ARTICLE 12 - Part 1: Problem #7 - Incorrect Global Perception

Viable Underdogs concerns itself with anything that is a Type 1, or global, issue. You can check an outline of all Viable Underdogs books and materials in this post:

Book Links & Other Viable Underdogs Material

**************************************************************************************

Parts 2 and 3 of this article can be found here: 

Article 12 - Part 2: Social Media Amplification

Article 12 - Part 3: Proof of Compromised Global Communication Channels

**************************************************************************************

Problem #7: Incorrect Global Perception

In the book, Uncage Human Ingenuity (and in the Podcast), I highlighted the main problems that have contributed to our Sustainability Crisis. The six problems identified are:

1) The Slow Acceptance of New Ideas (which you may notice is the foundation of the book, Renegades of Disruption).

2) Compromised Communication (which you may notice is the foundation of the book, Uncage Human Ingenuity).

3) Bureaucratic Inefficiency present in fields throughout the globe including science, politics, and Academia (which will be the basis of the upcoming book, The Paradox of Civilizations).

4) The Emotions Associated with Change and the Kubler-Ross Change Curve. See Podcast Episodes 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 25, 31, & 35. (These are known as Chapters 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 25, 31, & 35 of the book, A type 1 Unfreeze Chain Letter, which is an audiobook I converted into a podcast. A written version of the Podcast-Audiobook is also available in the above link.

5) Global Cooperation (or the lack thereof. See Part 4 of Uncage Human Ingenuity. Free download with the above link).

6) Strict Usage of Terminology. See Part 3 of Uncage Human Ingenuity. (Free download at above link).

Every time I present the list, I mention that I may add more problems to it as I gain more insight into my Global Diagnostic (which is still technically being performed). I had previously combined the problem of ‘Incorrect Perception’ with Problem #2, Compromised Communication, since the incorrect global perception is largely created from compromised global communication.

However, I have decided to separate perception from communication as its own problem, since the incorrect perception makes the ‘sale’ of these ideas so much harder. Problem #8: “Education” has also been added, and I will dive into that in different articles and books. Here’s one such article:

Article 11: 3BL, Incentives, & Urgency

Although I often joke about having succumbed to madness due to the ideas I present, it’s not really me that’s crazy (well, overly crazy anyway), it’s the ideas I present that appear wild and crazy.

The incorrect 'global perception' that is outlined in this article is something I claim that every human being is currently affected by. And, that’s quite the crazy idea to sell. After all, if you’re reading this, I claim you yourself are also affected. This is a bold and arguably insane statement to make, and yet, I can provide a body of evidence to support this claim. I know how it sounds.

If my claim is that everyone is affected by a problem but me, and I blame two culprits (entire global professional fields in this case) for the source of this problem (underfunded and irresponsible journalists + academics), then it wouldn’t surprise me if I was accused of ‘tilting at windmills.’ In other words, it might all be my imagination. As always, that’s up to you to decide. I can only present the evidence for my case…


A Cruise Ship Analogy (at least it’s not another car analogy ;) )

Let’s say you and I are passengers are a very large ocean cruise ship. I have discovered that the alarm systems on this ship are not operational. This is worrisome, but if there are no emergencies that arise during the voyage, then no real consequences will result. However, during this voyage, a few random passengers come up to tell us a small fire has started in one of the rooms at the other end of the ship. Keep in mind, this ship is huge, so if you and I take the time to confirm the fire, it will already have spread. That’s what the alarm system is for. The problem is the alarm is broken. By the time the fire has spread enough that people start to take the problem seriously, it’s too late. The fire is too far gone, and the only option is to abandon ship.

That’s what is happening to our planet right now. To be clear, the problem is likely still manageable. Though, very soon, it no longer will be, and our ability to communicate this global ‘alarm’ is compromised. Here, our analogy continues, but replace ‘fire’ with ‘sustainability’ (or ‘climate change,’ or ‘global warming,’) and replace ‘cruise ship’ with ‘Planet Earth.’

As mentioned, the fire has started, the fire alarm is not working, and verifying the fire yourself would take too long. 30 seconds after the first group of people tell you about the fire, another group comes along saying that there never was a fire. It was merely a bartender making flaming coffees for some patrons. Then 30 seconds after that, staff aboard the cruise ship announce over the speaker system that there is a fire. Then, 30 seconds after that, other staff announce over the speaker system that there was a fire, but it was already put out. Then 30 seconds after that, the Captain of the cruise liner starts telling people to begin evacuation….

The broken alarm system and subsequent poor communication of the crisis (the fire) would likely cause an incorrect perception on the cruise ship. The passengers would then likely be confused as to whether there is a crisis occurring or not. This will affect the perception they have and will strongly influence their subsequent behaviour and actions.

On the subject of sustainability and the climate crisis, this is exactly what is happening, except that this has been going on for many years. The Fall of Journalism (See: Renegades of Disruption) has created an incorrect perception in our world. Although we are in a crisis, and we are calling it a crisis, the perception does not appear to agree with the reality. Some sources tell us there is a crisis, others say there is a problem, but it’s not a crisis, and others say there is no problem. The broken communication has resulted in a weird perception where no one is 100% certain of the existence or severity of the sustainability problem.

This incorrect perception can result in different emotions within the general public based on the news source(s) they visit the most. Those who depend on news sites that focus on what far less than 5% of scientists are saying (NASA, N.D.) are likely in strong denial of the problem. We discuss these emotions when we explored the Kubler-Ross Change Curve (See: Uncage Human Ingenuity & Podcast-Audiobook- AKA: A Type 1 Unfreeze-Chain Letter).


Price-Gouging During Crises

During a crisis, or in preparation for one, the market transitions to a Seller’s Market. For instance, prior to a hurricane hitting a coastal city, businesses selling supplies, such as water, batteries, and flashlights ( or facemasks in epidemics/pandemics etc.), can vastly increase the prices they charge under normal, non-crisis, times. This isn’t to comment on the ethics and morals of extorting a crisis in such a way, but there is no mistaking that this is a Seller’s Market. Ethics or no, if you and your family need these supplies, you’re likely to fork out far more cash for them than you would under normal circumstances.


Global Public Perception Has Been Actively Changed Before

Perception and reality can often overlap one another in strange ways, and marketing experts work tirelessly to alter people’s Perceived Value (Kopp, C., 2019). This is the concept behind Brand Loyalty. Some customers are willing to pay more for a product simply because a company name is associated with it. They have a high Perceived Value for these companies and their products, and this has nothing to do with the reality of whether the products or companies are better than competitors

DeBeers utilized a massively successful marketing campaign in the 1940’s to change public perception that diamonds were far more valuable and rarer than they are (Sullivan, J., 2013.). Diamonds are the most common type of precious gemstones. Prior to this marketing campaign, engagement rings were associated with rubies and sapphires, not diamonds.

This public perception is so ingrained into our culture, that even though this isn’t really a secret, it doesn’t do a whole lot to sway people from buying diamonds. So, what were saying is you’re not off the hook if your sweety likes diamonds.

In other words, DeBeers successfully transitioned the perception, and therefore the market, on diamonds. Prior to their marketing campaign, diamonds could be said to be in a Buyer’s Market, meaning that buyers had more control since the desirability of diamonds was much lower. Following the DeBeers campaign (and the artificial restriction of supply), the perception, and market, on diamonds has since been permanently altered to a Seller’s Market. The desirability, and therefore perceived value, of diamonds increased dramatically, and thus the sellers charge exorbitant amounts of money for something that would not be worth the same under normal circumstances. No different than businesses who price-gouge in our hurricane crisis scenario.

