martes, julio 21, 2015

Was the Smart Grid 2025 a transition scenario? Do we need a transformation scenario?

“ Knowledge comes by taking things apart: analysis. But wisdom comes by putting things together.” -- John A. Morrison 
 "... technology is the easy part to change. The difficult aspects are social, organizational, and cultural." -- Donald Norman, "The Invisible Computer," Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press 1988. 
"You've got to start with the customer experience and work back to the technology, not the other way around." -- Steve Jobs
After 4 years have elapsed and a lot of progress has been achieved on what emerged as the Value Added Electricity Architecture Framework, on what started (and continue to be documented) as the Electricity Without Price Controls Architecture Framework (EWPC-AF), we might be able to come up to conclusions on the main questions:

Was the Smart Grid 2025 a transition scenario?

Do we need a transformation scenario? 
That is very important and also timely to agree upon, for example, to support the post Referendums on the transformation to direct democracy, might start with Electricity Pacts in Europe, USA and OAS and also given the "Fourth update. Just like the Haiti's Energy Roadmap is the DR Energy Roadmap truly Sustainable? of the post Applying #Jobsism to transform current global #Fordism marketing myopia, where the transition  (the future will be a continuation of the past) versus transformation (the future will not be a continuation of the past) decision is at stake.

As will be seen below, it can be confirmed that the Smart Grid 2025 scenario was a transition scenario, that the Institute For The Future (IFTF) organized as was reinterpreted in the post How to Cross the Thin Line from Arrogance to Leadership as a quantity collaboration analysis, that we can now say was looking for knowledge, based according to Norman on "the easy part to change," and on Steve Jobs' "the other way around,"

An extract from said post tell us about a transformation scenario, as a quality collaboration synthesis that we can now say was trying to look for wisdom, considering according to Norman on "the difficult aspects," and by following Steve Jobs' "to start with the customer experience:"
Trying to draw the attention of the IEEE Spectrum and IFTF, using repeatedly several social network communication channels, a week after game ended, I wrote and sent the blog post Was the EWPC-AF_Creator the All Around Winner of the Smart Grid 2025 Game? Relative to Quantity vs. Quality in Collaborations, in that post I stated that:
“It is important to understand that the experiments conducted in the Foresight Engine collaborative community are generally known for its capacity to exploit the “Wisdom of Crowds,” by building up ideas that engage players to gain momentum as an analytic feasible winning scenario. But, according to the IFTF it is also very powerful and useful device to facilitate collaborative testing by players in the community, of what they call “outlier” ideas, like that of the original EWPC-AF idea, that I claim are synthesized by one person or a very small team.” That's exactly what Peirce was against when he developed his scientific architecture.
Regarding the above mentioned customer experience is the blog post Great electric service that repeats a comment posted under the article Energy: The smart-grid solution, by Massoud Amin, published online in Nature on 10 July 2013, in which Dr. Amin “…outlines how the United States should make its electricity infrastructure self-healing to avoid massive power failures.” It was found that of three criterion, 'The smart-grid solution' doesn't "... meets ... the third as a result of two scoping flaws in its underlying architecting act done in 2002 and 2003. The flaws are in industry organizational change scope and in the customer scope."

To be able to come up with sound conclusions on the two main questions of this post, please also consider the article Massively Multiplayer Futuring: IFTF’s Foresight Engine, by Jake Dunagan of Institute for the Future. As a complement of what's written on "Was the EWPC-AF_Creator...," Dunagan wrote that a:
... user attempted to develop his own scoring system, one that would rectify a scoring “bug” in the original system that allowed players to rack up millions of points, while others who were making similar levels of contributions were scoring in the hundreds. This scoring system altered the final leaderboard, and a new “winner” was unofficially declared. As Foresight Engine is intended to be a continually evolving and learning platform, these unsolicited re-designs of the game were not only welcomed, but a thrilling testament to the passion, intelligence, and commitment of the players to the game experience. Beyond the numbers of players and cards played, there is no greater indication of success for a participatory platform that the users taking ownership of the platform itself. 
Transcript of the first minute of the Smart Grid 2025 video
Smart grid development has centered on a key problem:
HOW TO integrate the slow and reliable infrastructure of the classic grid with the fast-paced, disruptive communications and computing technologies that support the smart grid.

A "systems-within-systems" approach has been advocated- and it is working.

But there are other systems to integrate...
... the volatile and complex social, economic, and political systems of our world.

How ALL these systems work together will determine the Smart Grid of the future.

This is the story of one future for the Smart Grid of 2025.

Will this be our future?

Smart Grid 2025 from Institute for the Future on Vimeo.

No hay comentarios: