*INTEGRATIVE IMPROVEMENT INSTITUTES PROJECT
By Graham Douglas
1 This description of the Project is in the following five sections:-
Section 1 Project Overview.
Section 2 Draft Project Plan.
Section 3 Progress Report as at 28 April 2006.
Section 4 How is it different from other approaches?
Section 5 Description of Integrative Improvement™: Sustainable Development as if People and
Their Physical, Social and Cultural Environments Mattered.
*SECTION 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW
2 The challenges we face in our economies and democracies and in our divided unsustainable
world are perhaps greater than at any other time. These challenges have arisen because of the
way we have thought and acted as individuals and the way we have organised and governed
ourselves. We have thought, planned, organised, governed and acted as though our world is
comprised of parts that can be separately exploited by humans and managed by us from one
stable state to another. We have tended to act without a sense of wholeness - without
integrity. Meeting these challenges will require completely different approaches to how we
think and act as individuals and how we organise and govern.
3 This project directly addresses these challenges in a novel way. It is designed to improve the
well-being of people and their environments through low-cost self-organising diffusion,
refinement and implementation of my unique bottom-up Integrative Improvement™ (II)
approach for achieving sustainable development.
4 II emphasises dynamic connections, relationships and interactions in line with our current
scientific understanding of the world as tending to be self-organising with human beings whose
minds are naturally integrative. II improves in a balanced, integrative and sustainable way the
lives people already have. II uses Integrative Governance™ enabled by human and machinebased
technology in all organisations. II progress is measured by indicators of well-being such
as The Australia Institute’s Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI). II is implemented by training all
involved to apply NEW Integrative Thinking™ (NEW IT), Douglas Integrative Governance 247™
(DIG 247) and their complementary tools.
5 The project is backed by practical experience and research over three decades. It is at the
stage of seeking people and institutions that would like to join me in advancing Integrative
Improvement™ in the world. In line with the self-organising tendency inherent in the
Integrative Improvement approach, I foresee the current draft plan will adapt as other
catalysts join me as one of a maximum of seven founding members of the Federation
Integrators Team of the first Integrative Federation™ (IF) or in other roles as the project plan
is implemented.
*SECTION 2: DRAFT PROJECT PLAN
6 Bearing this in mind, the current draft long-term plan is as follows:-
*AIM:- Improve the well-being of people and their environments through low-cost selforganising
diffusion, refinement and implementation of the Integrative Improvement™ (II)
approach to development.
*STRATEGY:- Establish a self-organising networked Integrative Federation™ (IF) of largely
virtual Integrative Improvement Institutes™ (IIIs)) in a number of countries using the training
modules and templates at http://www.integrative-thinking.com and their complementary
tools.
*OUTLINE PLAN:- Have one IF website for teaching, research and consulting in Integrative
Improvement with a page for each Institute, for each tool and for research related to
Integrative Thinking™, Integrative Governance™, Integrative Improvement™, Integrative
Capitalism™ and Integrative Democracy™. A catalyst in each of 7 countries would select and
train 7 people to be the IIIs Integrators Team (IIIsIT) in their country. Each Institute would
select, train and license 7 people with experience in 7 industries to provide personal contact in
7 local areas to further diffuse Integrative Improvement and, for a fee, train successive groups
of 7 people from government, business and civil society organisations based on material on the
website. These trained people would implement Integrative Improvement in start-up and
existing organisations and help in the further diffusion, refinement and implementation of
Integrative Improvement in line with the model outlined here.
*TACTICS:- Sense and respond adaptively to other catalysts and end- users/citizens as the
Integrative Improvement Institutes “virus” spreads.
*SECTION 3: PROGRESS REPORT AS AT 28 APRIL 2006
7 Progress includes:-
a) A paper on the Project was presented at the Open Culture Conference at the University of
Milan on 27-29 June 2005.
b) The project has been publicised in group fora such as those in connection with the
Development Gateway, “The Support Economy”, the Communication Initiative, the
International Institute for Sustainable Development, the NextBillion and the World Business
Council for Sustainable Development.
c) The IF website is under construction at www.intfed.org .
e) Research and practical tools that complement the training modules and templates at
www.integrative-thinking.com are being collected.
f) The IF, along with the National Research Council of Italy (CNR) and others will be among the
first to test and use Archivemaker outlined at http://www.bdaweb.net which explains BdA
(now known as DigitAlexandria) as follows:-
“The Biblioteca d'Alessandria is a cross-platform system, composed by a set of very handy and
fast tools, designed for building digital archives and digital libraries of any complexity, from the
personal archive of a single researcher up to the repository of a big institution, such as a
University or Research Center. It is based on a peer to peer network and is compatible with
the Open Archive Protocol (OAI-PMH).”