Effective communication, marketing in this case, has the ability to almost permanently alter perceptions in our world, and can spin a perception into a reality, sometimes even becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Here is general public PERCEPTION on sustainability:

Sustainability is kind of important. We want it addressed, but we don’t want too much to change while we address it.

Here is the REALITY:

Sustainability is a crisis, bordering on becoming a full-on global catastrophe. Immediate global change is necessary to prevent the collapse of modern civilization.

There are two main reasons this has occurred: Compromised communication channels (Due to factors like the Fall of Journalism and Social Media Feedback Loops (Amplification) - See Uncage Human Ingenuity) and ineffective education. We will explore education in more detail in the upcoming book, The Paradox of Civilizations, but right now I want to focus on how this has caused an incorrect perception worldwide due to Global Cognitive Dissonance occurring on sustainability.

In essence, the communication that ‘we are in a crisis’ and the education on ‘why/how we are in a crisis’ have both not successfully occurred. How do I know this? Well, do your behaviour and actions correspond on the subject of sustainability as though it has escalated into a crisis? How about everyone else on your life? Are the overwhelming amount of people in your life behaving as though there is a ‘hurricane approaching,’ or ‘that there is a fire on a cruise ship?’


Global Cognitive Dissonance (See Renegades of Disruption - Part 4)

This is something that was not included in Uncage Human Ingenuity, since the more I reflect upon certain problems, the more I come up with different methods of sharing these ideas.

In terms of the story of sustainability, we can cluster all the global news sources into one of three categories: Those who deny the severity of the problem (or deny it altogether), those who accept there is a problem, but are not effectively communicating it as though it is crisis, and those that communicate it as though there is a crisis. Here is a diagram to visually display this idea, and for the record, I am implying that no news source is overly reliable these days, so please hold judgment on the examples of news sites I included.



All three of these messages ("no problem exists," "problem exists," and "it’s a global crisis") are sent through communication channels throughout the world, and these conflicting messages are being diffused in a very unique way since no one really knows which message is accurate. Then, the emotional reactions tend to correspond to what each of the source messages is indicating, and can be plotted along the Kubler-Ross Change Curve (see: Uncage Human Ingenuity for more details). These are all concepts pulled from the field of Change Management, then laterally applied to the subject of sustainability.


Buyer’s Market vs. Seller’s Market

We can further explore the idea that the perception on sustainability is incorrect by evaluating the products and services associated with sustainability. This is similar to how Real Estate cycles between Buyer’s Markets and Seller’s Markets. A home sold during a Seller’s Market will fetch a higher price and will sell quickly, whereas a home sold during a Buyer’s Market will fetch a lower price and typically takes longer to sell. The important thing to note is that it’s not always exactly a black and white thing. That ‘Market’ is also on a spectrum. I know this because I used to work in home sales. Salespeople often tell customers we are in a hot market (usually salespeople never admit to being in a ‘cooled-down’ market or Buyer’s Market), but there’s a whole grey area on that. An area may indeed be ‘hot’ for a particular salesperson, but overall sales can be low within the entire company. And a lot of salespeople also succumb to same types of human behaviour biases we outlined and Renegades of Disruption. It’s just human nature. Some of us live in reality, others live in ‘la la land.’ You have to decide which I belong in. That decision is, as always, yours to make. I can only present the evidence for my case.

There are a variety of factors that determine whether it is a Buyer’s Market or Seller’s Market. However, the important thing to remember is all these factors combine to create this perception. In essence, what determines the type of market is public perception.

Let’s assume for a second that the United Nations, NASA, the Vatican, National Geographic and countless other organizations out there are correct (See: ‘List of organizations calling it a crisis’ in Part 6: Global Urgency of Uncage Human Ingenuity) and we are indeed in a long-term Sustainability Crisis.

Should the fact that we are in a crisis mean that anything to sustainability is now in a Seller’s Market? This means that energy auditors, sustainability consultants, and other green solutions should all have buyers lined up, particularly as many of these services and products are still profitable over the long-term.

However, this is not the case. We are not in a Sustainability Seller’s Market, because most people don’t realize we are in a crisis. The perception has shifted to be so far removed from reality that a significant portion of our global population don’t even realize there is a problem. These errors in communication all add up to create what you see: a world on the verge of collapse, and a perception that gives the impression that nothing is really all that wrong.

To be clear, this is not targeted exclusively at climate change deniers. This is aimed at everyone, because this communication and consequent perception problem has affected you too. Everyone is affected by this because we are very social animals. If a fire alarm is going off in a building and everyone is behaving as though there is no problem, this in turn, will cause others to think there is no problem as well. It doesn’t matter whether there is an emergency or not.

The incorrect perception will provide a false sense of security until those problems become impossible to ignore (in the case of the cruise ship, that’s the time the ship is completely engulfed in flames). Unfortunately, that is usually when the problem is the hardest to deal with, and it could even mean that many people die if the reality of the situation is different from the perception: that there is a fire.

The reality of sustainability is also different from the perception: That this is a Crisis. A Long-Term Global Crisis with a world unable to send an effective message due to all the errors I have already pointed out.


Examples indicating Sustainability is a Buyer’s Market (Not perceived as a crisis)

In Uncage Human Ingenuity, it is mentioned that the global perception of sustainability is incorrect. We are in a Buyer’s Market and not a Seller’s Market, which means, in this case, no one is lining up to purchase goods or services known to profitably increase sustainability. Here’s an example from an engineer I interviewed who worked at a firm that specializes in energy efficiency, and the reduction of Greenhouses Gases (GHG’s). (This was included in the written version of the Podcast-Audiobook, A Type 1 Unfreeze-Chain Letter):

I will read you some of the exchange we had with this engineering firm over email. This is an organization that specializes in increasing efficiency, thereby lowering greenhouse gasses emitted into the atmosphere, thereby increasing sustainability, and this is often done in a manner that is cost-effective. In the long run, these clients can often save money and be more sustainable.

As this engineer mentioned:

“In general, there are more cost effective savings for bigger customers: Industry tends to have the cheapest, then commercial/institutional, then residential. But all of these are areas with potential for improvement.”

There are two questions we posed them that we will share with you now:

Here was the first one we sent:

Question:

“Does your company typically need to promote or ‘sell’ its services to clients, or do you find most of the clients seek out these types of services?”

Answer:

“We definitely sell.”

[Further indicating, this is a Buyer’s Market. In a Seller’s Market, a seller does not have to try very hard to sell their products].

Second question:

“Is there anything in your field you wish the general public knew more about?”

Answer:

“The problems are almost never technical. 

By that, I mean that we know how to reduce energy & GHG emissions cost-effectively in the built environment (at least in buildings...sometimes it *is* technical in big industry). Where efficiency doesn't happen, it's not usually for technical reasons. It's due to things like a lack of understanding; lack of available capital; "split-incentives" when the person that pays for a retrofit isn't the one that pays the bill (think of someone that rents a house, but pays the bills); or plain old inertia”

If you think I cherry-picked one example for my claim on incorrect perception, how about an example pulled from the textbook, Management (Fourth edition), I have often referenced:

The textbook mentions a poll that was conducted on 729 global business leaders to prioritize the 10 challenges facing them in the coming year. Sustainability was ranked near the bottom in 9th place. There are then two suggestions the authors provided as an explanation. On one end, it is suggested that sustainability is still not placed on equal footing to profits. On the other end, it suggests that these businesses “may be acting in confidence that sustainability isn’t a crisis anymore” or that “business leaders believe their firms have sustainability issues under control.”

