Davos
2001 was our first time so we have nothing to compare
it to. It was an incredible experience. An
experience that I have replayed several times since
returning to the US. It raised as many questions
as it answered. |
What
was actually experienced is one question.
The implications of the experience create another
whole set of questions. Davos is ripe with ambiguity
and maybe that is how it should be. |
What
was actually experienced is one question.
The implications of the experience create another
whole set of questions. Davos is ripe with ambiguity
and maybe that is how it should be. |
Will
I go back? Yes, if the opportunity presents itself.
Will I go back a different person with radically
altered expectations than the first time? Definitely. |
Davos
is not easy to sort out. It is full of contrasts.
If you are awake, it will cause you to challenge
many basic assumptions. |
The
political unrest that surrounded the meeting, while
not impacting the meeting itself, is not something
that can be ignored. The unrest is the result of
ignorance and will not be settled by more of the
same. |
On
a personal level, the entire expedience once again
reminded me of how little I fit in society and how
I cannot relate to the various warring camps that
are trying to determine how the world should be.
There was a barbed wire divide and I am as uncomfortable
on one side as the other. |
Maybe
this is why I should be inside - and again
- maybe not. Davos can be seductive as much of modern
life is seductive - and distracting. Inside, it is
not easy to remember outside. From the outside, it
is impossible to know what Davos is really
about. |
Davos
is a paradox - like a great deal of life. |
Like
all high stake investments, you just dont know
how it is going to turn out. |
There
were moments there when I was truly moved by what
was going on or being said. The density of people
with something important to say was far greater than
any large gathering I had ever been to. In a week,
I was never bored nor in a dull situation. You cant
say that about your average meeting. The diversity
of people was greater than anywhere I have ever been
- in fact, far greater. |
The
sincerity of the the people there need not be questioned.
Yet, the paradox remains. And that is probably the
great gift of Davos - the paradox. |
This
was a gathering of elite. A VERY expensive
gathering of elite. The focus was on closing the
divide. Yet, I spent more money eating this week
than half the population earns in a year. The economic/technology
system that brought us fresh fruit and vegetables
to the Swiss Alps in January is totally unsustainable
and can never be expanded to global scale. Many of
the people who attended actually had answers to these
problems. And they presented them. Will it matter?
What is seduction and what is progress? What real
changes will actually come out of it? Was this a
good investment? Was it an honest investment? |
It
is impossible to tell from here. And, when it is
possible to know, it is too late - the time is spent.
Like all investments, it is a risk. Life-time is
a risk. |
Gail
and I conducted four workshops. Over ten percent
of those attending Davos came to one of them. The
process was well received and the results remarkable
given the time constraint of an hour and a half for
each one. Will it make a difference? What flows from
this? Real change or just a bunch of elite (including
us) feeling better about what they do? I am not saying
this cynically or critically. I mean it as a real
question. |
The
changes that have to be made, globally, stagger the
imagination. Recent history does not encourage optimism.
We seem to be heading back to angry confrontation
on one hand and complacency on the other. The scale
of development grows, good design does not keep pace.
As always, there are many many projects that demonstrate
that better alternatives exist. As before, their
impact seems insignificant to a world headed toward
self-destruction. |
The
same old dichotomies hold the imagination of too
many peoples in an iron grip. Some of us are free
enough to think about these things, Some free enough
to ignore them. Most, dont have the leisure
to do either. Can you imagine that the majority of
humans still live in oppression, poverty and ignorance,
and the ones who do not, no matter the value of their
achievements, live in a way that cannot last? This
is species failure on a colossal scale. |
At
Davos, you are in the middle of this paradox. |
It
took more than 1/25th of my productive year to prepare
and go to Davos. I enjoyed it immensely - did I do
the right thing? |
Davos
as a place totally charmed me. I found myself
thinking I could live here. The scale
is magnificent. It is a great venue to think, read
and design. The Swiss take care of their country
and run it like an enterprise. Very impressive. As
a visitor, of course, I do not know what I did not
see and experience. There is no question that the
Swiss play close attention to the commons and manage
cities better than many manage a single enterprise
or building. And Davos was managed. This made
it very pleasant but I kept wondering what the experience
was like for the inhabitants and non WEF visitors
- or, the many that were not allowed to travel there.
