04.918-08:00Those noisy newsletters!How often do you read email newsletters? If you're like me, it has become a habit to unsubscribe from as many as you can, except maybe for one or two. Most of the time, newsletters are a pain. I sometime find useful information in one of them, but please, please, if you have to send me one, send me something interesting, simple, easy-to-read, and to the point.<br />
<br />
Sadly, most newsletters I see are terrible. They are so inexpensive to send that many organizations don't invest much resources in designing<i> good</i> newsletters. Newsletter senders, please get inspired by these few principles below, or run the risk to be an annoyance to your reader. Please STOP WASTING MY TIME.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7jIAJIlSe5Dv1I4dhyphenhyphenUSZSeMHa_DcpVlkI9ivEBqqgPukMEQc5g9VfKpTkBdo6OCI5mZXDR9cuC20n9vRvgqivpEdE5zG-3S9JZenFgPSDJAGWM2_T2Fo7kgD_tVfUOvUdBiJMfurJ3mE/s1600/Design_is_simple_by_leepro.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="371" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7jIAJIlSe5Dv1I4dhyphenhyphenUSZSeMHa_DcpVlkI9ivEBqqgPukMEQc5g9VfKpTkBdo6OCI5mZXDR9cuC20n9vRvgqivpEdE5zG-3S9JZenFgPSDJAGWM2_T2Fo7kgD_tVfUOvUdBiJMfurJ3mE/s640/Design_is_simple_by_leepro.jpg" width="640" /></a><i><a href="http://leepro.deviantart.com/art/Design-is-simple-119635650">Picture by leepro on DeviantArt</a></i></div>
<br />
<h4>
Purpose: Beyond the click-through rate</h4>
<br />
The way newsletters are made has not evolved much in the last years. However the way people interact with online information has, emails included. The amount of information we read online, in particular, has increased drastically (<a href="http://hmi.ucsd.edu/howmuchinfo_research_report_consum.php">14% of all information hours Americans receive come from the Internet (p. 18)</a>). Users are learning to be more selective with the information they grant their attention to. With the amount of emails we receive everyday, consider your newsletter as a potential annoyance for the recipient, and a sign of trust on their part when they open it. This trust is precious, hard to earn and easy to lose. Sending a newsletter just to send a newsletter is the easiest way to lose it. For many people, your email is the visible face of your organization. If you think it's only one more email, you're missing out the context. Your email is a statement about who you are and how you view your relationship with the reader.<br />
<br />
You can't design your email with in mind the click-through rate as ultimate goal and measurement of success. It's a valuable metrics, but more important is that your reader keeps trusting you enough to open your next newsletter. If he or she doesn't, you lost them. How to do then? Focus on pleasing your reader - just like you would if you sent an informative email to a friend. Don't try to trick them with deceiving offers, don't try to get their attention if your content is not worth it. Respect their time!<br />
<br />
<h4>
Good little content</h4>
<br />
I'm sure you want to tell me all about your business, but don't try to force feed it to me in an email: it is not the right medium! That's what websites are for. It may seem radical, but in newsletters good content is little content. Give me <i>one or two content items</i>, no more. If you have no way to prioritize between four news items, it's likely that none of them are worth sending a newsletter about. Maybe you should consider blogging instead - readers can consult your blog whenever they like, they can even subscribe to a RSS feed. Send an email only if you have something important to share, and in that case, share only that, all the rest is noise. Nothing stops you from linking to your blog, why not even with the titles of the last three posts published.<br />
<br />
Just consider how <i>you </i>read your emails; do you often spend more than 7 seconds reading an email not personally sent to you? Me neither. So if you take my time with an email, make sure you have top A content for me, not B not C. It's okay to share B quality content on a blog, it is not okay to waste my time with it in my inbox.<br />
<br />
<h4>
Empty space is soothing</h4>
<br />
