The second Fiscal Sustainability Report published by the UK Office of Budget Responsibly appears to make no reference to energy other than to falling North Sea Revenues. Important though this is, it is the statement that productivity will continue to increase at the long run 2%, without justification, that is the critical issue.

Productivity has been, and is, intensely energy dependent and here is significant discussion about the amount of easily won energy moving forward from this point, and the value of the useful net energy it yields; not least within the International Monetary Fund.

Energy use and GDP are historically closely correlated and projections that ignore this are suspect at best and probably meaningless.

This a strategic mistake as it fails to focus the available National creativity on the search for energy and resource intensity reduction in UK economic activity at system level.

At the moment, all efforts are aimed at marginal energy and resource intensity improvements at micro level.

dd

See also Energy, economy and the impending rite of passage

The financial crisis and the current Banking furore illustrates our failure to educate for ‘Service for the Nation’. An understanding inbuilt in citizens of the benefits they receive from society and their responsibility for it, together with an appreciation of how this impacts global societies.

We seem to have lost this quality in ourselves and it is increasingly degrading our Quality of Life.

On it depends our survival as a coherent society with an acceptable Quality of Life for all.

Here are some of my thoughts

DD

A 21st Century National Service

The UK Government has introduced a requirement for 11 year olds, starting secondary education in September 2009 to stay in Education or training until they are 18.

There is currently much debate about how this translates into positive outcomes and Sir Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity, which is the outcome least required as we shift paradigms into the OPW. A 2005 OFSTED report finding that only 12% of 19 to 30 year olds interviewed thought that school had enabled them to be creative or understand risk.

In addition the change to fee paying in Further and Higher Education has led to most learners deciding to stay local to complete their education.

Similarly, with no form of National Service, young people not in continuing education experience no other input than their local area and as a result, in most cases, have no expectations beyond their limited boundaries. There is clear evidence that this is causing a dependency culture and an underclass, as is being widely reported.

So where do we stand at the start of a new decade and halfway through the UN Decade for sustainable Development 2005-2014?

It can be stated

◦       There is a wide spread of achievement output from the UK’s Education System

◦       This is aimed at satisfying a paradigm that no longer exists.

◦       This results in high youth unemployment.

◦       Leading to disaffection and continuing underachievement.

◦       And withdrawal from involvement in the wider society

◦       Causing violence and crime, fuelled in many cases by drugs.

Clearly, increasing the age of compulsory education will have no effect on this vicious circle unless we recognise the paradigm we need to educate for is shifting rapidly as we move into the One Planet World.

We have to recognise, as stated throughout this article that education has to liberate the creativity that will enable citizens to help create the OPW within the UK. This can only be achieved through ‘service above self’.

This is not the politically correct thing to say at this time, but it is central to any future that can be envisaged in a UK of around 70 million citizens.

Conclusion

Our conception of National Service is coloured by its compulsory and in many cases arbitrary nature, where outcomes were not tailored to the needs of individuals, or even society.

This is not the aim of Service for the Nation; the aim is to provide rounded citizens with a range of knowledge and skills appropriate to their talents and the creativity to use them effectively and efficiently in helping create the One Planet World.

This does not mean that military service will not be part of the mix for those attracted to such service and we need to acknowledge the part played in current conflicts by our young people.

We do not need to reinvent the wheel as there are service organizations, Scouts etc. who know how to create future citizens and leaders that we can use as templates.

These things are critical

◦       There must be an element of compulsion for all to contribute in their own way.

◦       There must be a controlled but significant element of risk.

◦       Service should be away from home for realistic periods

◦       Learning and work undertaken must result in value added to society.

◦       All must have access to achieve to laid down standards

◦       Rank must be available for significant leadership ability.

Many will argue that this cannot be afforded but the real question is “can we afford, not to be able to afford it?” – if the alterative is societal collapse.


W Edwards Deming did his celebrated work in an era when environmental and social constraints where not at the forefront of managerial minds and his body of work can be interpreted as a method of maximising solely economic profit.

Although Deming was a child of his times; it is clear from the Preface to ‘Out of Crisis’ that he was reaching out to the Concept of Sustainable Development. Which I define as the process of continual improvement on the journey to perfect Quality and Deming would recognise as his, holistically defined.

Deming said in the Preface  ”Performance of management should be measured by the potential to stay in Business, to protect investment.. to protect jobs through improvement of product and service for the future, not by quarterly dividend”.

We have now passed through a period of perhaps 30+ years where environmental and social process failures were seen as an add on burden to organisational management but now, in the resource constrained future we find ourselves in, we have to see them for what they are, core survival issues, and we must be treat them as such by revisiting Deming’s teaching.