Again, the paradox. |
This
brings me to the the unfortunate demonstrations and
riots. There was little at Davos, of course, because
transportation to it was controlled. I understand
that there was a brief confrontation between police
and about 200 demonstrators. I was in the building
at the time and never knew it. Other than a few painted
signs and a glance or two in town on the day of the
demonstration, it was like it never happened. One
can take comfort - and not - in that. We were safe
from threat. And, like much of life, it was like
it never happened. |
How
much of life - the real human experience - for most
of us never happened? |
Would
we make the same decisions if our experience
was more direct [link] - more intense -
less managed and filtered? Does personal success
bring
with it immunity from knowing and, ultimately, caring?
Does it bread ignorance? Yet, will getting mired
down in all these details help to change these circumstances?
Did my salmon plate at Davos have any direct relationship
to starvation half a world away and the decimation
of fisheries? Does direct aid really help or is it
another form of imperialism? Does it take leisure
and an elite to gather the forces of change? |
What
do we have to do to make a fair ecologically
balanced world? |
The
Davos byline is committed to improving the
state of the world. I believe that the vast
majority of the people who were there are committed
to that. The question is what constitutes improvement?
The view inside the fence? the view outside the fence?
The view of the many alternatives that have never
had the exposure of a Davos? |
We
come, in this discourse, to the question of legitimacy
and methods. I do not support McDonalds - I do not
spend my dollars there. I am not ready to trash one
out in Zurich either. However, I can understand the
feelings of someone who does. The sad fact is, without
dissent and social disobedience, society rarely changes. |
The
majority of Americans who, today, would never propose
rolling back civil rights, do not condone street
demonstrations and activist Supreme Courts. Yet,
that is how those civil rights came into being. |
I
do not believe that in the USA, it would be even
possible to cut the transportation to a city because
of the threat of disturbance. And if it were
or become so, what would that imply? |
Some
of us believe - hope - that the new distributed technology
of the Internet will provide an alternative to this
ignorance/conflict/social compromise cycle. That
a new legitimacy will emerge from a new market of
ideas and tools for action. |
Up
to now, the elite rule no matter the political system.
This is a fact. The elite set the terms of how to
join their club. These rules vary in different cultures
and political economic systems. In a market economy
(our partial practice of it) there is greater
mobility and many more ways in the door than
less free societies. Nevertheless, there is a door.
If you have ever been out you know what
I mean. |
In
the US today, consumerism, sports and entertainment
seem to serve the same function as the old Roman
Circus. People have freedom of movement and great
freedom to consume - freedom to work where they want
and live where they desire. Yet, how much of this
is distraction? How easy is it the change any of
the fundamental systems-in-place of our society?
Such as the school system. Or, how a President is
elected? Or, who really is a candidate for
CEO or high office? What became of your life last
time you tried? Is true freedom and participation
being traded for toys, vicarious experience and comfort? |
When
someone does break in to a governance role where
they are not wanted, how are they treated? How long
do they last? How effective is the social immune
system? We should think about these things - no,
we should act about these things. |
What
filter determined who attended Davos? What was the
algorithm? Everyone there was accomplished, committed,
intelligent, successful. Who was not there?
Making this doorway - determining this filter - is
not an easy task. It is a supremely important design decision.
One we all make every day. |
I
suspect this years Davos was one of the most open
ever - and deliberately so. A response to criticism.
I doubt that Gail and I would have been there otherwise.
World business leaders did get an earful and not
all of it pleasant. There was great tension between
the WEF and the NGOs that attended. Two different
worlds trying to share and make common space. Both
reaching out - both trying to keep their integrity.
Both describing the elephant from a different vantage
point. |
I
asked one of the WEF organizers why the dissidents
were not invited in. He said it was the judgment
of the WEF that these groups did not want to
dialog. He pointed to prior failed attempts to be
inclusive. There is clearly truth in this. It is
also true that people rarely start out radical -
they become so through experience. Is it possible
that this was too little, too late? |
When
leadership ceases to have legitimacy to you what
choices do you have? Disconnect, retire, yell - or
fight. Is it possible that, to those who took to
the streets, all the peaceful means had been exhausted?