The good thing with little content is that there is more space for <i>nothing</i>. AAAH what a waste? No, empty space is a rare commodity on the web, everyone trying to fill each pixel with value-creating content. There is great value to <i>nothing</i>. First, in the noisy web, it is resting, and users appreciate this comfort (look at the success of Google's homepage when competitors were filling their pages with news, ads and fluff). Second, space contrasts with content, so it emphasizes it without having to use noisy tricks like <b>bold</b>, <i>italic</i>, <span style="color: #cc0000;">colors</span>... And third, empty space loads pretty damn fast with every connection :-) In short, empty space is not nothing! Designer Mark Boulton has written a <a href="http://www.alistapart.com/articles/whitespace">good article on the use of whitespace</a>.<br />
<h4>
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Simple layout</h4>
<br />
When I open an email I expect to read an email, not a full webpage. When you're in email-reading-mode, your mind expects a certain layout of the information. A normal flow is to read from top to bottom, with unobtrusive colors and images, so that you find the important information <i>right away</i>. Don't annoy your readers by asking them to adapt to a cool new layout. Forget about columns, anything you add in them is secondary stuff that I can find on your website if I'm interested - and if I'm not, then it's noise to me. Put your secondary links (e.g., "Like us on Facebook", "Follow us on Twitter") in the footer, where I'll see them at the end if I read through. If I didn't read through, why do you think I would follow you on Twitter anyway?<br />
<br />
Remember that your email will be read within a visual context. Most email clients already divide the page in columns. If you add columns to your emails, you're offering at the minimum a 3-columns layout experience.<br />
<br />
<h4>
Simple design</h4>
<br />
Your website is <i>your </i>space, I'm much more open to fancy designs there than in my emails - my inbox is <i>my </i>space. My mind expects dark text on light background, left-aligned, you know, straight forward. Anything that gets away from that means an effort on my part to read - why would I make it? I can also just click Delete - or worse, Mark as spam. It's okay to make your email look nice, but keep it simple, light, and make sure that the whole is well integrated. <br />
<br />
<br />
Images are especially noisy. First, they don't load automatically, I need an extra step to see them. I often browse the email without the images first. They might be the number one reason why I close an email - too many noisy images. Photographs especially, because they have wider variations in colors, which take some brain effort to take in. And photographs rarely have a color palette that goes well with other images and the colors of your design. The result is a visually intense email, and unless the images themselves are the content (e.g. art portfolio), it's a no no 90% of the time. <br />
<br />
<br />
Oh, and if pictures there are, they'd better be meaningful and beautiful. Or black & white / monochrom, to be less noisy.<br />
<br />
<h4>
Some examples from my inbox</h4>
<br />
There is nothing better than to actually see what we talk about. Below are some newsletters that I received, they range from terrible to great.<br />
<br />
What do you think?<br />
<br />
<h5>
JFK University</h5>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyKPcB9-xsgkVT2EJAGFGTJ7sXXKsS8HsKVzmmuSaukGvqPjP28E2208_zwvn0bBltHsvXmp5n4pO0OKkZj3m-ljaMIyhEeM7qqBZPwVTHTblxktPv3ZdiMWVyGIMOkcXGD_myuHuyBGXM/s1600/JFKU-enews.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8Lc4PlD71q6KIz6Dtq34foru-oG9FQowhMSxN6fOB-PAYwfTeORRUoCZvWwkTmyJxi-KhIz7sMa_P1ib1P-BjTI3P9NBukxo2Ef_UqbMWKmJyGqFvPGHS-te3dJurX1tBXNgRuoCNxPmq/s1600/JFKU-enews-thumb2.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The typical newsletter that I never read. Sadly it falls into every possible pitfall. So many content items that you're overwhelmed, yet most of them concern only a minority of recipients (alumni, law students, ...). All that content would fit on a blog. Or with a calendar-style presentation.<br />
<br />
<br />