As Deming said “Survival is not Compulsory”

Deming Laid down his teaching in 14 points, interpreted at http://www.hci.com.au/hcisite2/articles/deming.htm as

1.”Create constancy of purpose towards improvement”. Replace short-term reaction with long-term planning.

2.”Adopt the new philosophy”. The implication is that management should actually adopt his philosophy, rather than merely expect the workforce to do so.

3.”Cease dependence on inspection”. If variation is reduced, there is no need to inspect manufactured items for defects, because there won’t be any.

4.”Move towards a single supplier for any one item.” Multiple suppliers mean variation between feedstocks.

5.”Improve constantly and forever”. Constantly strive to reduce variation.

6.”Institute training on the job”. If people are inadequately trained, they will not all work the same way, and this will introduce variation.

7.”Institute leadership”. Deming makes a distinction between leadership and mere supervision. The latter is quota- and target-based.

8.”Drive out fear”. Deming sees management by fear as counter- productive in the long term, because it prevents workers from acting in the organisation’s best interests.

9.”Break down barriers between departments”. Another idea central to TQM is the concept of the ‘internal customer’, that each department serves not the management, but the other departments that use its outputs.

10.”Eliminate slogans”. Another central TQM idea is that it’s not people who make most mistakes – it’s the process they are working within. Harassing the workforce without improving the processes they use is counter-productive.

11.”Eliminate management by objectives”. Deming saw production targets as encouraging the delivery of poor-quality goods.

12.”Remove barriers to pride of workmanship”. Many of the other problems outlined reduce worker satisfaction.

13.”Institute education and self-improvement”.

14.”The transformation is everyone’s job”.

To be continued…

See also 
http://trailblazerbusinessfutures.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/re-defining-quality/

It is now widely acknowledged that global resources are increasingly constrained, most recently on the 16th March by the US, where the president signed the National Resource Preparedness  Order

As resources become more constrained, we, as societies, organisations and individuals will decide what is the ‘essential value’ that gives us a satisfactory ‘Quality of Life’, within the affordable resources available to us. Spending on ‘non-essential value’ will of necessity fall; although in the real world it will not completely disappear as incomes will always be unequal. (luxury car sales to China for example)

We can see at  
http://trailblazerbusinessfutures.wordpress.com/the-one-planet-equation/
 that Resource Intensity decides the Consumption (Value) creatable for a given consuming population. Past circumstances that allowed a disproportional level of consumption in the West for given availability of resources no longer apply.

In the limit, most available resources will be used creating ‘essential value’ and we can thus define Resource Intensity as ‘the resource use per person per unit of ‘essential value’ created’.

Although there will always be transient niche markets; in this One Planet World, only organisations that create ‘essential value’ can hope to survive and grow over time.

What we can say is, tomorrow’s successful, sustainable organisations will help maintain the Essential Value Created on Energy Invested by

  • Satisfying emotional and spiritual need rather than gratuitous wants – self-actualisation
  • Satisfying the essential needs in the lower orders of Maslow’s Pyramid
  • Employing people rather than energy
  • Creating or using renewable energy and other resources
  • Minimising water use or creating the technologies that do
  • Creating/deploying climate stabilising and mitigation technologies
  • Being increasingly local
  • Providing a service rather than a product
  • Practising life-cycle stewardship of their resources
  • Managing value rather than cost
  • Being able to operate at continually reducing resource intensity
Defining the ‘essential value’ you and your organisation add to society is the first step in deciding a viable business strategy and this is best seen as an organisational ‘Quality’ issue 
http://trailblazerbusinessfutures.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/re-defining-quality/

DD

Exponential Growth is what we see all around us, it is what maintains life but spells the end of an individual ‘system’ unless a balance, steady state can be maintained.

Over the short run, in geological terms the Earth does this and mankind’s ability to influence this has been  minimal. We have now reached the near vertical part of the Exponential Curve in many areas of human activity.

Look at these two resources and decide for yourself if our ‘multi-planet world’ way of life is sustainable

DD

The magic and misery of exponential growth 97-03 v2

Arithmetic, Population and Energy- abridged)

The UK Public Accounts Committee has recently carried out a consultation exercise on ‘Strategic Thinking in Government’. A link to the submission made by me can be found below.

dd

Background to the consultation

Reasons for the inquiry

 In October 2010 PASC published a report, ‘Who does UK National Strategy?’, which concluded: The answer we received to the question, “Who does UK Grand Strategy?” is: no-one … As things stand there is little idea of what the UK’s national interest is, and therefore what our strategic purpose should be.