*SECTION 4: HOW IS IT DIFFERENT FROM OTHER APPROACHES?
8 People generally like to know what is so different about my approach compared with the
myriad of other approaches to sustainability in the various disciplines. In a nutshell, the
differences between my approach and others are:-
a) The Integrative Improvement approach is the only one of which I am aware that:
· addresses the improvement of individual and organisational integrity directly
and in conjunction as the linchpin of sustainable development,
· offers low-cost, easily memorised tools for doing this in any context and
thereby,
· provides a common basis for communication between individuals and within and
among organisations – necessary for improving individual, organisational and
overall creativity and performance, connections, relationships, interactions and
trust.
b) Other approaches do not appear to be as firmly based on recent advances in the
understanding of the human mind coming from Mind Science. (For a concise introduction to
the Mind Science that underpins my work please see the interview with George Lakoff about
his and Mark Johnson’s book “Philosophy in the Flesh” at
http://www.edge.org/discourse/lakoff.html .) Among other disciplines, Mind Science draws on
work from the brain sciences (which include neuroscience, immunology and endocrinology);
biology; ethology; computer science; social, evolutionary and cognitive psychology; physics;
anthropology; neurophilosophy (a new science established with a view to building a unified
science of the mind and brain); linguistics; the philosophy of mind; the philosophy of science
and evolutionary epistemology (a branch of philosophy concerned with the origin, nature,
methods and limits of human knowledge). (Based on this work the human mind may be
defined as the process of a trained living human brain interacting with the rest of the human
body, which is interacting with its physical, social and cultural environment.)
c) As a result, other approaches do not seem to address the process of human cognition as
currently understood and come across as being about a top-down process for managing
existing parts of the world. For example, even advanced tools for education in sustainable
development seem to be about analysing and evaluating information and managing parts
categorised as “education”, “sustainable development” and “systems theory” in line with a
particular set of values currently considered to be important by some knowledgeable people.
On the other hand, Integrative Thinking™ is built around the idea of a multi-faceted dynamic
human will reflecting what could be regarded as basic human needs common to all people and
a comprehensive range of other memorised triggers of the conscious and unconscious mind (in
which much cognition occurs and leads to behaviour). Accordingly, the approach helps people
change the way they think rather than how they justify their thoughts through critical thinking,
so is likely to be more efficacious in actually changing behaviour.
d) Training in NEW Integrative Thinking (NEW IT) is of much lower cost in time, money and
teacher/facilitator resources to deliver than other tools for improving creativity and
performance.
e) NEW IT is much more widely applicable in that it is a fully integrated easily memorised tool
for negotiating the change from what one has to what one wants (problem solving), for
planning strategy and tactics, for guiding action and for review and evaluation in any context.
f) NEW IT provides a common basis for communication for all relations and interactions in all
contexts- essential for establishing trust.
g) NEW IT is integrated into the process of Integrative Governance*™ and together with it and*
other complementary tools, provides the framework for achieving Integrative Improvement in
any context.
*SECTION 5: DESCRIPTION OF INTEGRATIVE IMPROVEMENT (II)™:
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS IF PEOPLE AND THEIR PHYSICAL,
SOCIAL AND CULTURAL ENVIRONMENTS MATTERED
Introduction
9 This section discusses how we now think, organise and govern ourselves and outlines my
unique science-based approach called Integrative Improvement (II) that addresses directly the
fundamental issues of individual and organisational integrity.
10 The section explains the core principles and processes of Integrative Improvement (II) in
comparison with current development approaches and describes its key tools of Integrative
Thinking™ and Integrative Governance™.
11 The section concludes with some questions and answers about the approach, which
illustrate the Integrative Thinking™ > Integrative Governance™ > Integrative Improvement™
Integrative Capitalism™ > Integrative Democracy™ linkage.
