The MLP shows that each large scale system is composed of many, many
subsystems, and reflexive research and action frameworks help to connect the big
sustainability challenge of a Great Transformation with the small sustainability
potentials of each individual’s decision to learn more, be mindful about his or her
intentions, speak truth to power or organize change initiatives. In essence it means
that a transformational 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development begins with
challenging and changing our self and inspiring those that we can reach. Gramsci
called this the “progressive self-consciousness,” explaining that: “The awareness of
self is reconstituted through an appreciation of prevailing thought-patterns and the
nature and distribution of life-chances. Hence the moment of self-awareness leads
to a more complex and coherent understanding of the social world and is a form of
historical change” (cited by Gill 2003: 31).
Such a change in personal mind-sets might bring about exactly what all innovation needs: the energy-sparking imaginary of what could be if x, y, or z were
different. Offering alternative ideas, interpretations and practice experiences also
means offering alternative meaning, legitimacy and knowledge about solutions.
This can foster deliberative co-creative processes—or at least delegitimize claims
that there are no alternatives. The future constellation of imagination, rationalization
and justification patterns in which decision-making processes take place is changed.
And even if it does not trigger alternative decisions or practice right away, the
mind-sets of the people involved are altered. A spark of inspiration or resentment of
complacency has been planted. The radical intention fuels another incremental step.
Award-winning
complex
system
and
leadership
researchers
Margaret J. Wheatley and Deborah Frieze of the Berkana Institute found that from
separate local efforts might arise networks which solidify into communities of
practice once people join them not only out of self-interest but also for a jointly
aspired-for outcome and out of concern for the others. From these networks might
emerge new “systems of influence” that possess qualities and capacities that did not
exist in the individuals before and were not anticipated: “the system that emerges
always possesses greater power and influence than is possible through planned
incremental change. Emergence is how Life creates radical change and takes things
to scale” (Wheatley/Frieze 2006).
What Wheatley and Frieze call the “aspired outcome” equals Gramsci’s ‘aim’
and my purpose: it can unify different expectations into a collective will for change.
This outcome imaginary is not understood as a blueprint. Those, as complex system
researchers agree and empirical research will show, are not available for living
systems. Rather, when there is clarity about which default practice and arguments
can be jettisoned, a corridor of steps that qualify as going in the desired direction
can emerge, and movement both as a team and in a strategic fashion is facilitated.
This brings me back to the radical imaginary of recoupling, a common thread in
twenty-first century science (Chap. 2) and one suitable for capturing the contextually different repurposing efforts of the pioneering initiatives presented in Chap. 4.
Under current circumstances, their incremental strategies are ones of
double-decoupling: doing things better when it comes to treating nature and
5.2 Transformative Literacy: Hacking Systems and Their Purpose
161
subsystems, and reflexive research and action frameworks help to connect the big
sustainability challenge of a Great Transformation with the small sustainability
potentials of each individual’s decision to learn more, be mindful about his or her
intentions, speak truth to power or organize change initiatives. In essence it means
that a transformational 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development begins with
challenging and changing our self and inspiring those that we can reach. Gramsci
called this the “progressive self-consciousness,” explaining that: “The awareness of
self is reconstituted through an appreciation of prevailing thought-patterns and the
nature and distribution of life-chances. Hence the moment of self-awareness leads
to a more complex and coherent understanding of the social world and is a form of
historical change” (cited by Gill 2003: 31).
Such a change in personal mind-sets might bring about exactly what all innovation needs: the energy-sparking imaginary of what could be if x, y, or z were
different. Offering alternative ideas, interpretations and practice experiences also
means offering alternative meaning, legitimacy and knowledge about solutions.
This can foster deliberative co-creative processes—or at least delegitimize claims
that there are no alternatives. The future constellation of imagination, rationalization
and justification patterns in which decision-making processes take place is changed.
And even if it does not trigger alternative decisions or practice right away, the
mind-sets of the people involved are altered. A spark of inspiration or resentment of
complacency has been planted. The radical intention fuels another incremental step.
Award-winning
complex
system
and
leadership
researchers
Margaret J. Wheatley and Deborah Frieze of the Berkana Institute found that from
separate local efforts might arise networks which solidify into communities of
practice once people join them not only out of self-interest but also for a jointly
aspired-for outcome and out of concern for the others. From these networks might
emerge new “systems of influence” that possess qualities and capacities that did not
exist in the individuals before and were not anticipated: “the system that emerges
always possesses greater power and influence than is possible through planned
incremental change. Emergence is how Life creates radical change and takes things
to scale” (Wheatley/Frieze 2006).
What Wheatley and Frieze call the “aspired outcome” equals Gramsci’s ‘aim’
and my purpose: it can unify different expectations into a collective will for change.
This outcome imaginary is not understood as a blueprint. Those, as complex system
researchers agree and empirical research will show, are not available for living
systems. Rather, when there is clarity about which default practice and arguments
can be jettisoned, a corridor of steps that qualify as going in the desired direction
can emerge, and movement both as a team and in a strategic fashion is facilitated.
This brings me back to the radical imaginary of recoupling, a common thread in
twenty-first century science (Chap. 2) and one suitable for capturing the contextually different repurposing efforts of the pioneering initiatives presented in Chap. 4.
Under current circumstances, their incremental strategies are ones of
double-decoupling: doing things better when it comes to treating nature and
5.2 Transformative Literacy: Hacking Systems and Their Purpose
161