[Alright boys and girls, you heard 'em, the crisis is over. Let’s all go home].

OR, does it just look a lot like my previous analogy in terms of conflicting messages. This is simply another contradicting message on the subject of the Sustainability Crisis:

As mentioned before, the fire has started, the fire alarm is not working, and verifying the fire yourself would take too long. 30 Seconds after the first group of people tell you about the fire, another group comes along saying that there never was a fire. It was merely a bartender making flaming coffees for some patrons. Then 30 seconds after that, staff aboard the cruise ship announce over the speaker system that there is a fire. Then, 30 seconds after that, other staff announce over the speaker system that there was a fire, but it was already put out. Then 30 seconds after that, the Captain of the cruise liner starts telling people to begin evacuation….


No wait. Our bad, the Crisis is over. Wait, it isn’t... Wait, it is….Wait, it isn’t…

The $5000 Sustainability Challenge

As I have mentioned throughout a lot of this work, it’s often been quite difficult to get any useful feedback on my work and research. One of the comments I have heard a couple times is that this style of ‘meta’ commentary where 'I bitch about my experiences with presenting these ideas’ is somewhat annoying to some readers and listeners. So much that some responded to say that they wouldn’t listen to anything else (See: EPISODE 41 on the Podcast, which is technically Episode -4).

The reason I leave this commentary is to provide further evidence of the slow acceptance of new ideas, and also ‘cause of how amusing I find this all: A world-changing idea to a known global problem and no one willing to entertain me long enough for me to present it. Then, I write a book on how others in the past have experienced this same problem. The ‘meta’ may be annoying now, but I assure you if, and hopefully when, I locate future listeners and readers, it should prove quite entertaining. It has also helped me gain more insight into the perception problem. After all, if we are in a global Sustainability Crisis, and a person says they have solutions to this crisis and they are willing to challenge people 5 thousand dollars of their own money in an attempt to gain an audience, wouldn’t the complete lack of response also be indicative of an incorrect perception? I even offered to pay any journalist I reached out to for their time in order to entertain my claims long enough for me to be given a chance to present my evidence.

Even if you think some of my ‘sales’ tactics were a bit on the greasy side (like the $5000 Sustainability Challenge), if we were indeed in a Seller’s Market, then these types of tactics should have yielded some results, right? Greasy or no, these are proven strategies that do work, particularly in Seller’s Markets. But, sadly, we’re not in a Seller's Market. While I admit I have decent sales skills, I’m being asked to make the hardest sale there is - the sale of a disruptive idea with an incorrect global perception. And I have known far better salespeople than me over the years. I’d love their input, but on my own, baby ;)

I also have a lot of things to do at once. I am writing these books, while simultaneously still performing active research, while I still hassle people with different ways to try and ‘sell’ these ideas, even while I was travelling. Then I am trying to stay on top of other Type 1 problems. And during all this I also had to make all those videos (which take me forever - that lateral thinking one probably took me 30 - 40 hours of time. Maybe you could have done it quicker, but I am learning how to do all this. I don’t know jack about podcasting, recording software, or writing books, formatting books, creating YouTube videos, doing research, etc.). This was my ‘job’ for over two years. It has now become a mere hobby to preserve my sanity. I don’t work for free for forever. I’ve got bills to pay too.

It’s not my intent to be ‘meta,’ but if these types of ideas ever do gain any sort of traction, these types of meta comments could also provide some insights on how to prevent this from occurring in the future.  [At least I’m not as annoying as Navi, “Hey! Listen!”].

Journalists making similar claims to what I present here

To add icing to this cake of evidence I have so far provided, here is a very recent opinion piece from a journalist that presents similar ideas to what I present in this article:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/05/governments-coronavirus-urgent-climate-crisis

He compares our current long-term Sustainability Crisis (a crisis that spans years or decades) to a short-term crisis. Bear in mind, these are global problems, so the time spans increase a fair bit when comparing it to more localized crises like our cruise ship or hurricane crises. Although our global ability to communicate short-term crises is less compromised, check out this article I wrote to read more about the same problems occurring with the current coronavirus as the problems occurring in our Sustainability Crisis (Errors in communication, a lack of clear leadership, etc.):

Article 10: An outbreak of Terrible Communication & Leadership


Make sure to read Uncage Human Ingenuity for more info on how our ability to communicate a long-term crisis like sustainability, is compromised, much like what some journalists appear to be suggesting.


Check Engine Light (CEL)

As an alternate way to present the idea of the ‘cruise ship fire,’ I’ll go back to my favourite analogy: vehicles. Any modern car comes equipped with a way of notifying the driver of problems occurring in the driveline. One of these is the check engine light. Here’s a quick rundown on its different operations:

Upon startup, the CEL performs a self-check and turns on for a couple seconds, then shuts off. If it continues to stay illuminated after the self-check, this indicates there is a problem that should get checked out. The urgency of how quickly this has to be checked out really has to do with the source of the problem. Some problems are fairly inert (in terms of damage to your vehicle), so you could arguably drive with the check engine light on for years without any problems (so long as you don’t care about the additional emissions now being introduced into the environment by your vehicle).

However, once the check engine light is flashing, it means serious damage is likely to occur soon. If a check engine light is flashing, the vehicle is likely running terribly and should be brought to a technician ASAP.


Earth’s ‘Flashing Check Engine Light’

I have compared our world to an engine in Uncage Human Ingenuity and the Podcast-Audiobook. In this case, academics and journalists are the “check engine light” that notify the world to potential problems (Part of the Role of Information). Throughout the twentieth century, our planet’s check engine light was illuminated, indicating that there was a problem that should get addressed at some point.

Here is a fact-checked news article dating back to 1912, over a century ago, indicating climate change was a problem:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/1912-article-global-warming/

If we are comparing Earth to a very large engine, I have now presented evidence indicating that Earth’s ‘check engine light’ has been on for over a century.

At the turn of the 21st century, two things changed: The first is that The Fall of Journalism means that Earth’s CEL is no longer capable of notifying us with updates on its status. This becomes more troubling due to the second thing that has changed: According to responsible journalists and academics all around the world, not only is Earth’s check engine light still on, it has started flashing. 

2018 United Nations Crisis Message

In September 2018, the United Nations delivered a ‘sonic boom SOS’ crisis message to the world regarding sustainability and the climate crisis. Here’s the first three lines of this message:

“Dear friends of planet Earth,
Thank you for coming to the UN Headquarters today.
I have asked you here to sound the alarm.”

https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2018-09-10/secretary-generals-remarks-climate-change-delivered

The perception is off, and this, I claim, has affected every human being on our globe. So, the question is: have I made a strong enough case in all of my work to encourage you to share and forward these ideas (thereby initiating the Unfreeze-Chain Letter)?

Once this Unfreeze-Chain Letter is underway, my claim is it will correct the communication and education problems occurring all around the globe. The reason for this isn’t magic. As Rama Nemani, the NASA scientist, mentions back in Episode 12, “Once people realize there is a problem, then tend to fix it.”