*Core Principles of Integrative Improvement (II)
12 These are:-
a) II is a bottom-up approach involving everybody. Other development approaches tend to be
imposed from the top down.
b) II emphasises dynamic connections, relationships and interactions because it is based on
the current scientific understanding of our world as tending to be self-organising with human
beings whose minds are naturally integrative. Other approaches tend to accept an earlier view
that we live in a world of parts that can and must be managed into a stable state or moved
from one stable state to another by top-down managers trained to think unintegratively rather
than integratively.
c) II is about improving (making or becoming better) in a balanced, integrative and
sustainable way the lives people already have, that is, it is about - sustainable development as
if people and their physical, social and cultural environments mattered. Other development
approaches tend to emphasise growth in particular aspects of the lives of some people and,
hence, tend to adopt, as a common denominator, measurable economic growth in a sector,
industry, area or country as the goal.
d) II involves encouraging and facilitating Integrative Governance™ enabled by technology in
all government, business and civil society organisations. Other approaches based on and
measured in terms of economic growth tend to accept without question the narrowly selfinterested
and profit-driven corporate governance model that has arisen since the Industrial
Revolution and has been fostered in all fields in recent years.
e) II progress is measured by indicators of national wellbeing such as The Australia Institute’s
Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) (please see http://www.gpionline.net for further
information). Other approaches tend to use Gross Domestic Product (GDP) which is not a good
indicator of changes in wellbeing.
*Core Process by which II is Developed and Applied
13 The process for applying II is centred on improving the integrity, creativity and
performance of each person involved, improving the integrity, creativity and performance of
each organisation involved and providing a common basis for communication between
individuals and within and among organisations. These improvements are initiated through
training in and practising of NEW Integrative Thinking (NEW IT)™ by all individuals involved
and training in and adoption of Douglas Integrative Governance 247 (DIG 247)™ by business,
government and civil society organisations. An outline of these follows. (Please see
http://www.integrative-thinking.com for a general introductory article, further information and
low-cost training modules and templates. The NEW IT Modules are entitled Overview, Theory,
Bibliography; Our Integrative Mind™; Reconciling Needs and Wants; Problem Solving and
Planning; and Applying NEW IT. The DIG 247 Modules are entitled Overview of Douglas
Integrative Governance 247 and DIG 247 Governance Templates for a Federation, an
Enterprise and Direct Support Advocates Teams. The purpose and contents of each Module are
summarised in free introductory paragraphs on the website.)
*NEW Integrative Thinking (NEW IT)
14 After many years of practical experience and research it seems to me improvement in all
areas is impeded by the way we are trained to think. Broadly, we tend to be trained in critical
thinking. In educational institutions, at work and even at home we train what I call our
Critical Mind. We train people to reason in a *disembodied way as though our minds were
symbol manipulators like computers, unconnected with the remainder of our bodies and our
physical, social and cultural environment. We train them to break problems down into parts, to
put these parts into rigid categories with shared properties and to manipulate symbols
representing these categories. We train them to hypothesise using these rigid categories
( thereby excluding all other possibilities) and look for a grain of the “truth” about these
categories that is imagined to be "out there" in the real world and to justify that "truth" with
propositions expressed in words or mathematical symbols joined together in accordance with
the rules of logic. We train them to think in a straight line towards a conclusion. We train them
as though the way we justify our thoughts - in logical statements - is the way we think. In
short, we train people to think “inside the box”. We dehumanise reasoning.
15 The effects of this on our lives and work include:-
become alienated from the better justifiers.
decreases.
conflict in groups and organisations. This unresolved conflict can surface later and undermine
the group or organisation.
individual and others.
creativity and performance as individuals, in groups and in organisations.
by Paul Weaver in “The Natural Advantage of Nations: Business Opportunities, Innovation and
Governance in the 21st Century” (pp 246-253). As stated on its front flap “This book is about
innovation, solutions, competitiveness and profitability. It is also about building environmental
integrity and sustainability now and for future generations.” For further information on
sustainabilty please see www.naturaledgeproject.net .
16 Critical thinking has produced and will continue to produce much knowledge of parts of the
world around us but it is inconsistent with the integrative way in which nature, our bodies,
brains and minds function. There is mounting evidence in our increasingly interdependent
world that in addition we need to be trained specifically in something like NEW Integrative
Thinking (NEW IT) which is consistent with the integrative way nature, our bodies, brains and
minds function. While continuing to train in and employ critical thinking we need also to train
what may be called our Integrative Mind of which our *Critical Mind is a part.*
*NEW Integrative Thinking (NEW IT)
17 Extensive research in brain and mind sciences in recent years has shown:-
within itself and with its physical, social and cultural environment.
of its being done.
reflected in patterns in our brains.
way usually involves redeploying prototypes from another domain to the novel domain.
ability to trigger those prototypes, the easier it is for us to creatively address novel and
complex problems.
our short-term memory while we are working on other information.
