REPLY How to promote good work (SD6581)

[SDMAIL Richard Stevenson]

Posted by  Richard Stevenson <rstevenson at valculus.com>

Kim Warren wrote:
> Whatever one thinks of how well the 'establishment' serves this
> community, we should recall that virtually all that commitment is
> voluntary and done for the love of it - a point I know Richard himself
> has  made before.

Absolutely - I hope I have been careful not to be critical of  individuals.

>  I have not come across a single case of an outsider being discouraged from
> getting involved - quite the opposite - and if we think something should
> be happening that isn't, it's up to us to get on with it rather than
> complain that 'they' are not doing so.

Well... only partially agreed.   It is the case that some perceptions  
of the SDS (especially from outside the US) are that it is  
effectively controlled by the Boston "group".  I totally understand  
the geographical density of SD talent in East Coast USA - but I think  
that whereas "outsiders" are not explicitly discouraged, neither are  
they actively encouraged.  Like it or not, there is a "not invented  
here" culture in the SDS that tacitly (but effectively) discourages  
many "outsiders" from getting involved.

> Richard's personal contacts whose politically-incorrect submissions  have
> been excluded from discussion may not want to be named, so could he at
> least give us a precis of the key themes of those contributions, so we
> can all see the kinds of ideas that have been denied to us?

Sadly, no.  Several of them have been quite derogatory about the SDS  
- I stress NOT about individuals.  I summarised the theme as best I  
could in my previous mail.  There's  a lot of frustration out there  
in the wider world.  I am just a messenger - and despite being shot  
at, I am still upright.

> The conference is a great place to feature practical work, and for a
> serious professional - who after all will have done all the real  work on
> a project already - the extra time needed to fulfil the quite modest
> requirements is trivial.

Now here I do disagree.

Actually, it's not trivial!  Absolutely not!  This is a common  
academic conception but there is actually a huge barrier to serious  
professional submissions.

First there is the confidentiality and "sanitisation" issue - this  
can actually wring the guts out of a serious strategy case study.   
Second, there is the need to "distil the SD-interest essence" from  
what might be a hugely complex set of issues, some not involving SD.   
Third, there is the additional and irksome requirement to conform to  
academically-orientated SDS submission requirements.

Most business professionals have a greater need to move on the the  
next project.  Thus - a huge amount of accumulated knowledge gets lost.

And here's another nub of my argument.  Academics and business  
professionals often don't understand each others' value drivers!   
Those who try to straddle the fence usually fall one side or the other.

And - dare I also say - the SD Conference is not such a great place  
to feature practical work.  It's small, inwardly focussed and low  
impact for a professional practitioner.

> Nevertheless, perhaps a System Dynamics 'magazine' would be  popular, in
> which shorter pieces could be published - volunteers welcome,  including
> from outside Boston! This would also of course need practitioners to
> contribute.

I think the "magazine" idea is interesting.   But we need a  
completely new and 2010-focussed professional reappraisal of how all  
practitioners can constructively interact.

Maybe the SDS should hire some external consultants?!

Richard Stevenson
Valculus Ltd
UK
Posted by  Richard Stevenson <rstevenson at valculus.com>
posting date  Wed, 5 Sep 2007 17:03:10 +0100