The design is heavy and noisy due to little empty space, 5 different colors of text and heavy, inconsistent styling (bold, underline, line spacing, ...). You can see the designer's attempt to create clarity by using different background colors to separate blocks; not necessarily a bad idea in itself, but here they add to the noise, and are simply not very aesthetic. The dark blue background adds to the feeling of lack of space. The 2-column layout further adds weight to the design and makes the reading flow requiring mental effort. Notice that although it was designed as a 2-column layout, when you add the blue background and my gmail interface, my screen is divided into 6 columns.<br />
<br />
<h5>
Next Step Integral</h5>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhuegHj2VXrhe6QskbA-vPmB97Mhmh43swmUhF1LrRzD6kfmFqICBKLLVVf9RW9fCR1HxrcXNwlVADhhNZWCylU6U7TheTiu8NrAXWE3ADeKn2bOsq7SXwcwpGoFLGpgZet_G6eSyfCq0SD/s1600/Next-Step-Integral-enews.png"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0wQKpIer4_hHiUqziezJFbk9lBUIzU9HM_0TBrfnwJLea4aZKHCmOvoHbqo6RmejEcC6BDmIfpYMIYQ8Ey3Feec195ZvdLQPe59iiRmw1hO-U1pthe03wxGrVsC4tVJtjfH8Rrv7wisUf/s1600/Next-Step-Integral-enews-thumb.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
This email fails to make good use of empty space (padding missing around text),<br />
has too many content items, misses some visual prioritizing of content, and has one picture visually too striking (the last one).<br />
However, they use only one column, it's rare enough to note, and it makes the reading experience much easier.<br />
<br />
<h5>
Designcollectors</h5>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxZKLCEPZHGX7j1ftPrwJerZ19MWzPYhCbT0hOP1r0eRyU60pYKMDcXvr_AR4cuIb-feTcIrk7qfhyhyphenhyphend9T0db_2gya4-vJwfjeTWXttlBdR2_E1flPYUZVlGHUHvLAZYPGG-oIeD7Hyv9/s1600/Designcollectors-enews.png"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNohGVzaGSwnygU8v5Lwqj9woGCYHlfXl3ccMG6WmwriTgFsAGlKl0XcwiYFVx3d6kCJZayKJExC-A-IcBL3Xh58wQDWEBwUPMPRGMHhLx6bE2i_T3q5z_MgM2Lb5h0X4GwwgNbe8QUjXd/s1600/Designcollectors-enews-thumb2.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
This design is beautiful for a webpage, but too fancy for an email to my taste. I would quickly identify it as 'ads' and rush to the unsubscribe link.<br />
The red rectangles are a nice design touch, but attract too much attention in an email. However it is well counter-balanced by an otherwise unobtrusive design. Notice how the pictures don't add noise to the design; they blend perfectly.<br />
<br />
<h5>
Hub Bay Area</h5>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHnO6et45oMtQMhvda_Dv-IQezPH_Jv40kdJmenPTuokDRlCpJLflZe-ngeEo9sKhVzGWS-fQb_WO388jh_eRdDGwPRFQV7uGRMc9Ecn1U18C8Lu782qRHDjFN6Rq6zspbZghQnqynCxW3/s1600/Hub-enews.png"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgpK6IErVIShdhKDVuho-XaYmGRYKfNaRerYxQsQY-Nl45pGqDrudJOUk1LzEJYaWwvFa_xDvgLDPdYxmWCM6wpJjLQcgAap4eKLwTCefVJOPtEfWY5zwCreX39PNHE409a9OHaJBxyXseZ/s1600/Hub-enews-thumb2.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
This one is interesting. Nice simple design - the black line drawing adds some fantasy without much visual noise.Few colors, which again generates little noise.<br />
<br />
The 3 draw backs are 1) the left column - it breaks the reading flow, uses more than one third of the entire space, yet less than half of its area has content, and the content is typical secondary content that would fit in the footer. Boo on this column. 2) Many content items make it a taxing read. And a table of content for an email, ouch. Sorry, it's only 1 email among others, I don't want to have to think about how you organized it. 3) The images are simple, yet they are noisy. They're too close from the headings so they overshadow them (the left-align doesn't help). They are of different sizes, and with different background colors. Too bad because it's a really cool newsletter.<br />
<br />
<h5>
BASOL</h5>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3OQp-eWUi4EQEJiZNk-tsuhx9GtrZKXPQwxlMTh7Nc7VgwV7gAX_vQPXJyPqa6IOe7AKdNBDejuCO2gmRJ8vIFUeTVU7DRIq42ohvw8avyu20n8sJnITfy6eVk-fkr5OeXk6zj18-moTR/s1600/BASOL-enews.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVYIC8x56sU9yPY7IKKfCp4dIL0uWqSlJCOFplCZfGFyoPUpCjzwhkSdRgWH-lIGh1BAiWF9iCpDShGHl_HZn5Dvz_v-AMc8RVM4ix5n0YYtphyphenhyphen59Mp7D6q3qI3-JUoTSy-LlNLCrHmogc/s1600/BASOL-enews-thumb2.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
Not much effort on aesthetics, but this email has the merit to have only one main content item. Logistic details related to the content item (here an event) are a rare occasion where a side column is relevant. Overall, the email could use more aesthetic effort, more empty space and way less text for the author bio.<br />