(For a concise outline of the Mind Science that underpins my work please see the interview
with George Lakoff about his and Mark Johnson's book "Philosophy in the Flesh" at
http://www.edge.org/discourse/lakoff.html. For general information on the subject please see
http://www.thymos.com/mind/web.html)
18 While encouraging and applying critical thinking when appropriate, NEW IT is a process of
habitually and almost automatically making connections to create a whole new picture rather
than habitually and almost automatically breaking down an old picture into its parts.
19 NEW IT may be thought of as a more comprehensive successor to lateral thinking and using
multiple intelligences but, not surprisingly, is fully integrated, not an add-on extra. It is a
practical application of Mind Science so is a form of technology but it is human-based rather
than machine-based technology. It is a NEW way of thinking which helps us think “outside and
inside the box” and integrate the two as we plan and act.
20 The process of NEW IT may be thought of as our wondering (W) about a situation, creating
a narrative (N) connecting our wonderings and managing our experiences (E) in acting out our
narrative. It involves understanding and learning what our basic human needs and aspects of
our human will are, what guides us in balancing those needs and will, clarifying what we have
and what we want to set our goal, exploring possible connections when relaxed, arriving at a
strategy to negotiate the change from what we have to what we want, devising tactics to
advance the strategy, taking bold, assertive and timely action to achieve our goal, reviewing
and evaluating our performance.
*Becoming an Effective NEW Integrative Thinker (NEW IT) Is Not Difficult
21 For example, my SOARA (Satisfying, Optimum, Achievable Results Ahead) Process of
Integrative Thinking™ involves the learning of a comprehensive set of aids to memory to help
trigger connections in our minds, help us see analogies in unrelated fields and provide a way of
self-monitoring our thinking and acting. All these aids to memory are joined together in a
meaningful sentence so the Process as a whole can be learned in about the time it takes to
learn to drive a car (about twelve hours) and easily remembered. With practice its application
can become almost automatic. At all stages of the Process provision is made for learners to
record their reflections and possible actions based on those reflections. People can be
introduced to the basic concepts of the Process at almost any age. The Process is culturally
neutral.
22 With practice, applying the SOARA Process of Integrative Thinking becomes a habit that
empowers people and makes easier our struggle to achieve successful outcomes on a life-long
journey among possibilities. It helps us refine our perceptions, expand our horizons, sense and
respond successfully to emerging trends and events. By helping us to make analogies from
other domains it brings out and enhances our creativity. By helping us to always consider a
comprehensive range of variables it ensures we always take others into account including our
“customers” and stakeholders. NEW IT helps us and our enterprises thrive.
23 While improving our creativity and performance NEW IT helps us gain a sense of meaning,
a sense of belonging and a sense of personal power. This is because NEW IT helps us reconcile
our needs and wants and balance and integrate our thoughts, feelings and actions in harmony
with our physical, social and cultural environment. In this way NEW IT helps us to a self-reliant
state of mind from which we can work towards sustainable development and the better linking
of life and work.
24 In all contexts NEW IT provides an essential ingredient for sustainable successful
connections, relationships and interactions – a common basis for communication between
individuals.
*Douglas Integrative Governance 247 (DIG 247)
25 Governance is the process by which government, business and civil society organisations
gain, exercise and maintain power in relation to individual end-users/citizens and their
physical, social and cultural environments. Modern means of transparent communication are
making present governance approaches obsolete. Since the Industrial Revolution,
organisations have developed top-down, hierarchical, command and control governance
arrangements in a climate of slow, uncertain, incomplete and often secretive communications
to meet mass markets of relatively uninformed individual end-users/citizens in independent
nation states. These governance arrangements are dominated by managers so the situation is
sometimes referred to as the managerial economy. Bullying, corruption, poor accountability,
poor acceptance of responsibility in organisations, poor stakeholder engagement and lack of
transparency are possible in this sort of economy and are tolerated as being competitive ways
of gaining, exercising and maintaining power over people and their physical, social and cultural
environments. The cooperative and creative potential of most human beings is seen as inferior
to the ultra-competitive nature of some people.
26 More generally, because of the influence of these top-down organisations over our lives,
value and wealth generation are regarded as residing in the products and services supplied by
them rather than in the end-users/citizens who generate demand and can now readily express
it. This has inhibited sustainable improvement in the lives of many because it has valued
production and distribution (supply) at the expense of physical, social and cultural
environments and the potential for cooperation and creativity in each individual.