Incentives

In ARTICLE 11 of this blog, I briefly discussed the idea of incentives, and how many people require some kind of incentive to undergo change. However, if we are indeed in a Buyer’s Market for sustainability, it means the incentives to implement change required for sustainability have been largely removed. This is not to say it affects every person the same, but it will drastically affect the rate of change to overcome this sustainability problem.

As your only Global Systems Technician or Global Systems consultant, the question I have for you in this article is:

Do you (and everyone else in your life) realize the severity of the Sustainability Crisis? Do our global attitudes and behaviours match those that you would find in any other crisis? Are we in a Seller’s Market, much like the sale of face masks in the coronavirus ‘crisis?’

Or should I change the name attached to these books from ‘Viable Underdogs’ to ‘Don Quixote?’ Carlos can be my Rocinante, and I’ll update you later regarding my Dulcinea. Maybe Wonder Woman? 

#YouBuying?

#ViableUnderdogs

**************************************************************************************

References

Jones, O., (2020). The Guardian. Why don’t we treat the climate crisis with the same urgency as coronavirus?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/05/governments-coronavirus-urgent-climate-crisis

Kasprak, A., (2016). Snopes. Did a 1912 newspaper article predict global warming?
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/1912-article-global-warming/

Kopp, C., (2019). Investopedia. Perceived Value.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/perceived-value.asp

NASA, (N.D.). Scientific Consensus: Earth’s Climate is warming.

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

Schermerhorn, J., Wright, B.,& Bachrach, D., (2017). Management. Fourth Canadian Edition. Wiley.

Secretary-General’s remarks on climate change [as delivered]. (2018). United Nations. 

https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2018-09-10/secretary-generals-remarks-climate-change-delivered

Sullivan, J., (2013). The New York Times. How diamonds became forever.

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/05/fashion/weddings/how-americans-learned-to-love-diamonds.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilting_at_windmills_(disambiguation)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Quixote


All of the following books are available for free PDF download in the link provided at the start of this article:

Viable Underdogs (2020). A Type 1 Unfreeze-Chain Letter: Laterally Applying Management Concepts To Correct Compromised Global Communication Channels. 

Viable Underdogs. (2020). Renegades of Disruption: How To Overcome Humanity's Overwhelming Resistance to Change & New Ideas.  

Viable Underdogs. (2019). Uncage Human Ingenuity: A Realistic. Profitable Global Transition to Sustainability Within 10 Years.

ARTICLE 11: 3BL, Incentives, & Urgency

Viable Underdogs concerns itself with anything that is a Type 1, or global, issue. You can check an outline of all Viable Underdogs books and materials in this post:

Book Links & Other Viable Underdogs Material

**************************************************************************************

A brief note before you read this article: For the most part, in the course of my ongoing ‘Global Diagnostic,’ I usually don’t try to pick on easy targets, and this article is no exception to this. The textbook explored is, overall, a pretty solidly written book (well, the third edition was - I haven’t read most of the 4th edition), and this should be clear due to the amount I have referenced it throughout Viable Underdogs. However, it is still subject to the problems I continually refer back to, so using examples like these allows you to hopefully understand how widespread the problem is when these are present in, what is otherwise, solid material.




Renegades of Disruption explored how human beings are not as individually intelligent as many of us believe we are. For the majority of academic and professional fields and information that exists, our level of knowledge is on par with young children (as in, we understand very little). One of the biggest differences is that children aren’t afraid to ask questions, whereas many adults lose their sense of wonder and curiosity soon after adolescence (See Part 5 of Renegades of Disruption). Throughout much of Earth’s history, civilization has required that the majority of its population not ask too many questions. As always, this is merely a statement of fact, not a comment on whether this is inherently a good thing or a bad thing.

Until recently (the last couple centuries), the standard rate of change of any civilization was typically fairly slow when compared to the rate of change of our current global civilization. During slow, or non-existent, rates of change, it’s beneficial to have a general population that accomplishes what is asked of it.

For the most part, this is still how we educate ourselves in school, and it’s an often touted reason for the ‘sale’ of an education in the first place: Get yourself an education, which will get you a good job, so you can successfully support yourself and your goals, and thereby be a productive member of civilization. Depending on who you ask, and where on the globe you ask this, the response to this statement can be met with anything from strong agreement to disillusioned anger.

I have said before that we are all ‘followers’ for the majority of things in our lives. For example, I follow the advice of a field of medical professionals since I have very little experience and knowledge within that field. Relying on others to be experts in their respective fields is a matter of necessity, since it is impossible for any individual to fully educate themselves on even a small fraction of all the professional fields that exist. I am inclined to listen to my doctor’s advice on my health, and likewise, he’ll likely listen to my advice as a mechanic. This is how our civilization operates; we depend on others to be experts in their given fields, just as others depend on us to be experts in our fields. This extends beyond the realm of occupations as well.


Manual Transmissions

When I state that no individual on this planet is overly smart, I also include myself in that statement. Here’s a story that still makes me shake my head whenever I reflect back on it. This is one of many, so it’s not like I have any shortage of dumb moments.

In North America, automatic transmissions in cars are far more common than manual, or standard, transmissions, so much that many drivers have never operated a manual transmission. This is quite different than pretty much anywhere else on the globe. Growing up, I never had any exposure to manual transmissions, nor do I ever even remember being a passenger in a car in anything other than an automatic.

So, when the first car I bought ended up coming with a manual transmission, it was a tad more challenging. A friend provided a quick demonstration on how to operate one of these bad boys in a parking lot, but other than that I did not receive a whole lot of instruction. However, I had watched a lot of movies that had car chases… 

A couple weeks later, I was driving somewhere to grab some grub with a different friend than the one who taught me. Now, obviously, as I was still learning, my shifting wasn’t as smooth as an experienced manual driver, but my passenger would have understood this, as he had also been taught to operate a manual transmission. After a while, I suppose my erratic shifting had become distracting enough for him to turn to me and say “why the f*** are you shifting gears like the cops are chasing you?”

To be clear, I was driving fairly conservatively and obeying the speed limit, but every one of my shifts was being performed lightning fast, which meant I was dumping the clutch fairly hard and making for rather unpleasant, bumpy ride. My response to his question must have appeared quite idiotic, “How else am I supposed to shift?”
To which he proceeded to inform me that under normal driving conditions, the shifting can be slowed down to become less erratic and a much more enjoyable ride.

Now, some of you reading this may think that this sounds profoundly stupid (and maybe you’re right), but remember back in Episode 3 of the Podcast-Audiobook when I mentioned the influence that media can have on us? In this case, my only exposure, or ‘inputs,’ to manual transmissions was mostly from movies. And in those movies, the characters are typically shifting in this fast, erratic method, so I just thought that was normal.

How about you? Do you possibly have any similar stories where, in retrospect, you’re embarrassed by your momentary lack of intelligence?


Education: The Addition of Inputs

Education is an attempt to provide an individual with additional inputs (knowledge and/or experience) in a particular subject or field (See EPISODE 3 of the Podcast-Audiobook for more info on this). If this person’s exposure to this field, or inputs, is close to zero, then they have no other frame of reference to ensure the validity of the knowledge. They are at the mercy of the education itself. In these cases, the education provides the very foundation for all subsequent inputs, and therefore also the eventual outputs, when this individual commences work in this field.


