ValuDynamics Manifesto




ValuDYNAMICS MANIFESTO @F-L-O-W


the book @F-L-O-W


ValuDYNAMICS MANIFESTO @F-L-O-W

A Draft of Assumptions for ValuDYNAMICS

In a context setup by the Leadership Approach, there are about
7 different systems in play whenever we consider ValuDynamics
as a set of System Dynamics, or for that matter when we
"judge" we — using all of these systems in a metasystem of
judgment attempt to categorize in essence good or bad, this or
that, fit or not, go or run, etc. (note each values basin
would have a different gambit for the consequences of
judgment; in survival beige: the 4fs = feed, fight, flight, or
procreate… in an enterprising system orange, win-win, in a
contribution system such as yellow… allow or disallow?

The following manifesto helps to outline my own thinking of
ValuDYNAMICS in light of these seven DYNAMICS listed here:
Capability – Bias – Style – Level – Role – Values –
System.

My Draft Manifesto of
ValuDYNAMICS 2013: (Updated May 2014)

1) I want to retain the integrity of Spiral Dynamics®
and my friend and colleague Dr. Don Beck; leave it
alone, as a way in which to explain parts of reality
as we face them….

2) By switching into ValuDYNAMICS, it avoids confusion
about SDi, SD1, 2, etc. and its derivatives.

3) Unlike the spiraling structure, which I believe to
be true in cases, there is a networking structure,
which I also believe to be true; working in
conjunction to support a scaffolding effect for the
spiraling (see a graphic of the internet to visualize
how both could be true!)

Spiral Dynamics and networking joined together

4) The basins which Graves/SD
identified over time are worthy of maintaining as a
way to explain the discreet value systems as a dynamic
system which continues to build density and frequency
based on algorithms to support the particular
conditions — often fractional, sometimes fractal.

5) People moving through those
basins is not always the case and is limited by a lot
of things, capability being one (Graves noted this). 
People often leaf out
rather than continue to grow
and spiral vertically (more hierarchically complex).

6) Inbornness vectors us
to accumulate more density in frequency in those
basins where we are naturally inclined (to be
intrinsically rewarded), or designed if you like. 
Although design implies consciousness and mostly our
design is unconscious, at the minimum sub-conscious.

7) As new memes (algorithms) are
generated, value systems accumulate, discard and
protect through immune systems the accumulation,
acquisition and assimilation of memes which deny the
prime directive identified in the nodal system
governing the values basin (strange attractor).

8) As memes are dis-integrated, and
stripped apart/unwound; parts of the memes are
assimilated to give the appearance (if needed) of AAA
(Acquisition, Accumulation and Assimilation)… to the
extent necessary to evolve the system for fitness,
while protection from the basins immune system.

9) People are different because of
inbornness and it is usually the culture they reside
in, which dictates how the scaffold of memes — density
and frequency — are available for AAA; inbornness
dictating why — directly and indirectly — memetic
emergence occurs as a subconscious response to fitness
requirements, in view of conditions.

10) Hybridization (stripping, and
re-assembling) occurs as a way for AAA to function as
a fitness generator within the cultural scaffold, and
among other cultural scaffolds, which are they
themselves becoming as fit as they can through a much
larger and longer process, which is more immune to
inbornness — although indirectly not — than the
individual who is bound by inbornness to display
capability, bias, style, level, and roles in the face
of becoming individually and collectively fit in the
circumstances.

Example: In Hotels you see the card which says they
want to save the earth by not washing your towels or
sheets, right? That is a hybrid algorithm developed by
very sophisticated hotel operators to prey upon the
idea that you or anyone would want to save the planet,
our "mother" earth, by sleeping in dirty sheets and
hanging up your towel — which of course has the benefit
of dramatically lowering their fixed costs of you
staying there, from maid service to washing, to
logistics to a whole lot of things that are eliminated
when you hang the sign on the door that demonstrates
that you are saving the earth.

For those of you who are hoteliers, here’s another way
to work this… make a rather distinct sign that hangs
on the door, or a special green "neon" sign that the
guest flips on to let "housekeeping" know that dirty
sheets and wet towel are ok, and watch the usage
skyrocket as everyone wants a green light at their
door! 