<br />
<h5>
Reos</h5>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgdeWWOcrng7ORM4pRsex420tYFchBnY36uTB822BcQK4BqJyn3ogiSaRqbPp8aKUmlsXrYmpFCIkvJCFHAv8O58VcNOX8JLABOZ8hRPAmpNhSL6X0KES3HNXwjqGoptojqG1CaW-KfjcOe/s1600/Reos-enews.png"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrRdsOUhJ2UoBtSvxEjCidYb8Z_UEbKhhaEZiq5hbiOBlmrVNXtBCOH7B3q_trsuMzA3op1Rjokgl-jdbzJQs5GVGm_f7dcWuW0gwtqClrlhtBS8oN4KpnFWUeZ0PoBGdH5jZrPGMF2zFZ/s1600/Reos-enews-thumb.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Beautifully designed email from Reos. I read it because it is so spacious - great use of empty space. Also a good use of font styles to convey structure. The two negative points is that they try to feed way too much content into it, and the presence of different layouts is disconcerting - especially this first line of pictures horizontally arranged, then the back and forth between 1-column and 2-columns.<br />
<br />
<h5>
Manymoon</h5>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLvbZBTyqEP9uGGlZnQvLdmK4tqGBkifcnuP5EDpcfhvZZfODejHBT3q5hyphenhyphenQKtfoPMxhtfTdvtssXJ7fNKAGf3BaHDer7V_UNyZv2bMCMhR1KyGkRHMPucbOtMVGUERbsFIaWeffMruUdm/s1600/Manymoon-enews.png"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsipJChNo917kDd_L_5C3EgOEQShCdr_d18qvkq2WSzPsiHWXzUXccAZaBLBc1kyfQGKyMT3EoR0oa0gOHMApjOvY-Zdv7XVY4R57-BG2o0BNlSNhR_uF8r6Se42pKph62W-3VO7TfmjwX/s1600/Manymoon-enews-thumb2.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
My second favorite. A minimalist design with an extremely clear message. One content item, only, so they can develop it. And I read it, because it flows - it's longer, but it's only one story to follow, that's easy on my neurons. Only 2 colors are used besides black and white, yet it's light and not boring. It's so simple that it almost looks like a personal email from a friend.<br />
<br />
<h5>
HolacracyOne</h5>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTyUjbpSWECD4HPwvPomIPwjIH7BkoMKpQ-Cq6TKb_xXvnlLn8c50TQHdFPz4h-jjmSbLR7QuZu2SPz-QA6qXAOtoliwCSsU_C36m8nGLMPug1Ni_tmEVoAMSPFOnERYTGvytJBj9699q-/s1600/Holacracy-enews.png"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXh0xGTDmldf8VPpUG-Sts9Jw7UaoL8tLdi20NzfKGp0oWiJCsSrdWnLjKbOWZ6KbaJqBhgKZS4i8YKGbfFrndWObmbgl9ySngn5Ux2G5ZKqlGGybzuIzCHd_uDFzoL4t8-y1qrH_oIDUN/s1600/Holacracy-enews-thumb2.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
My favorite. They do a great job at being concise - thank you! <br />
Only 3 content items, well separated by empty space, each item with a clear title and little text. No need to scroll down.<br />
The left column has practical and useful content, so I make an exception here: I like it.<br />
It's only true because it generates very little noise in an already low-noise email: no image, no background color, left column text greyed out. Too bad the banner image is kind of plain and lacks originality. But it doesn't add much noise, so I'm fine.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-74871357607021188982011-04-23T01:59:00.000-07:002011-04-25T00:53:27.745-07:00Mishmash...3 years, 5 months, 12 days after my last post, I decide to blog again. Needless to say, I'm a completely different person, and good news: my English has improved!<br />
<br />
Did I mention the web is a passion of mine? oh, well. Let's start with a"Mishmash" post.<br />
<ul><li>Distillate content from webpages and liberate it - the future of the web? This <a href="http://www.alistapart.com/articles/orbital-content/">visionary article</a> by <a href="http://fictivecameron.com/">Cameron Koczon</a> on <a href="http://www.alistapart.com/">A List Apart</a> explains how cool little bookmarklet apps such as <a href="http://www.instapaper.com/">Instapaper</a> and <a href="http://www.readability.com/">Readability</a> may pave the way for a new web era. </li>
<li>Chrome? Firefox? Though a long time Firefox user, I wondered for a week. I finally settled for Firefox. Firefox 4 includes the "<a href="http://firstpersoncookie.wordpress.com/2011/01/23/more-choice-and-control-over-online-tracking/">Do Not Track</a>" feature, <a href="http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/2011/04/chrome_do_not_track.html">which Chrome has NOT implemented</a>. </li>