Triple Bottom Line (3BL)

In the Podcast-Audiobook, I refer back to the Triple Bottom Line (People, Planet, Profits) quite a bit. The reason I have included this so many times in the ‘Lewin Modified Global Change Message’ is to correct the foundation of incorrect inputs many individuals have in regards to what’s most important to a business organization. In EPISODE 24, I mentioned a quote that I said I would refer back to at a later date. Here it is:

The following excerpt was taken from an ethics article, titled Economics and Ethics, published in September, 1990, in the Journal of Business Ethics. Volume 9. Written by B. J Reilly, and M. J. Kyj:

“The theory of business organization that is taught in economics classrooms throughout the country (and reiterated in corporate circles as well) argues that the corporation has to maximize itself, regardless of the effects on the environment outside the firm. Welfare of the employees, health of the communities, and loyalty to suppliers, customers, and the nation itself are taken into consideration only as a means for maximizing the corporations wealth.”

A business entity requires all 3 (People, Planet and Profits) to stay in operation. Now, maybe you think that a business entity being concerned about people and the planet should be common sense, but then you’re forgetting what I mentioned before about human intelligence. There are far too many fields of study and knowledge in existence, for knowledge to be ‘common.’

This isn’t to blame the business sector exclusively for the state of our Sustainability Crisis. We all contribute to this problem in different ways. The Role of Business should ensure that businesses consider People and the Planet in its business decisions, but the Role of Information should ensure that business-people are educated in this manner. Unfortunately, this business-people, for the most part, have not been educated in this manner.


Dated Material - Whether not removed or not added

The textbook, Management, by John Schermerhorn Jr. & Barry Wright, provides one example of many about not adding or removing information to reflect our changing world. To be clear, the reason I used this textbook is because I personally feel it is well written. There’s good information in there. I would not have referenced it as many times as I did if there wasn’t. However, it is also guilty of a problem that is rampant throughout Academia - knowledge in dire need of updating. To be clear, this is a problem that exists in many texts, and I am not trying to pick on this text, but here is a couple examples of dated material:

First, included (both in the third and fourth editions) is the Myers-Briggs Personality Test (MBTI), which has long since been debunked. Here are a few links to back this claim:

Sci Show Pshyc (YouTube):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JN6_K6ALeZI

(This video does a good job both explaining and debunking Myers-Briggs)

https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2013/mar/19/myers-briggs-test-unscientific

https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/give-and-take/201309/goodbye-mbti-the-fad-won-t-die

http://www.opd.net/abstracts5.html


You’ll find no shortage of sources that praise the MBTI (including some organizations I have used as references for other material in the past). The MBTI, after all, is big business since many organizations use these types of tests as screening tools during the hiring process.

As mentioned in Renegades of Disruption, the 20th Century saw a lot of overlap between the Role of Information and the Role of Business, and this would be another example. In some cases, this overlap is beneficial (such as how I have laterally adapted many business concepts like Lewin’s Change Process), but in cases like teaching debunked material like MBTI, you can see how the overlap has disadvantages as well.

At the very least, if textbooks and universities insist on teaching dated and debunked material, they could at least mention that there is some dispute over its validity. The MBTI has been arguably debunked for at least 25 years, as can be seen in the references section. While I don’t dispute that there is likely a financial incentive for some business to ensure this continues to be taught, this is mostly due to the problem I am outlining in this article - knowledge in dire need of updating.


‘Type A’ Personalities

On the subject of personality types, ‘Type A’ personalities is another example of dated material included in the Management textbook. What’s interesting is that the origins of this ‘knowledge’ was in marketing, dating back several decades:

https://www.businessinsider.com/type-a-personality-traits-smoking-marketing-2016-8

The tobacco industry funded scientists to produce a desired result. This is an example of what I discussed in Episode 29 and Renegades of Disruption. How about knowledge about our ongoing crisis - is that in need of updating too?

You betcha.


Sustainability

If you happen to check out a copy of the textbook, Management, explored in this article (which I do recommend if you want to learn introductory Management concepts), then I would also encourage you to pay attention to how often sustainability is mentioned.

According to responsible academics and journalists, we are in the midst of a Sustainability Crisis. On page 9 of the fourth edition of Management, you’ll find an outline of the ‘changing nature of organizations.’ Although ‘concern for sustainability’ is noted as being “relevant to the study of Management,” and “one of the pillars of stewardship” in organizations, they then proceed to cover the subject of sustainability for less than 1% of the material: 2 pages out of a 481 page textbook. (Also see upcoming ‘Perception’ article for another issue on education / communication of sustainability - even though Sustainability is stated as important, it makes up less than 1% of the material, and then also suggests a possibility that sustainability is no longer a crisis).

Can students then be blamed for being given the impression that sustainability is not really a priority? We are in a crisis, and yet despite the fact that some of the causes of this very crisis is relevant to subject material taught in universities, we allocate less than one percent of the material to it.


Prioritizing Sustainability

Now, the reason that sustainability is so vital to teach in every subject in universities (not just in Management) is that eventually, those obtaining an education will become members of various organization, and sustainability is “one of the pillars of stewardship,” meaning every member of an organization needs to take sustainability into account for every decision they make. And if it appears obvious, or common sense, that an individual should do so, then once again, I’d like to remind you of what I said before. But instead of me repeating it, here’s a quote from the book, Administrative Behaviour, by Herbert Simon:

“The phenomenon of identification, or organizational loyalty, performs one very important function in administration. If an administrator, each time he is faced with a decision, must perforce evaluate that decision in terms of the whole range of human values, rationality in administration is impossible. If he need consider the decision only in the light of limited organizational aims, his task is more nearly within the range of human powers.”

If sustainability is not prioritized as an aim (which I have just proved to you it is not), then why are we surprised when we live in an unsustainable world? This is no different than my idiotic transmission shifting due to the exposure I received in media. If the only exposure to sustainability a student or employee receives does not create urgency and incentive on the subject, then the corresponding outputs will correspond with the communicated and educated inputs:

That sustainability is…kind of important? Enough to warrant a couple pages in a nearly 500 page textbook. And then, it’s also suggested that the crisis may already be under control (See Perception article).

For the record, this is not intended to lay blame exclusively at the business sector, nor the educational sector. This is one factor of many that all compound one another to create our current Sustainability Crisis.

To further explore the ideas presented in the preceding quote, here’s an interesting article by the individual who originally coined the term ‘Triple Bottom Line (3BL).”

https://hbr.org/2018/06/25-years-ago-i-coined-the-phrase-triple-bottom-line-heres-why-im-giving-up-on-it

The super short version of it is that although he still feels sustainability and ethics is important, he thinks the framework did not achieve its desired effect. As your only Global Systems Consultant (or Global System Technician - whichever you prefer), I have another question to ask you:

Do you think it’s possible that the 3BL has been ineffectively taught and communicated within business schools and in the business sector in general? Particularly as it takes the same amount of time for it to be updated in textbooks that it does for the creator of it to give up on it?

Alright, alright. You got me. I exaggerated by one year. The third edition of Management, written in 2014, does not discuss the Triple Bottom Line in the 2 or 3 pages it discusses sustainability (roughly the same number of pages it allocated to sustainability in the fourth edition of the textbook). 3BL is discussed in the fourth edition published on 2017 - 24 years after the term was originally coined. It’s no wonder that the individual who coined the term gave up on it the following year in 2018. The academic world can take decades to update its textbooks with new material (Like 3BL), and decades to removed dated and disproven material (Like MBTI & Type ‘A’ Personalities).

