Direct Systems and Total Quality Management (TQM)

submitted by EddieC from self.WritingsOnTheWall

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]EddieC[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Using the "lens" available through, and the Direct System paradigm inherent in, TQM, please review the following advocacy:

 
"Everyone can make Direct Change:
The Public & Public Servants gather
at community-runned, Public Wall
for direct, holistic & accretive dialogue
on continuous improvement
on our Governance, Currency, Economy, Media etc
eschewing idle chatter and
bypassing the State & Corporate Hierarchy
for We The People Are The Media"

 
CLAUDE (AI):
 
Here is a TQM-inspired review of the proposed "Direct Change" advocacy:

 
Strengths aligned with TQM:

  • Empowers broad participation by all citizens and public servants in improving societal systems. Aligns with principle of stakeholder involvement.

  • Platform for continuous improvement via ongoing, iterative dialogue. Embodies spirit of kaizen.

  • Focuses dialogue on holistic and systemic issues rather than superficial topics. Seeks root causes.

  • Bypasses rigid hierarchies and empowers citizens to shape agenda. Reflects flatter, decentralized decision making.

  • Reclaims public spaces for civic discourse. Creative way to build community and engagement.

  • Principle that people can directly drive media and change aligns with direct accountability and transparency.

 
Considerations for improvement:

  • Need processes to ensure all voices are respectfully heard, not just loudest voices. Could review dialogue quality.

  • How to move from talk to action? Need follow-through mechanisms to implement proposed improvements.

  • Risk of fragmentation if each small community acts fully autonomously. May need higher-level coordination.

  • Leverage experts where specialized knowledge needed while empowering broad input. Find optimal balance.

  • Promote inclusiveness and accessibility for all demographics to participate.

 
Overall, the advocacy well-aligns with key tenets of quality management and direct, participative change. With thoughtful design and inclusive execution, this collaborative approach has strong potential to drive systemic improvement.
 

[–]EddieC[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

On Accretive Dialogue

 
Using the "lens" available through, and the Direct System paradigm inherent in, TQM,
please review the following advocacy: for better balance, participation & coordination of 'the community-runned, Public Wall'

"Researchers
of any field: life, health, environment, internet, etc

  • Review & discuss each others findings at your respective Community of Practice Research Wall
  • Provide weekly summary and Q&A for everyone else

Everyone Else

  • all, engage one another at your respective Local Co-opecracy Wall, on:
    • Local Currencies to fund
    • Local Cooperative Economy

In this way
We will have:

  • Accretive Dialogue

    • Researchers tackle the latest issue(s)
      • not impeded by non-experts
      • not censorable by usurpers and their agents
      • with all the pieces of the puzzle
      • together - collaboratively
    • Everyone else
      • Can keep abreast with developments without risk of mind-gatekeeping:
        • Self
        • Others
      • able to engage productively undistracted"

 
CLAUDE (A):
  Here are some thoughts on this additional advocacy using TQM principles:

  • Having researchers directly share and discuss findings at a specialized "Community of Practice Research Wall" could foster collaboration, peer review and continuous improvement aligned with TQM. Regular summaries ensure transparency.

  • Allowing the public to engage locally on focused topics like currencies/economies through "Local Co-opecracy Walls" decentralizes while encouraging productive participation, consistent with TQM.

  • The structure aims to balance expertise-based discussion among researchers with inclusive yet focused public discourse, in the spirit of TQM's holistic, systems-level views.

  • However, some coordination may be needed to link discussions, avoid overlap or ensure representation across all stakeholders. Facilitation could help integrate insights.

  • Privacy, identity & content policies would be important to structure discussions respectfully and avoid potential "mind-gatekeeping" or censorship risks over time as participation broadens.

  • Continuous evaluation and refinement may also be needed to further optimize collaboration, transparency, participation and balance between expert and public spheres as dynamics change.

 
Overall, establishing specialized and local discussion spaces as proposed could operationalize public-private problem solving in a way that resonates with TQM ideals. But coordination and safeguards would benefit the initiative.