Is their point of view really NEWS [link]?
After all, a few more years of debate over fresh
salmon about old growth forests will be mute. The
forests will be gone and the salmon with them. OOPS,
Sorry. Next problem please and pass the caviar. |
Well,
we can all shed a tear and look at old films. At
least we have a bundle of nature films to show our
decedents how we blew it. Problem is, the experience [link] of a redwood forest cannot be captured on film. |
How
do we get rules of engagement in place that will
promote a true dialog before there is further escalation?
My personal answer to this question is using (now)
the tool we (at MG Taylor et al.) spent 25 year making
to address
these questions [link] and promote legitimate action. |
The
focus at Davos, and many other meeting of its
type was on how to fix what is wrong,
expand what is good and include more
in this emerging global experience. Worthy objectives.
However, there are deep
systemic problems [link] with our entire approach
to economy. If these are not addressed, our successes
will create conditions that will make our failure
look like good timess. |
If
I return to Davos, it will be to report that a bridge
across the divide can be constructed. Hold the salmon,
please. |
The
return to Davos was accomplished in 2005 - at least
partially. This time we came with an RDS [link].
Certainly our work was better represented and the
impact greater. It remains to be seen if it was significant
and if real change will follow. One of the sessions
I facilitated was focused on socially responsible
investment - a thorny problem. This is a problem
I do not have. Mine is different. I have only my
time to invest. Where to do this? Was Davos 2005
a good investment? Did I build my portfolio, act
responsibly, preserve intellectual capital and do
some good. Same questions as when investing money
and there are no clear answers. |
A
quarter of a century separates these two pictures.
Al Gore 25 years ago, I think, was still in congress.
He wrote his thesis on the impact of video on the
human brain. Ultimately, he wrote legislation to
enable the “virtual
super
highway.” Today, he is forming a company that
can deliver video through the Internet. There is
a consistency in all his work in this realm. Patrick,
who Brilliantly organized the Davos WorkSpace this
year, would have been, perhaps, in the first grade
when the second picture was taken. The majority of
his work life investment is before him. Gail and
I were in our early 40s and starting MG Taylor based
on a network model of organization [link] -
what today we call a ValueWeb
[link].
In the bottom picture, I am sitting in our Studio
at
Instead a
few miles
from
a wall of solid ice
above Boulder, Colorado - an environment much like
Davos although more modest in scale. This room was
heated by solar energy and an old wood
stove.
At
the right
of the picture is an Apple II Computer with 96 k
of memory - the pc at the time - it connected
to the EIES system (an extension of the DARPA net
for universities and precursor of the Internet) by
a phone line that ran at at about a 150 baud rate
when it
worked
at
all.
We thought that this was super technology and had
already designed the next generation of it [link].
In this room, I planned and wrote much of what became
the
conceptual basis of MG Taylor, our patent and what
we are doing today [link]. |
In
the top picture, Al Gore is talking about the relationship
between various media, how the brain works, the structure of
information distribution services and the business
he is creating today [link] designed
to balance out some of the distortions that exist
in the existing “communication” system. Such different
lives we have lived and such similarity of purpose.
Would our paths
have
crossed
to facilitate
this
dialog
except at Davos? |
What
makes a good investment of a lifetime? This is a
serious question that all should ponder. |
|
|
Return
to DAVOS WorkSpace |
|
|
|
Taylor
Environments - a Tour |
|
|
|
Matt
Taylor
Palo Alto
February 7, 2001
SolutionBox
voice of this document:
INSIGHT POLICY PROGRAM
|
|
Posted:
February 7, 2001
Revised:
February 1, 2005
20010207.765279.mt 20010213.238403.mt •
20010216,985319.mt 20050201.543210.mt
•
this
document is complete 99%
Copyright© Matt
Taylor, 2001, 2005 |
|
|