I am not trying to insinuate this is the only reason the idea behind why the Triple Bottom Line fell short of expectations, but it certainly didn’t help. While the idea itself may not have been executed as intended, the underlying concept of the Triple Bottom Line is more relevant today more than ever. We are in a crisis, which means every sector needs to play their part to address the issue. This was the reason I repeated the idea so much. Maybe the 3BL framework needs to be re-worked or re-branded, but the fundamental idea behind it is still highly relevant.

To clarify, every member (front line staff or CEOs) of a business organization should concern themselves with all three aspects (profits, people and planet). This would help repair the Role of Business in the Sustainability Crisis. There requires adequate incentive for change to occur, and currently, the material taught in many business schools is out of date and creates no urgency on the crisis nor the importance of sustainability. 

#YouBuying?

#ViableUnderdogs

**************************************************************************************

References

Burnett, D., (2013). The Guardian. Nothing Personal: The questionable Myers-Briggs test.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2013/mar/19/myers-briggs-test-unscientific

Elkington, J., (2018). Harvard Business Review. 25 years ago I coined the phrase “Triple Bottom Line.” Here’s why I think it’s time to rethink it.
https://hbr.org/2018/06/25-years-ago-i-coined-the-phrase-triple-bottom-line-heres-why-im-giving-up-on-it

Grant, A. (2013). Psychology Today. Goodbye to MTBI, the fad that won’t die.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/give-and-take/201309/goodbye-mbti-the-fad-won-t-die

Kane, S., (2016). Business Insider. The strange and somewhat icky reason we call people ‘Type A’ personalities goes back to the tobacco industry.
https://www.businessinsider.com/type-a-personality-traits-smoking-marketing-2016-8

Kyj, M.J., Reilly, B. J., (1990). Journal of Business Ethics Vol 9. Economics and Ethics.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/25072087?seq=1

Nowack, K. (1997). Personality Inventories: The Next Generation. Performance in Practice, American Society of Training and Development, Winter 1996/97
http://www.opd.net/abstracts5.html

Sci Show Psyche. (2017). SciShow (YouTube). Do personality tests mean anything?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JN6_K6ALeZI

Schermerhorn, J., & Wright, B., (2014). Management. Third Canadian Edition. Wiley

Schermerhorn, J., Wright, B.,& Bachrach, D., (2017). Management. Fourth Canadian Edition. Wiley.

Simon, H., (1997). Administrative Behavior 4th Edition. Free Press. 

ARTICLE 10 - Part 1: An Outbreak of Terrible Communication & Leadership

Viable Underdogs concerns itself with anything that is a Type 1, or global, issue. You can check an outline of all Viable Underdogs books and materials in this post:

Book Links & Other Viable Underdogs Material

************************************************************************************* 

NOTE: Parts 2 and 3 of this article can be found here:

Article 10 - Part 2: An Outbreak of Terrible Communication & Leadership

Article 10 - Part 3: An Outbreak of Terrible Communication & Leadership

*************************************************************************************

There exists no nation on this entire planet who does not interact with other nations on some level. Regardless of the many differences between nations, they share many more similarities. Things that occur in one part of the globe can have devastating consequences in other parts of the globe.

For a current example of this, the coronavirus outbreak, which as of today is still mostly concentrated in China, has large financial impacts in economies like the United States, since the American iPhone’s manufacturing is based out of China (See References). This is only one example of how interconnected our world is. Our economics and our epidemics should both be considered inside the realm of Type 1 challenges.


Accurate Data and Effective Leadership

A lot of Viable Underdogs material revolves around environmental sustainability, since this is the first problem identified (and one of the most urgent ones to start addressing). While Viable Underdogs claims to have the solutions to our Sustainability Crisis, locating a receptive audience to this type of idea has proved challenging, as difficult as this may be to believe. I highly recommend reading my second book, Renegades of Disruption, for more details on this.

While Viable Underdogs seeks out different strategies to locate a receptive audience, it still has lots of Type 1 style challenges to explore and recommend solutions to. In this article, I’m going to share an example of poor leadership, communication, and data on the subject of sustainability, then I will show how this exact same thing is occurring on the subject of the coronavirus outbreak.


Methane and Anthropogenic Climate Change (Part of the Sustainability Crisis)

If you read Uncage Human Ingenuity or read / listen to the Podcast-Audiobook, we briefly explored how methane is a greenhouse gas that is more potent than carbon dioxide (Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the gas mostly discussed at climate conferences and within the world of sustainability). Let’s look at some of the data surrounding this fact.

First off, here is an article published this week from The Guardian:

Watts, J., (2020). The Guardian. Oil and gas firms have had far worse climate impact than thought. 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/19/oil-gas-industry-far-worse-climate-impact-than-thought-fossil-fuels-methane

Written on Feb 19, 2020, it claims methane is “80 times more potent than CO2 over a 20 year span.” As well, the link it includes to this source was broken the same day the story was published.

If you read a lot of my material, you’ll notice that I use The Guardian as a source a fair bit. This is because I suspect they are one of the news outlets the least affected by The Fall of Journalism (Fundamental Disruption of Journalism - See: Renegades of Disruption). Although I do still think they are a reliable source, they are certainly not perfect, and they do not always maintain neutrality. While there is nothing inherently wrong with leaning a certain way on stories, it becomes quite problematic when I claim one of the best and most reliable news sites we have (among a saturation of mostly garbage reporting) is found to be biasedly writing its stories. If all outlets were held to a higher standard, then this type of bias is not only expected, but necessary to tell the full news story (there are two sides to every story).

It’s not that I necessarily fault them for reporting in the style that they do, but it truly does mean that since a news outlet is only as trustworthy as the field it represents, no outlets are overly trustworthy. I managed to locate what I suspect was the source the previous article mentioned for the statistic on methane:

UN Environment Programme. (2019). UN Environment Programme. Oil and gas sector can bring quick climate win by tacking methane emissions. 

https://www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/story/oil-and-gas-sector-can-bring-quick-climate-win-tackling-methane-emissions 

This article mentions the same statistic as The Guardian’s article that methane is 80 times more potent than carbon dioxide over a 20 year span.

Here is a different article from the United Nations also discussing the issue of methane, and its statistic is quite different from the other one it mentions:

United Nations. (2014). United Nations. Why methane matters. 

https://unfccc.int/news/new-methane-signs-underline-urgency-to-reverse-emissions 

Written Aug 7, 2014, it claims that methane is 34 times more potent than CO2 over a 100 year period.

Feel free to go do some more digging on your own and you’ll find that methane statistic is all over the map. Here’s the American Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) statistic:

EPA. (2017). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Methane emissions. 

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases 

With data as recent as 2017, it quotes a 2007 IPCC report indicating that methane is 25 times more potent over 100 year period.

Then, if we go back in time a couple years, The Guardian was reporting a similar statistic to the EPA and the second U.N. article:

Pearce, F., (2016). The Guardian. What is causing the rapid rise in methane emissions? 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/oct/26/what-is-causing-the-rapid-rise-in-methane-emission 

This article states that methane is 30 times more potent than CO2 over 100 years.

Two separate statistics

As you can see, despite a lot of the variability in the data if you do your own research, you’ll notice two numbers come up a fair bit. One floats around methane being 30 times the potency of CO2, and the other statistic floats around 80 times the potency. That’s quite the spread. As you can imagine, it could lead some to question any statistic regarding this matter, which adds to further distrust and denial, another thing we have discussed at some length.