27 This is no longer the most efficient, effective and competitive way to organise because
supply responses from such organisations cannot keep pace with the demand changes of a
rapidly increasing number of informed end-users/citizens with access to world-wide,
comprehensive and fast communications. End-users/citizens, for whom the organisations exist,
have become alienated from the organisations. It is time for existing business, government
and civil society organisations to change and for new enterprises to adopt a governance
approach tailored to the realities of an emerging distributed economy.
28 As a result of thinking integratively about the difference between what we have and what
we want, Douglas Integrative Governance 247 (DIG247) offers a new approach to governance
for existing and start-up organisations that want to survive, adapt and prosper by meeting
24/7 the sustainable needs and wants of individual end-users/citizens in balanced ways that
benefit both parties. It offers a way of re-humanising connections, relationships and
interactions. It is governance for the emerging distributed economy.
29 In short, DIG 247 is about helping organisations employ fully the integrative capacity of
individuals to ensure the organisations are stable enough to meet efficiently, effectively,
competitively and sustainably the needs and wants of end-users/citizens while remaining
adaptable enough to self-organise to meet changes in those needs and wants. Within and
among organisations of all sorts DIG 247 provides an essential ingredient for sustainable
successful connections, relationships and interactions – a common basis for communication.
30 By a happy coincidence, DIG 247 is aptly named because it is based on digging deep into
the roots of individual and organisational behaviour in a world where end-users/citizens are
expecting their demands to be met any hour of every day (24/7). Also, these governance
policies incorporate well-known understandings that 2 heads are better than 1, our limited
short-term working memory is for 4 items plus or minus 1 when processing other information
and 7 is the optimum size for a decision-making group. Because we all have limited short-term
working memories, acronyms are used throughout DIG 247 material to help people remember
it and help trigger connections between it and other information relevant to the situation being
considered when applying DIG 247. DIG 247 was arrived at by my applying NEW IT to what
we now have and what we want as regards governance.
*What We Have
31 This is summarised in the acronym FIRST™:-
F ast and accelerating external changes affecting organisations;
I ndividuals who tend to think integratively but have been trained to think unintegratively,
and their knowledge and motivation in organisations;
R elationships and interactions with individual end-users/citizens and their knowledge and
motivation, and relationships and interactions among those within organisations;
S elf-organizing propensity of individuals and organisations;
T echnology improvements to enable end-users/citizens to deal with suppliers 247.
*What We Want
32 What we want is good governance in organisations. This is summarised in the acronym
START™:-
S takeholder engagement at all times;
T rust based on the individual integrity of each person involved;
A ccountability;
R esponsible behaviour by persons in organisations;
T ransparency.
*Transparency, NEW IT and DIG 247
33 As transparency is necessary for achieving the other aspects of good governance we will
discuss it in a little more detail.
34 Transparency is about all involved being open and candid. Being open and candid is part of
acting with integrity - the condition of being wholly honest and upright.
35 Transparency is also about interactions among individuals. For instance, the public sector
exists to serve the citizens of a country and interacts continually with them and individuals in
business and civil society organisations in the nation and externally. Accordingly, if we wish to
achieve transparency we need to address how the integrity of each unique person is instilled
and how it is maintained during interactions with others.
36 How integrity is instilled in each unique person raises the matter of how we train our minds.
Based on our current scientific understanding, the human mind may be defined as the process
of a trained living human brain interacting with the rest of the human body, which is
interacting with its physical, social and cultural environment. Training of the human mind so
defined involves our instinct, socialisation and conscious individual effort and takes time.
Accordingly, formal and informal education and training directed at instilling integrity and
based on our current scientific understanding of the human mind needs to begin at an early
age and continue throughout life. Techniques that can help in this regard are in NEW
Integrative Thinking (NEW IT)™ Modules available at http://www.integrative-thinking.com
and their complementary tools.
37 How individual integrity and transparency are maintained during interactions with others
involves building into organisations the checks and balances that help keep individuals “wholly
honest and upright”. An approach to governance that can help in this regard is outlined here
and is detailed in Douglas Integrative Governance 247 (DIG 247)™ Modules available at
http://www.integrative-thinkng.com and their complementary tools.