That idea will save you millions, and it’s just
another hybridization of an algorithm which has at its
root FS-Green memes, but modified and using the
FS-Green equality/social/be like Mike density to get
more people enrolled in "saving" the planet! — while
reducing your costs dramatically and increasing your
profits, because have you noticed, that not one cent
of savings went to increase salaries of maids and
service workers… (the FS-Green stripped away!)

11) Valuing is a process that seeks
to provide a "return" on behavior (RoB) through means
and ends relationships which are vectored by
inbornness in the individual and by fitness in the
collective, although fitness to conditions is driving
the individual as well, but not so much as inborn
architecture.

The reason to understand this, is that "some" (few)
individuals can overcome their conditions to become
fit to conditions, which do not yet exist making them
"mobile".

12) While it’s difficult to
separate a chicken and egg dilemma, motives are ends
(the reasons why we value) and values are means in
which to accomplish service to those ends.  Motives do
not change over our lifetimes as they are inborn
(although most motive structures are very complex
system dynamics making it difficult to just say this
is the cause and effect, as it’s often difficult to
unwind combinatorial effects. Yet, just because it’s
difficult, doesn’t mean it can’t be done, or doesn’t
exist as a cause and effect at some level).

With
the exception of those events which can cause deep
personality change, such as trauma, or physiological
damage, the motives don’t shift.  The means in which
they are served and valued do continually shift
through the emergence of a belief system constructed
from experience, which is vectored by the motives… and
hence valued, as does the conditions which are the
matching tension causing values to shift — not motives,
but ValuDYNAMICS.

13) Means as well as ends can be
occluded because of the layers of indirect and direct
functions that are present to construct both our
experience and our future direction, which experience
often directs, and is served by.

14) Identifying ways in which to
represent all of this process is important and I have
chosen NETWORK Dynamics to figuratively represent the
AAA of values against the ground of inbornness.

15) Where this gets tricky is when
we look at apples and oranges — while both being fruit,
and coming from trees, are different in terms of their
flavors, use, and deliverables — as is the individual
and the collective. Few systems can explain both, but
Spiral Dynamics® comes close as long as one makes a
discreet claim that individuals do not follow
necessarily a spiraling path of values AAA-Activation
in MOST cases — a rare, very rare number of humans (not
worth using as exemplars) can emerge from the
subjectivity of their own capability, bias, style,
level, and role to move through increasingly complex
values because they are not limited by subject/object
or hierarchical complexity.

16 By using a networked approach,
we see that values are actually a way in which the
motives direct fitness through AAA-behavior in the
individual and to some extent the culture. 
However, the
culture is not bound by an individual’s inbornness but
seeks to amalgamate the scaffold for the many;
choosing instead and often to relegate the needs of
the many to the strength of the few individuals who
agentically in some form direct the AAA of the
cultural scaffold.

Over time, the cultural scaffold
becomes representative of the best practices, which
are in fact, without an exemplar, but as a composite,
making it difficult for the many to shift the scaffold
to their own design.

17) This attempt to conform and
utilize an increasingly more complex scaffold is
navigated by fewer and fewer over time because of the
limits of capability to produce ValuDYNAMICS which are
more complex and thus multi-faceted — beyond the
capability, bias, style, level, and role for most
individuals. (This is in large part is due to the
fact that 20% own 90% of the planet’s wealth… and
that number will become less over time if the current
operating system I call BLANK SLATE stays in place.)

18) Instead, individuals begin to
fragment complexity rather than becoming fractals of
complexity… fragmentation leading to polarization and
conflict among competing ValuDYNAMICS.

19) As time goes on, these few are matched with
the confusion and dis-integration of ValuDYNAMICS and
forced to realize that most can not be, do, have,
become, and contribute in concert with accelerating
complexity, and seek to create Values approaches which
either attempt at requiting the polarization through
understanding, or the construction of systems, which
make force compliance, as understanding wanes.

20) Complexity is at the root of
all problems — each solution becoming the problem of
the next level and human inbornness, or genetics has
not yet produced — per se — the capability to modify
this inbornness in any volume.  Therefore until that
happens, complexity will be the enemy of the people
and the culture as conflicts emerge.*

*Segue for Systems DYNAMICS
here because if we can’t do much about it, we can
study it and understand why what is happening is
happening; until we can do something about the
structural situation of the gene-meme gap that is creating
the tension as a result of accelerating this gap.

More Info
@F-L-O-W

 


© Generati