<li>Tristan Nitot, chairman of Mozilla Europe, <a href="http://standblog.org/blog/post/2011/04/18/Faire-vite-et-bien">reminds us that choosing a browser has political implications</a> <u style="color: #999999;">[fr]</u> - it is the interface between us and the web.</li>
<li>The "<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1p3vcRhsYGo">Learn Startup</a>" (and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eubdKflIVoQ">part 2</a>). Eric Ries presents his view of a management methodology integrating constant feedback from users/reality. A good example of <a href="http://goog_1619179423/">fifth order / </a><a href="http://developmentalobserver.blog.com/2010/06/09/an-overview-of-constructive-developmental-theory-cdt/">self-transforming mind</a> applied. </li>
<li>My friend Erik told me about <a href="http://processing.org/">Processing</a>, a programming language dedicated to visual animations and interactions. Particularly interesting is the sister project <a href="http://processingjs.org/">Processing.js</a>, a javascript library that converts the Processing language into javascript, css and HTML5. Data visualization using web standards and without any plugin! Check out the result with visuals on <a href="http://mattmckeon.com/facebook-privacy/">the evolution of default privacy settings on Facebook</a>, or the <a href="http://www.m-i-b.com.ar/letters/en/">Letter-Pairs Analysis</a>. </li>
<li>I missed a cool event just next door in Berkeley. On April 17, an interview of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Levy">Steven Levy</a> from Wired, author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Plex-Google-Thinks-Works-Shapes/dp/1416596585">In the Plex: How Google Thinks, Works, and Shapes Our Lives</a>. I haven't read it but it's now on my list. This event was organized by <a href="http://www.sylviapaull.com/berkeleycybersalon/index.htm">Berkeley Cybersalon</a> and the <a href="http://berkeleystartupcluster.org/">Berkeley Startup Cluster</a>, which I had never heard about. Berkeley Startup Cluster is a collaboration between institutional agents of Berkeley to attract startups in downtown Berkeley, while Berkeley Cybersalon seems like a more idiosyncratic setup by the enigmatic <a href="http://www.sylviapaull.com/">Sylvia Paull</a>...</li>
<li>Lately I've been equipping myself with ergonomic computer devices because of a painful <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repetitive_strain_injury">repetitive stress injury</a>. I'm now using the <a href="http://www.goldtouch.com/p-64-goldtouch-adjustable-keyboard-black.aspx">Goldtouch Adjustable keyboard</a> and the <a href="http://www.evoluent.com/vm4r.htm">Evoluent VerticalMouse 4</a>. Along with a lot of rest, it is helping quite a lot. The Goldtouch takes some getting used to and my partner hates it. The vertical mouse is great, but minor problem: with a vertical hand, all the weigh rests on the side of your hand, narrower than your flat wrist, and it quickly gets to hurt on a hard surface. Since I find wrist resting pads inconvenient, I'm going to get the <a href="http://www.imakproducts.com/product.php?s=20128">Imak Computer Glove</a> to compensate. It takes a lot of Google search to find good information on (not too expensive) computer ergonomic solutions...</li>
</ul>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16886613067714225665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-47202972425673653542007-11-11T16:21:00.000-08:002012-02-21T00:09:44.125-08:00Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), what are they?Christian Vélot is a French researcher in molecular biology, working for the public domain. As a public researcher, he estimates a part of his duty to let people know about the researches all these scientists are working on. One of them is a burning topic: the <span style="font-style: italic;">Generically Modified Organisms</span> (GMOs).<br />
In November 2005, he gives a conference in Toulouse, France, within which he explains scientifically but in very simple ways the complexity of what GMOs are. What is a GMO, what different types of GMOs there are, the different problematics they present, why we should not mix them up and especially why we should be careful when listening to some scientists purposely mixing them up.<br />
<br />