*Key Aspects of Douglas Integrative Governance 247 (DIG247)
38 These key aspects are summarised in the IFEDS Model™. This IFEDS Model is for start-ups
but its main features also apply to existing organisations in the transition from the managerial
to the distributed economy. Each part of the IFEDS Model is a node in a network of
relationships that employs fully the integrative capacity of individuals to ensure enough
stability to meet efficiently, effectively and competitively the needs and wants of endusers/
citizens while remaining adaptable enough to self-organise to meet changes in those
needs and wants. Within the network are what have been termed “value exchanges” by Verna
Allee at http://www.alleetoolkit.com/ rather than the “transactions” of the managerial
economy.
39 The nodes of the IFEDS Model are:
I ndividual end-users/citizens;
F ederations;
E nterprises;
D irect Support Advocates (DSAs); and
S uppliers.
40 The IFEDS Model works as follows:-
• Individual end-users/citizens who join a Federation in a geographical area express their
changing needs and wants face-to-face and/or virtually to a Direct Support Advocate (DSA) for
the area who is a member of that Federation.
• Direct Support Advocates (DSAs) obtain for end-users/citizens the goods and services
they want through Enterprises of that Federation.
• Enterprises staffed by Enterprise Catalysts (ECs) and other Enterprise Integrators (EIs)
facilitate the connections between Direct Support Advocates (DSAs) and suppliers. This
includes training and coordinating of DSAs and provision of enabling technology.
• ECs, EIs, end-users/citizens and DSAs, are all members of the Federation.
• Federations are governed by Federation Catalysts (FCs) and other Federation
Integrators (FIs) who provide coordination for up to seven Enterprises engaged in efficiently,
effectively and competitively meeting the needs and wants of end-users/citizens through
Enterprises and their DSAs.
• Individual end-users/citizens, when they are satisfied with the goods and services
supplied, release cash into the Federation for distribution in accordance with prior contracts.
41 Policies covering all aspects of the relationships among the nodes of the Federation are
included in Douglas Integrative Governance 247 (DIG 247) Policies customised for the
Federation from DIG 247 Templates.
42 This federated network of “value exchanges” is a joint venture among independent parties.
Each participant in the Federation is a joint venturer with a simple written contract defining
their situation. In this regard, ALIVE-Advanced Legal Issues in Virtual Enterprises is of interest.
(Please see http://www.vive-ig.net/projects/alive/index.html for further information.)
43 Meetings in the network employ Dynamic Facilitation Skills. (Please see
http://www.ToBe.net for further information.) Financial planning, budgeting and activities for
any period incorporate Intangible Management® which is “the new system of financially
valuing, financially recording and scientifically managing time by reference to knowledge,
relationships, emotional intelligence and speed- the four key value drivers.” (Please see
http://www.Standardsinstitute.org for details.) Also, the network incorporates Decisionality
Self-Service Everywhere™ which “empowers the information worker with time-sensitive,
optimum decisioning-flows in a way that cannot be avoided, whilst automatically generating
the decisioning audit.” (Please see http://www.decisionality.com/ for details.)
44 With some overlapping, this IFEDS Model may be aligned very broadly with existing
organisations as follows:
Individual end-users/citizens – citizens, those served by a civil society organisation, customers
of a business;
Federations – executive government, judiciary, legislature, civil society peak bodies,
conglomerate businesses;
Enterprises - government agencies, civil society campaigns, businesses;
Direct Support Advocates – elected representatives, members of a civil society organisation,
customer relations staff;
Suppliers – providers of goods and services to government departments, civil society
organisations, businesses and end-users.
45 “Businesses that operate with a high degree of excellence, but in the transaction model, will
continue to have an important role to play in the new networks. In these cases, the internal
logic that governs efficient production will have to be subordinated to the necessity of
alignment with the individual and thus the distributed imperative." (“The Support Economy” by
Zuboff and Maxmin, p379, http://www.thesupporteconomy.com .) For instance, a software
company could become the Facilitation Enterprise of a Federation, a housing company the
Housing Enterprise of a Federation and so on. It would all depend on the motivation and
knowledge of the initial Federation Catalysts. Federations would compete to provide direct
support for end-users/citizens and their success would be indicated by the extent to which
end-users/citizens used this direct support and remained loyal to the Federation.
46 For a long time to come distributed economy organisations will be dealing with managerial
economy organisations so DIG 247 policies for Federations, Enterprises and Direct Support
Advocates are based on existing laws. Under DIG 247, entities can be whatever is legally
permissible. The relationship between entities under DIG 247 policies is one of joint venturers
and may be defined in simple contracts because of the trust-based and trust-enabled nature of
the policies in the DIG 247 Templates. However, nothing in this description or the Templates
constitutes legal advice. Advice from a qualified legal practitioner should be sought before
adopting DIG 247.
