[Ailist] AI, Competition, and Collaboration

Mon Nov 2 12:42:29 MST 2009

One of my first introductions to collaborative decision making involved the
need to understand what was actually being decided upon and a brief
introduction to finite and infinite 'games'. 

When one thinks about any group of organizations engaged in competition
their real aim is not to eliminate their competitors. After all without any
competitors there would be no competition. The actual purpose of being a
chemical company for instance is to get people to buy more chemicals. In
that respect all chemical companies are involved in the same 'game' which,
for their own benefit, they MUST play in an infinite fashion. The same is
true of a football league. Even though every match is a finite game the
infinite game that provides the context in which they are played is 'get
more people to watch football'. In fact the 'both/and' might also be
considered to be a 'get more x to y' in a competitive sense. Such
organizations don't necessarily collaborate in the traditional sense but
they all do in a progressive and competitive sense. The better the product
the more business grows. If they were not playing their game infinitely they
would not be in existence.

We might therefore consider that in the course of doing business there are
generative competitive practices that prolong the 'game'infinitely (e.g.
innovation, training), degenerative practices that unchecked would finitely
end the game (e.g. price wars) and neutral practices (e.g. purely defending
one's position without trying to improve it). There is an obvious benefit to
focusing on generative practices.

I first ran across 'both/and' within TRIZ which also contains the
interesting proposition that all things move toward a point of 'ideality'
which is defined as 'all of the benefit for none of the harm'. Harm being
any or a combination of cost, environmental damage, additional work etc. In
itself ideality is based upon what the function of something is rather than
the necessary action required to achieve it. That's why we don't have many
typewriters or Vinyl LP's any more.

Roger

-----Original Message-----
From: ailist-bounces at lists.business.utah.edu
[mailto:ailist-bounces at lists.business.utah.edu] On Behalf Of Jackie Stavros
Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 6:37 AM
To: 'Leif Josefsson'; 'Bill Scott'
Cc: ailist at lists.business.utah.edu
Subject: Re: [Ailist] AI, Competition, and Collaboration

Thank you for the conversation thread and your insights about competition
and/or cooperation.  I really like the co-inspiration thinking (Leif) that
it can be a "both/and" conversation.

Back in the late 1990s when we were working on the SOAR framework, it was
David Cooperrider who suggested to Lynn Kelley and I the idea of competitors
collaborating to build industries and their own organizations. And, it was
Marge Schiller who always taught me the "both/and" conversation versus the
"either/or" conversation when it comes to addressing an issue, solution, etc
... Our collaborative conversations certainly lead to co-inspiration as we
move forward with our work.  

I just wanted to share (see attachments) - a few files from when the Thin
Book of SOAR was launched that helps to connect to this conversation because
at first I saw the dialogue as SWOT versus SOAR or SWOT or SOAR but what
I've learned is that SOAR builds off of the "SO" of SWOT (through my lens it
is the strengths of SWOT) and moves the conversation in a reframing
direction of creating the most preferred futures (aspirations) with results.

Appreciate the opportunity to share and that we have choices on how to move
forward - Jackie

P.S. - Please let me know if I can send you some other separate book
chapters written in the last year.

-----Original Message-----
From: ailist-bounces at lists.business.utah.edu
[mailto:ailist-bounces at lists.business.utah.edu] On Behalf Of Leif Josefsson
Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 6:16 PM
To: Bill Scott
Cc: ailist at lists.business.utah.edu
Subject: Re: [Ailist] AI, Competition, and Collaboration

This is an interesting conversation.  Cooperation, or maybe "Co-inspiration"
in contrast to competition.

It is easy to elaborate around the theoretical ideas of Collaboration vs
Competition

But how is it in the community when it comes to action, and to the
relationships between companies and individuals?

How rooted are the metaphors of "War" in our way of thinking?  Do we dare to
share ideas, concepts etc or do we fear that someone will steal the
customer, idea, concept etc.?

If the underlying image is "war" then we think in win/lose - zero sum game
etc.
If the underlying image is "play" then the mind will think about growth,
sharing, etc

Let's say there is a network meeting.  Do I consider bringing customers
there, or am I afraid of someone else approaching them?

How do you create plans and strategies that are based on
Co-inspiration/Collaboration rather the Competition?  What are the
differences in views with an American/European/African/Asian/... other
approach?

What are the differences in the way you act, taking the ideas of AI really
seriously?

Have a good week!

/Leif

On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Bill Scott <wjs.consulting at shaw.ca> wrote:

> Hi Simon,
>
>
>
> I saw your post and it indeed is a provocative one. I'm certain I'm 
> not going to stay on point and I believe others will provide you with 
> the specific feedback that you are seeking.
>
>
>
> The student raises some interesting and important points and he makes 
> the mistake that many do when considering generative change methods - 
> he assumes (with apologies to Gervase Bushe) that an appreciative 
> approach is just about the positive. A more thorough read of Jackie's 
> work clearly demonstrates that a SOAR analysis isn't about ignoring 
> weaknesses and threats, it's about reframing them so that you 
> understand what you want to move toward rather than what you wish to 
> avoid.
>
>
>
> I think the student's last remark is possibly the most telling. I 
> think it points to his/her bias (and perhaps dependency?) toward 
> traditional thinking/teaching. Jackie's SOAR model is receiving strong 
> reviews from a variety of private sector companies, government 
> departments, and social profit organizations that have used the model with
great success.
>
>
>
> On a separate note, many people still view the competitive model as 
> essential to optimal business practice. I'm not convinced. Numerous
authors
> - including those not associated with AI - have independently 
> concluded that collaborative practice is often (though not always) 
> superior to
competitive
> practice. One non-AI author I would direct you toward in this regard 
> is an OB professor I studied with 15 years ago - Dean Tjosvold.
>
>
>
> Thanks for the opportunity to respond.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Bill Scott
>
>
>
> Surrey, B.C.
>
> bill at elpisconsulting.com <mailto:Wjs.consulting at shaw.ca>
>
> www.elpisconsulting.com
>
> 604-574-1856
>
>
>
> cid:image001.png at 01CA5A2E.BC3C8A00
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Appreciative Inquiry Discussion List is hosted by the David Eccles 
> School of Business at the University of Utah. Jack Brittain is the 
> list administrator. For subscription information, go to:
> http://mailman.business.utah.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/ailist
>

--
ps. Jag åker till Gotland den 20 november. Hemvändardagar.  Alla kan hitta
hem.  Följer du med? www.hemvandardagar.se

Leif Josefsson
Förenklare / Facilitator
LeanderLeander AB
Ölandsgatan 48 - 116 63 Stockholm - tel +46 70-773 00 54

www.leanderleander.com
follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/ljosefss Send me a message:
http://twitter.com/direct_messages/create/ljosefss
_______________________________________________
The Appreciative Inquiry Discussion List is hosted by the David Eccles
School of Business at the University of Utah. Jack Brittain is the list
administrator. For subscription information, go to:
http://mailman.business.utah.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/ailist