What’s actually going on?

Well here’s an article by Climate Central (an organization I have recommended a couple times if you want to become more knowledgeable on the Climate Crisis (Sustainability Crisis). Their book, Global Weirdness, is an easy read that is fast to get through that should explain the climate change situation adequately.

This article is older than all the other references cited so far, so the range of the methane statistic is not a case of older data that needed to be updated:

Climate Central. (2014). Climate Central. Determining methane leaks is key to climate goals. 

https://www.climatecentral.org/news/climate-goals-priority-is-methane-leaks-17854 

If you read Climate Central’s article, you’ll learn that the two statistics are actually the same statistic. Methane is around 80 times more potent in the short term, and around 30 times more potent in the long term. Both of these are important to consider.

Here’s a link to a different article stating that this methane statistic is being ineffectively communicated and that standardization should be applied:

Vaidyanathan, G., (2015). Scientific American. How bad of a greenhouse gas is methane? 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-bad-of-a-greenhouse-gas-is-methane/  

Pay attention to the dates this article was written in as well. Over 4 years ago, it was recommended that this methane statistic be updated and standardized to better reflect the data. Something I have just proved hasn’t happened. How long do you think is an acceptable timeline to have implemented this new standard?

To be clear, I am not cherry-picking a certain data point. I am writing this to explore just how widespread the problem is. A lot of the information and statistics I used in the Podcast-Audiobook and Uncage Human Ingenuity had just as many unclear or inaccurate data sets. This problem combines with all the other problems I have already identified and add to the confusion and lack of action on the Sustainability Crisis.


Wikipedia

In Renegades of Disruption, I mention that journalism is in the midst of a long-term disruption. To add further evidence, I’m often impressed with how much more reliable Wikipedia is to many news outlets:

Here is the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_methane
And here’s a quote you can find in said article: 

“Methane…is a greenhouse gas with a global warming potential (GWP) 104 times greater than CO2 in a 20-year time frame; methane is not as persistent a gas as CO2 .…[which] means that a methane emission is projected to have 28 times the impact on temperature of a carbon dioxide emission of the same mass over the following 100 years assuming no change in the rates of carbon sequestration.”

Leadership

So let’s say, as a concerned inhabitant of this planet, you want to bring these types of issues to the attention of someone to get it addressed. You want to point out all the problems identified, which includes this methane statistic.

Who is it you contact?

That’s a rhetorical question. There is no leadership on this global Sustainability matter. That’s why known problems such as the one I just identified (of many I have already identified) continue to go unaddressed despite the following:

-As a species, we know, technically, these problems exists
-As a species, we know, technically, how to solve them.

Crazy, right?

Before you start listing off organizations you think may be in a leadership role of the Sustainability Crisis (such as the IPCC or The United Nations), I want to remind you of something:

During the year of 2019, there was only one person who was the face of the Sustainability Crisis. The only global leadership we have on this global crisis is a teenage girl, and this is not a cheap shot intended for her. It’s a cheap shot intended for a world who thinks a teenager should be the the unofficial leader of a global crisis.

I know the slow clap is tired and played out, but Earth, I’m giving you one hell of a slow clap right now.


According to responsible journalists, we are in the midst of a crisis, and yet, we don’t update our standards to reflect best practices on the data, and we put children at the forefront of the problem. The interesting thing is that I’m supposedly the one that sounds crazy. Yeah. Crazy idea to maybe implement effective leadership and effective communication during a crisis. Feel free to read an expert’s opinion on Crisis Communications in Steven Fink’s book, Crisis Communications: The Definitive Guide to Managing the Message, and learn how communication of this Sustainability Crisis is a ‘how to’ on doing everything wrong.


Alright, well maybe you don’t care about sustainability, or maybe you think I have made a bigger deal out of something than it is. How about on the subject of the current coronavirus outbreak? Is there possibly a lack of leadership, management, misinformation, and misinterpreted data points as well?

You betcha.

Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

Currently, the international accepted standard is a 14 day incubation period for the virus. This means an infected person may not show signs for 14 days. This is the reason that we have globally implemented a 14 day quarantine period. If an individual is quarantined for 14 days and shows no signs, then they’re all clear, right?

The largest study so far conducted determined that the incubation period may be up to 24 days long, a full ten days longer than the internationally accepted standard quarantine protocol.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), these longer incubation periods may be due to issues like ‘double exposure.’ This means there was a secondary exposure to the virus later on making it appear that it is a longer incubation period.


Pareto’s Principle (Yet Again)

As always, I do not claim to be an expert on how viruses and epidemics spread, I only claim to be a Generalist, but here are my questions as a Generalist:

Some experts mention that 24 days may only represent statistical outliers, meaning that an incubation period of 24 days does not occur the majority of the time. My first question is that if there are indeed cases of outliers, could these outliers be enough to continue to spread of this virus?

I have mentioned Pareto’s Principle (or the 80/20 Rule) a fair bit in other works, and it appears there very few fields where Pareto’s Principle does not apply:

Boseley, S., (2020). The Guardian. What are super-spreaders and how are they transmitting coronavirus?https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/10/what-are-super-spreaders-coronavirus 

This article mentions the idea of super-spreaders using the 80/20 Rule. If the existence of super-spreaders is accurate then my second question is as followsIf the 24 day incubation period is true in some outliers, could these outliers be enough to continue to spread this virus, especially if some of these outliers are possibly super-spreaders as per Pareto’s Principle?

Peer Review

If you read some of the links and do your own research, there are experts that claim that the largest study has not yet been peer-reviewed for accuracy. My third question is as follows:

If it’s possible the study is wrong, then how come it has not yet been peer-reviewed? Are there plans for independent organizations to peer-review this study in the very near future?

Leadership

Once again, where is the leadership on this potential global crisis? Maybe our systems will be adequate this time to prevent this problem from getting worse, but what about next time? Next time might not be an outbreak. Next time could be any of a number of Type 1 problems that I have either identified in my work or will be identifying in the future.

If leadership of the coronavirus outbreak is indeed with the World Health Organization (WHO), which would make sense, then how come they are not effectively communicating these ideas even on their website?

If there is no need for concern about the outliers (or if they don’t exist), then why is it not being reported?

Now, maybe there is some info on WHO’s website I may have overlooked, but wouldn’t you expect it to be quite easy to locate given how many news outlets are making the rounds with this? Wouldn’t those in a leadership position want to ensure the public is getting only necessary and verified facts? And if there are conflicting facts present (such as the incubation period), should this ‘leader’ not then provide statements as to why these conflicting facts are either incorrect or if more research is required?

Don’t forget, if you check out the sources I have left, you will find that there is a known problem of misinformation about coronavirus. If there is known misinformation, how does the entity put in charge of the leadership of this potential crisis plan on correcting it?

This situation is further evidence of the news running polarizing stories (Fall of Journalism - See Renegades of Disruption), a lack of effective communication by the organizations supposedly in charge (WHO), and a lack of leadership in general. With problems like this occurring throughout the world in every field, I am amazed our civilization is still alive and kicking.

Human ingenuity, you never cease to amaze me.

As always, I am not alone in my claims. In the References section, you’ll find an opinion piece written by an epidemiologist on the misinformation of the coronavirus outbreak. In other words, ineffective communication.