*DIG 247 in Practice
47 Applying DIG 247 in practice begins in the same way whether it is a social entrepreneur, a
single business person starting out, a large corporation, a public servant planning the
implementation of a government program or an activist in a civil society organisation. Each
person involved simply acquires the NEW Integrative Thinking (NEW IT)™ and Douglas
Integrative Governance 247 (DIG 247)™ training modules and templates and works their way
through them.
48 The NEW IT Modules are designed for self-learning and take the learner in easy steps
through the strategic and tactical planning, action, review and evaluation stages of an
Integrative Problem Solving ™ process that is applicable in any context. A problem is simply
defined as the difference between what one has and what one wants in any context.
Accordingly, problem solving and planning is simply the process of negotiating the change
from what one has to what one wants. Changing to good governance is no exception.
49 After completing this Integrative Problem Solving™ stage the people involved are ready to
establish governance policies for whatever type of organisation they have decided upon as
being most appropriate to the circumstances – Direct Support Advocates Team, Enterprise,
Federation, Supplier – or all four. For instance, a rural development project might start with
just two Direct Support Advocates as Catalysts. Nevertheless, it would start out with
governance policies based on the DIG 247 Templates and build connections, relationships and
interactions following the IFEDS Model™. Similarly, a civil society activist group might start
with two or three advocates in the equivalent of a Direct Support Advocates Team and as new
issues arose foster the development of similar small groups - one for each issue – that would
remain connected with the first group. In this way a Federation would start to develop.
50 On the other hand, a large existing corporation might start by setting up the framework of
a Federation with other corporations as Enterprises and Suppliers and existing local enduser/
citizen focussed people who could be trained as Direct Support Advocates. Similarly, a
government program might be implemented from the outset by a Federation with Enterprises
and Direct Support Advocates Teams in local areas.
51 In all these instances and depending on their qualifications, Direct Support Advocates,
Enterprises and Suppliers could be providing their services for more than one Federation.
52 Throughout the process of Integrative Problem Solving™ using NEW IT Modules and the
writing and review of Integrative Governance Policies using DIG 247 Modules, any new and
appropriate enablement tools would be integrated with those mentioned in this description.
*DIG 247 and Carver Policy Governance®
53 Templates of Douglas Integrative Governance 247 (DIG 247) Policies for Federations, for
Enterprises and for Direct Support Advocates Teams (DSATs) are available from
http://www.integrative-thinking.com . They greatly simplify and reduce the cost of preparing
governance policies for new or existing organisations. They can be adapted for Suppliers as
they follow a common pattern. They owe much to the Carver Policy Governance® Model and
my experience with it and other models in government, civil society and business organisations
in the managerial economy. Some Carver principles are equally applicable in both economies
and since both will exist in tandem for many years I strongly recommend people gain an
understanding of Carver Policy Governance® at http://www.carvergovernance.com before
using these templates.
*Integrative Thinking™ > Integrative Governance™ > Integrative Improvement™ >
Integrative Capitalism™ > Integrative Democracy ™ Linkage
54 This linkage is perhaps most readily explained by considering some broad questions and
answers about the practical implications of the Integrative Improvement approach.
55 Why would adopting the Integrative Improvement approach benefit companies?
a) Planning, production, marketing and distribution costs would be reduced because demand
based on meeting the rapidly changing needs and wants of end-users would be known
accurately before planning, production, marketing and distribution of goods and services took
place and customer satisfaction would be monitored quickly, accurately and automatically.
b) Competitiveness and revenues of existing and start-up businesses would improve because
end-users would have their demands satisfied well. This would encourage repeat business,
increased numbers of customers for existing businesses and the growth of new businesses
stimulated by seeing the success of those following the Integrative Improvement model.
c) Good governance in businesses, based on stakeholder engagement, trust, accountability,
responsible behaviour and transparency at all times in all organisations involved, would
counter the current tendency to poor governance in government that adds to business costs.
There would be less need for regulation and embedded tools such as Decisionality would help
ensure compliance so there would be fewer opportunities for delays and corruption.
d) Adopting Integrative Improvement would address the main concerns expressed in the
following extract from “Regional perspectives on 'Sustainable Livelihoods and Business” on the
website of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development at
http://www.wbcsd.ch/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet&ObjectId=MTMwOTY.
