White Spaces Innovation in Sweden - Innovation policy for ... - Vinnova

WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDEN2.4 Why human complex systems are differentHuman systems are different from natural and biological because they are reflexivewhich means that we can learn. The major differentiator is that humans can communicateby the use of language which has been described as involving the coordination ofthe coordination of actions (Maturana and Varela (1980). Language can itself be seen ascomplex adaptive system but language and the communication and interaction it allowsaffect interplay between micro-macro levels in other systems. Humans are cognitiveagents set out to pursue purposeful action, i.e. action or intervention based on intentionsindividually and collectively. Here we should note Midgely´s (2000) suggestion that ifintervention is purposeful action by an agent to create change, then systemic interventionis purposeful action by an agent to create change in relation to reflection onboundaries. What he means is that there is a need for agents to reflect critically upon,and make choices between, boundaries. Boundaries define both what issues are to beincluded, excluded or marginalized in analyses, and who is to be consulted or involved(the two are obviously linked, as different agents will have different concerns). Becauseof the „who‟ question, issues of power and participation are unavoidable in systemicintervention.Language is important from an innovation point of view which has to do with characterof the “knowledge boundaries” that have to be crossed. These are referred to incommunications theory as syntactic, semantic and pragmatic boundaries and the higherthe novelty the more a need to be able communicate across the two latter categories ofboundaries (Star (1989), Carlile (2004) by making use of boundary objects. These inturn allows for complexity absorption (Boisot & Child, 1999). This is not the place toexpand further on these topics. They are mentioned because they may play an importantrole in coordination and sensemaking in the generative phases of ideas and concepts.The issue of intent and the consequences thereof make the issue of how boundariesare defined of interest. The more universally a system is defined the less influence ofindividual and perhaps even collective action.It is clear that in order to be recognisable as such, a system must be bounded in someway. But as Cilliers (2001) says, as soon as one tries to be specific about the boundariesof a system, a number of difficulties become apparent. For example, it seems uncontroversialto claim that one has to be able to recognise what belongs to a specific system,and what does not. But complex systems are open systems where the relationshipsamongst the components of the system are usually more important than the componentsthemselves. Since there are also relationships with the environment, specifying clearlywhere a boundary could be is not obvious. Cilliers suggest that we should think ofboundary as something that constitutes that which is bounded in order to see the boundaryas something enabling rather than as confining.As an illustration of this logic he presents the example of the eardrum. It forms theboundary between the inner and the outer ear, but at the same time, it exists in order to32