 Background

 The global system is increasingly multipolar, with power shifting East, potentially diffusing to international institutions and to different non-state actors (like civil society, business, high-net worth individuals, cities and regions, sovereign wealth funds, Diaspora groups, international multi-stakeholder fora).

 The development in social media that harnesses the ‘wisdom of crowds’, cyber-advances, and other technological progress is transforming the context of policy making. This challenges the capacity and nature of government but also provides opportunities for both stronger engagements with the public and clearer national leadership.

 The complex and unpredictable nature of many global issues, which stem from multiple and interrelated problems, require systems-based and evidence-based analyses if emergent strategy is to be effective and efficient. Within this context, many countries (including the UK) face implicit, diffuse and unpredictable risks, rather than explicit and identifiable threats.

 In a previous report, we identified a deficit of strategic capacity across Government. In its initial inquiry, the Committee found “little evidence of sustained strategic thinking or a clear mechanism for analysis and assessment. This leads to a culture of fire-fighting rather than long-term planning”.

 We wish to assess what progress has been made since then.

 Response to the PASC Consultation on Strategic Thinking in Government v2

The World Economic Forum has just released a report ‘From Risk to Opportunity‘ that looks at six different themes

• The challenge of a shifting balance of power
• The challenge of natural resource scarcity
• The challenge of inclusive growth and equality
• The challenge of economic uncertainty
• The challenge of fragile states and new conflicts
• The challenge of global risk management

This is a wide ranging Report that this Blog will come back to, but it includes this comment that is critical to the situation we find ourselves in, as SystemUK, and Globally

“There are commonalities between all sorts of
disparate risks: the BP Gulf disaster, the terrorism
incident in Germany, Wikileaks, the euro zone crisis.
The interconnectedness is that they are all out of the
flow of day-to-day events. They are low probability
but high consequence events.”

Axel P. Lehmann, Member, Group Executive
Committee and Group Chief Risk Officer, Zurich
Financial Services, Switzerland; Member of the Global
Agenda Council on Systemic Financial Risk

There was a time when organisations were increasingly aware of the work of thinkers in ‘Quality’ such as Deming, Juran and Crosby but those were simpler days and we have moved on to a confusing, reductionist world of CSR, Environment, H&S and Sustainability.

These ‘Quality Gurus’ understood the core concepts of Organisational Leadership’ and the costs of less than perfect ‘Quality’ of organisational and product/service performance , of not doing the right thing right, every time.

Central to this was understanding the risks and costs of external Failure Demand arising from actions that ignore the consequences of the economic, environmental or social downside of decisions. The News International disaster is a current example.

Unless we rediscover these eternal truths there is little possibility we can create ‘Sustainable’ organisations and societies, as Quality and Sustainability are just the two faces of the same coin and ‘Sustainable Development’ is the journey of continual improvement towards perfect ‘Quality’

dd 


		
		
	

An email to a friend

Hi Andrea

 It good to catch up again last night at the Lancashire Construction Best Practice Club event; This was a really interesting meeting and after  I mentioned Sugata Mitra’s new experiments in self-teaching. Here is the link to the TED Talk he gave last year.

He has virtually proved that learning is an emergent property when small groups of students have access to information they can share.

I feel we are failing our learners if we do not lever the potential of social media and the internet to liberate the creativity all children possess and largely lose as they grow up with the educational model we have used since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution  . Ken Robinson makes this point in probably the most watched TED Talk at

Alison’s ideas and work with her Classofyourown Project www.classofyourown.com  is similarly inspirational and a vital tool in engaging children in the STEM subjects.

The problem, of course, as Alison has pointed out, is not with the children, it is with the Teachers and the industry, simply because they were not exposed to this concept of ‘emergent learning’ and the unlimited expectations of their mentors as they grew up.

In reality this educational model never served, but in this time of exponential change, where more children will be passing through education in the next fifty years than have ever done, we cannot create inspirational teachers fast enough to liberate the necessary creativity that will enable us to solve the problems presented in the One Planet World we now inhabit.

The other key issue of course is the necessity we have to reduce the resource and carbon intensity of the built environment by considerable amounts. We must liberate the creativity to do this by design, or resource availability at a price we can afford to pay as a society, will do it for us.

In all this a key point is being missed and this is the need to maintain and generate the ‘tacit’ skills our society requires as my generation passes from the scene. These are not created by this ‘Mitra’ process, powerful and vital though it is. Initiatives like Classofyourown are key to liberating these tacit skills as well.

These thoughts apply to all sectors of society of course not just construction, but the built environment does consume 50% of our resources.