"The highlights from these regional dialogues are summarized in this brief report. They have
been organized around the analytical framework presented in "Doing business with the poor: a
field guide", which looks at SL Sustainable Livelihoods business models through the lens of
13 basic business questions. The questions that generated most discussion and input from
participants were:
• What are the motivations to doing business with the poor and how do we operate a
mindset shift inside the company?
• Do we understand the real needs of the market and do we have the right product to
offer?
• How do we finance the investment, ensure that our product / service is affordable and
that payments are collected?
• How can we improve our supply chain?
• How can we replicate or scale up succcessful business models?
• How can we reach our customers? "
56 How would adopting the Integrative Improvement approach help ensure that the type of
development promoted is appropriate for poor communities?
a) The end-users/citizens of these poor communities would learn how to negotiate the change
from what they have to what they want and build and govern their organisations in a way that
quickly and inexpensively formulates and communicates their demand for goods and services
to potential suppliers.
b) Among these goods and services would be the public goods such as basic health services,
justice and security that their governments are in the best position to supply. The Integrative
Improvement approach would help poor communities engage more effectively to achieve these
public goods.
c) Businesses from within or without the poor communities would operate with good
governance from the outset and therefore be well-attuned to meeting the changing needs and
wants of those and other communities.
57 How would adopting the Integrative Improvement approach help ensure better governance
in business, government and civil society organisations?
a) All involved would be trained in NEW Integrative Thinking so all in an organisation would
have a common basis for communication – fundamental for success in any enterprise.
b) What constitutes good governance is addressed directly in templates that are used for
preparing governance policies common to all organisations so organisations would have a
common basis for communication with other organisations – another basis for success in any
enterprise.
c) Tools to ensure compliance with these policies are embedded in the policies.
58 How would adopting the Integrative Improvement approach lead to Integrative Capitalism?
a) Capitalism has many definitions but its main features are a free market for goods and
services, private ownership and control of the means of production, distribution and exchange
of goods and services except for public goods and services which are provided by governments
or in conjunction with governments. (At present, capitalism is distinguished by a tendency for
people to regard our world as a world of parts that have to be managed into a stable state and
from one stable state to another by managers who are trained to think unintegratively rather
than integratively – the way nature, our brains, bodies and minds tend to function.)
b) Integrative Capitalism retains these main features but enhances their operation by treating
people and our physical, social and cultural environments as a self-organising whole.
c) More specifically, adopting Integrative Improvement would improve the operation of the
market by clarifying demand quickly and accurately and by improving governance of
organisations to meet that demand. Individuals and organisations would tend to think and act
integratively. This would tend to improve their creativity and performance and hence enhance
sustainable development.
59 How would adopting the Integrative Improvement approach lead to Integrative Democracy?
a) The integrative basis and self-organising structure of Integrative Improvement and the tools
embedded in the Integrative Improvement approach would help achieve individual and
organisational integrity, stakeholder engagement, trust, responsible behaviour, accountability
and transparency so the need for regulation and government intervention would be
diminished.
b) The voice of civil society and businesses would be clearer and more structured so
governments would be better informed and better able to integrate the views of all in their
decision-making and actions.
c) All would have a common basis for communication – the essential ingredient for any
successful enterprise including democracy. Our currently disparate democracy would become
Integrative Democracy!
28 April 2006
*© Copyright Graham Douglas 1986-2006. All rights reserved.
This document contains trademarks which are the property of Graham Douglas or
other owners.
_Graham Douglas is a pioneer author and consultant in Applied Mind Science in the field of
Integrative Thinking™ and originator of Integrative Improvement™-Sustainable Development
as if People and Their Physical, Social and Cultural Environments Mattered, the SOARA Process
of Integrative Thinking™ and Douglas Integrative Governance 247™ (DIG 247).
He has a wealth of experience covering human development, governance, management and
training from his career in the Australian Army, government, business and the civil society.
This includes long and short-term planning; systems analysis; setting up the Financial and
Economic Policy Division of the Papua New Guinea Treasury; advising on the policies,
programs and projects of the World Bank in Washington DC; developing social, financial and
investment policy; establishing his own book business specialising in issues and ideas in the
social sciences and humanities; community affairs; citizens' advocacy; innovations in
governance and care in the community.
_*************************
Page Last Updated: May 8 4:17pm by user524@example.com