Fortunately a video has been made of this conference. Unfortunately for English-speaking folks, he is speaking <span style="font-weight: bold;">French</span>. For those who understand it, I really recommend to watch it, <strike>for others <span style="font-size: 85%;"><span style="color: red;">I will try to explain in English what he is talking about.</span></span></strike> <i>(update 04/2011: ah, I was optimistic at the time)</i><span style="font-size: 85%;"><span style="color: red;"><br />
</span></span><br />
<br />
<a class="abp-objtab-05169148354229206 visible ontop" href="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=-875413616197118497&hl=en" style="left: 0px ! important; top: 15px ! important;" title="Click here to block this object with Adblock Plus"></a><a class="abp-objtab-05847091806990327 visible ontop" href="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=-875413616197118497&hl=en" style="left: 0px ! important; top: 15px ! important;" title="Click here to block this object with Adblock Plus"></a><embed flashvars="" id="VideoPlayback" src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=-875413616197118497&hl=en" style="height: 358px; width: 440px;" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed><br />
<strike><a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-875413616197118497&hl=en">For more comfort and a wider screen, watch it directly on Google Video.</a></strike><br />
<i>(Update 04/2011: sorry, <a href="http://www.seroundtable.com/google-videos-search-only-13292.html">Google Video stops hosting videos</a> – including this one – on April 29, 2011)</i><br />
<br />
English Explanations <strike>(to be continued)</strike><br />
<br />
1. Definition of a GMO<br />
2. Basics in biology to understand the manipulation of GMOs<br />
3. What are the GMOs used for:<br />
- GMOs in the basic research<br />
- GMOs in medical research<br />
- GMOs in the food industry<br />
4. Health issues due to the spread of GMOs in the environment.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8586098679446861920.post-67124824958258923892007-11-09T03:20:00.000-08:002012-02-21T00:10:07.381-08:00The Dream ContractHere is a hindu tale my teacher in World Religion shared it with us. <br />
<blockquote>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjC2tkLYePjpk-MGuTjt8CjQJO4i23woGXlZb2tN7kVDdcBKRVOYT3i0pg9QwAIdNfE6TzX-PYbGj9zKbCgSW7Zi1Yzr8nRgEp6DhNQZuq-mx-en_M2FNMrt8U1bBXBXkHLutB6GJxfXFyu/s1600-h/thai_rama_114.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5130809836225245122" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjC2tkLYePjpk-MGuTjt8CjQJO4i23woGXlZb2tN7kVDdcBKRVOYT3i0pg9QwAIdNfE6TzX-PYbGj9zKbCgSW7Zi1Yzr8nRgEp6DhNQZuq-mx-en_M2FNMrt8U1bBXBXkHLutB6GJxfXFyu/s320/thai_rama_114.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 321px; margin: 0pt 0pt 7px 7px; width: 214px;" /></a><span style="font-weight: bold;">The Dream Contract</span> </blockquote>
<blockquote>
It was nine o'clock in the morning and Nasruddin was fast asleep. The sun had risen in the sky, the birds were singing in the trees, and Nasruddin's breakfast was getting cold. So his wife woke him up. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
He woke up in rage. "Why did you wake me up just now?" he shouted. "The sun has risen in the sky," said his wife, "the birds are singing in the trees, and your breakfast is getting cold." </blockquote>
<blockquote>
"Breakfast be damned," he said. "I was about to sign a contract worth a million grams of gold." With that he closed his eyes to recapture his shattered dream and those million grams of gold. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
Now Nasruddin was cheating in that contract and his business partner was a tyrant. If, on recapturing his dream, Nasruddin gives up his cheating, he will become a saint. If he works strenuously to free the people from the oppression of the tyrant he will become a freedom fighter. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
What kind of saint or freedom fighter are you if you are still asleep? If, in the midst of his dream, he suddenly realizes that he is dreaming, he will become awakened, enlightened.</blockquote>
<div style="color: silver; font-style: italic;">
<span style="font-size: 85%;">(<a href="http://www.learnnc.org/lp/multimedia/2543">Picture</a> under Creative Common licence, see <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/">terms of use</a>.) </span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com