Attached are two articles  that were in the Professional Engineers’ Handbook in 2005 and 2006. There is no point in my being unduly modest at this critical time and I feel they are both prescient and could have been written last week.

The third article attached is from the May 2008 edition of the CIBSE Journal and addresses the other key issue, our need to understand, as an industry the concept that the sustainability journey is just one of continual improvement towards perfect quality.

Kind regards

Derek

 Attachments

Sustainability and the Energy Gap sustainability-and-the-energy-gap2005

Building Towards the Future Sustainability, Building Towards the Future 2006

The Double-headed Coin Double Headed Coin – unformatted – BS

Don’t let the future be a matter of luck! – CarbonAct Now ~ Be Selfish & Help Save Civilisation

Two years ago I put together a presentation for Rotary International and this can be downloaded here

Save Civilisation- Rotary 2

This takes the stance that CarbonActing in your family’s interest is the same as acting for Society

Slides 1 – 12 are the presentation and the remaining slides are for possible use during questions

My view on the future of Rotary International, Rotaract and Interact

Rotary – leading in the One Planet World 

Interact & Rotaract – Learning to lead for the One Planet World

The magic and the misery of Exponenial Growth

Arithmetic, Population and Energy- abridged

Derek

 They say that “Imitation Is The Sincerest Form Of Flattery” and I take Jolito’s appropriation of my words, below, in that vain and with thanks. 

dd

The Earth Equation by Jolito Ortizo Padilla


All around us we are bombarded with messages telling us that we need to change, that the the earth is warming up. The messages are insistent and shrill but diverse, incoherent and all about our symptoms rather than the addiction we suffer: the hugely ineffective use of the resources that our one planet provides.

Clearly the earth as a system is dynamic and complex. Any attempt to describe it quantitatively and accurately is unlikely to lead to any clearer picture of useful action. What we need is a mind model, something that is powerful and evocative enough to provoke the right questions of societies, communities and organizations. Such a conceptual or mind model is the earth equation.

We are told that we are enjoying a “three planet lifestyle”- a lifestyle that consumes so many resources that we need three planets in order to cope. This tells us that what we are doing is not a sustainable state of affairs , but it is not clear what we need to do. 

We have in fact only one planet. If we look at consumption as an equation, the left hand side of the equation in a resource -constrained environment is always fixed at one. The right hand side of the equation is made up of population (P), its consumption of goods and services (C) and the factor that balances the equation -the resource intensity (I).

So at our starting point we have I=P x C x I, or I=I x Ix I. As we move forward from this point , the one planet remains the same, which means that the right hand product always needs to equal one. The only way this can happen in a resourced constrained environment is if the resource intensity is never allowed to be more than I divided by PC. In round terms, on predicted growth scenarios, we will need to reduce resource intensity by a factor of between ten and 100 by the year 2050.

Genichi Taguchi inspirationally made the observation and processes without loss were of perfect quality and, conversely , that less than perfect quality created a loss to society. In terms of this article, that loss results in an increased resource intensity.

We have thought of over the last 20 years or so that we can treat losses in processes and systems as separate. We have looked at quality as a function within an organization , focused on the customer, rather than that which maximizes the value added to society that results from the creation , use and disposal of products and services. Losses in processes and systems can be environmental, social or economic and are best minimized by seeing the goal of resource intensity reduction as a journey of integrated , continual , quality improvement.

These are the drivers of virtuous circle that using an organization’s stakeholders and their combined knowledge and skills, will enable process learning. This will then drive the process in the direction of sustainability. As the process becomes more sustainable , the losses are by definition minimized , reducing the need for appraisal costs and eliminating the costs and risks of internal and most importantly , external failures.

The message is clear: we have to change, but how? Our symptoms are plain for all to see but our addiction, the ineffective deployment of resources to create, use and dispose of the products and services we consume, remain untreated. Our task is simple, if not easy to accomplish, and can be reduced to key questions:
- Is our business model relevant to such future?
- Does our leadership and management enable the liberation of the creativity
required to continually reduce the resource intensity of the goods and 
services we produce , consume and dispose of?

This will need the most massive effort of quality improvement the world has yet seen. The earth equation is immutable , it drives our futures whether we choose to ignore it or not, and e have no option but to enter the future, either by design or negligence.


http://joepads.blogspot.com/2010/12/earth-equation-by-jolito-ortizo-padilla.html

see also The Big Q
http://trailblazerbusinessfutures.wordpress.com/2009/12/17/the-bigq-%e2%80%93-leading-for-competitive-advantage-in-the-one-planet-world/

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.