Complexity, Innovation, Knowledge and Learning: A quantum interpretation of management

Nothing as practical as a good concept (of innovation)

In a Flemish newspaper of yesterday (De TIJD, sorry in Dutch), I read one of these many messages containing an ever returning misunderstanding in innovation.  The Flemisch prime minister (of course) claims that more innovation is needed for Flanders.  Innovation (according to him) is taking risks, making errors, being adventurous.  Encouraging start, indeed. He even claims that "creativity and dynamics need to emerge bottom-up, and not to be forced top-down".  But then it comes: education and training is not adaptad to this.  There would be a mismatch between what schools teach and what companies need. Schools are too conceptual, and companies would need down to earth procedures.  And there we go again in order to fall in the same ever returning trap.

There is nothing so practical as a good concept (since it is easy to apply, and for many different circumstances adaptable).  And equally, nothing is so theoretical (since it is not generally applicable) as a detailed procedure.  Detailed procedures not only cause often problems in a real life case, they certainly limit the creative potential of possible innovators.

Companies claim that academia would be too theoretical (but they in fact mean too conceptual), ignoring that a good concept has general applicability. They consider themselves as practitioners, following a series of strict, pre-defined, often tailor-made procedures. What is often called theoretical is indeed practical, and what is called practical seems in practice often not feasible. The innovation paradox I would like to call it.   

The powerpoints of the Euro-Mediterranean Management Approach course

For those interested, the powerpoints of the Euro-Mediterranean Management Approach are now available on the reading page of my blog (drop down menu, top upper right corner of this page).

Migration and the Euro-Mediterranean zone

In cooperation with Espace Prépas, Euromed Marseille has prepared an interesting publication (in French) on migration.  This is not an exclusively Euro-Mediterranean issue, since present in the whole world, but given the creation of a free-zone between Europe and the Maghreb in only a few years from now, it should really start interesting us.

A mature science of consciousness

The Dalai Lama, in his new book titled "The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality", argues for a serious research investigation into consciousness. He might not be the first to do so, and hopefully not the last either, but I think his challenge is a real one for the scientific community. On November 12, he addressed a convention of neuroscientists in Washinton DC, where it was appaling that some of so called scientists refused this dialogue.  Science has always and only progressed in dialogue and discovery of new roads.

I do not want to elaborate on the content of the book, but I do want to highlight a just observation that the Dalai Lama makes.  Completely in line with the argument between Lorentz and Einstein, that in order to compare validity of theories, the validation itself should issue out of the epistemology of the theory, the Dalai Lama in fact invites "scientist" to investigate and develop a rigorous methodology of first-person empiricism. Indeed, given that subjectivity is a primary element of consciousness, first-person empiricism (based on contemplative traditions) could contribute to this development. Are we scientists able and willing to take up this challenge and possibly progress insight in such an important issue as consciousness further?

In Glenn Aparicio Parry's words: Ironically, as Western science followed its own methodology to its extreme, dissecting the world into smaller and smaller particles, it eventually entered the mysteries of the subatomic quatum realm. Heisenberg lamented that we had reached the ends of our language in describing such a world. Whitehead said that an atom actually exists entirely in its radiations, yet there is no "thing" there radiating.

Are we able to progress and to make an attempt to bridge scientific visions and beliefs?