To clarify, my claim is not that this is some type of conspiracy: just issues you might find in any poorly ran business around the world. Needless bureaucracy, ineffective or compromised communication, unclear organizational structures, incomplete or inaccurate data, etc.

Overall, I’m not trying to say one way or the other, whether this coronovirus problem will get better or worse. What I am suggesting is that this is yet another example of ineffective communication and non-existent leadership. This then creates the problem of the general public further distrusting science and organizations in charge of addressing these types of concerns.

If the situation ends up not becoming as bad as some projections suggest, then it will only embolden our species when the next one happens and we are even less prepared for it. As well, incorrectly communicating a story has other things to consider too, such as economic factors like the iPhone supply issues mentioned earlier.

Although this might sound slightly contradictory, it’s interesting how we all constantly doubt these systems in some ways (or I would never have sources to references), but we never question the possibility that it all might fail.

My claim is that it’s not a question of if it will fail, but when it will fail.

If you want further evidence of this, I’ll still be posting on this blog from time to time while I write the next book that will outline these challenges in more detail, The Paradox of Civilizations.


Stay Tuned...

#YouBuying?

#ViableUnderdogs

**************************************************************************************

References

Yet again, Professor Wikipedia will inform you about the high level of misinformation regarding the coronavirus outbreak:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misinformation_related_to_the_2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_outbreak

Hmm. Kinda sounds like a ‘global compromised communication’ issue I keep referring back to. Weird...






Apple warns coronavirus will hurt iPhone supplies. (2020). BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51539322

Boseley, S., (2020). The Guardian. What are super-spreaders and how are they transmitting coronavirus?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/10/what-are-super-spreaders-coronavirus

Climate Central. (2014). Climate Central. Determining methane leaks is key to climate goals.
https://www.climatecentral.org/news/climate-goals-priority-is-methane-leaks-17854

EPA. (2017). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Methane emissions.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases

Flanagan, R. & Slaughter, G., (2020). CTV News. Experts skeptical of reports suggesting some coronavirus patients don’t show symptoms for 24 days.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/experts-skeptical-of-report-suggesting-some-coronavirus-patients-don-t-show-symptoms-for-24-days-1.4807571

Kucharski, A., (2020). The Guardian. Misinformation on the coronavirus might be the most contagious thing about it.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/08/misinformation-coronavirus-contagious-infections

Paulos, J., (2020). The New York Times. We’re reading the coronavirus numbers wrong.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/18/opinion/coronavirus-china-numbers.html

(This article shows the peril of our addiction for instantaneous information. Something I have discussed a few times as well).


Pearce, F., (2016). The Guardian. What is causing the rapid rise in methane emissions?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/oct/26/what-is-causing-the-rapid-rise-in-methane-emissions

United Nations. (2014). United Nations. Why methane matters.
https://unfccc.int/news/new-methane-signs-underline-urgency-to-reverse-emissions

UN Environment Programme. (2019). UN Environment Programme. Oil and gas sector can bring quick climate win by tacking methane emissions.
https://www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/story/oil-and-gas-sector-can-bring-quick-climate-win-tackling-methane-emissions

Vaidyanathan, G., (2015). Scientific American. How bad of a greenhouse gas is methane?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-bad-of-a-greenhouse-gas-is-methane/

Watts, J., (2020). The Guardian. Oil and gas firms ‘have had far worse climate impact than thought.’
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/19/oil-gas-industry-far-worse-climate-impact-than-thought-fossil-fuels-methane

World Health Organization. (2020). Q&A on coronaviruses.
https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/q-a-coronaviruses

Worldometer. (2020). Coronavirus.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-incubation-period/

(A Link to the study suggesting a 24 day incubation period is included in this last reference).

Book Links & Other Viable Underdogs Material

At the end of his book, Crossing The Chasm, Geoffrey Moore compares pioneer technologists to authors, by mentioning that they feel compelled to perform their work, and that their motivations extend beyond that of financial compensation. If money was the only motivator in writing my books, then they would have remained incomplete ideas in my head, since it has proved quite difficult locating anyone willing to read them, let alone parting with some of their cash for them.

In Renegades of Disruption, I mentioned leaving a bit of margin on the book, Uncage Human Ingenuity, in order to get some amount of compensation for my research into the problem. Upon reflection, it makes more sense to focus on compensation with future books, consulting work, and other strategies, than it does to expect payment on books already completed.

You’ll find all my books available for free as a PDF download below. Currently, this includes Uncage Human Ingenuity and Renegades of Disruption. Once the written version of the Podcast-Audiobook is completed, it will be added here as well. If you prefer reading physical copies of the books, then I will also provide links on where you can purchase these (the costs to purchase the book goes towards the printing and shipping - none of the money goes to me as I have removed any profit).

As well, I understand there is a fair bit of material present throughout all my works, and it might fluster some people if they have no idea where exactly to start. In this post, I will also leave a detailed list on all the Viable Underdogs material (Podcast, videos, books, and this blog), and the ideal order the material should be digested. It has never been my intent to needlessly confuse anyone, but it has proven quite challenging to complete this work without assistance or feedback. While everything makes perfect sense in my head, it might come across as scattered gibberish to another person. I’m always open to suggestions and feedback should anyone be interested in getting in touch with me (viableunderdogs@gmail.com).

Here is the order I recommend:

Renegades of Disruption:

How to Overcome Humanity’s Overwhelming Resistance to Change & New Ideas.

You can download the free PDF version here (all links are through Google Drive):

Renegades of Disruption PDF

Or you can order a physical paper copy of the book here:

Renegades of Disruption (Physical Copy)

Renegades of Disruption lays out the foundation for all the other idea presented by Viable Underdogs. It first provides an explanation and methods on lowering your associative barriers - something essential in order for a reader to entertain the scale and magnitude of ideas that are presented. It also provides a gateway to better understand ideas presented in the first book, Uncage Human Ingenuity, and the third book, The Paradox of Civilizations (Expected completion - End of 2020). Although Uncage Human Ingenuity was written first, it was always intended for Renegades of Disruption to be read first. The reason they were not released in this manner was due to the time-sensitive nature of the material and that I did not expect to complete Renegades as quickly as I did.

After reading Renegades of Disruption, the order in which the material is consumed is less important, but I strongly urge anyone to start with Renegades first. Following, is a recommended list to explore the remaining material.

Uncage Human Ingenuity: 

A Realistic, Profitable Global Transition to Sustainability Within 10 Years.

NOTE: I am currently in the process of writing a second edition of this book, since I realize there are quite a few typos that need to be corrected, formatting issues that need to be edited, and the general flow of the book needs to be better streamlined. As well, I am working on adding additional information that will strengthen the points made, which is why this second edition will likely be in the works for some time. In the meantime, I'll update a list of articles here that should be read concurrently with the book, and will eventually be included in the second edition:

Article 12 Problem #7: Incorrect Global Perception

Article 12 - Part 2: Social Media Amplification

Article 3: Soylent Green is made of ...Climate Crisis Solutions?

You can download the free PDF version here (all links are through Google Drive):

Uncage Human Ingenuity PDF

Or you can order a physical paper copy of the book here:

Uncage Human Ingenuity (Physical Copy)

Uncage Human Ingenuity explores the idea that the greatest factor in our current global Sustainability Crisis is compromised communication. The method in solving this style of compromised communication exists in business fields like Change Management. Although, there are different options on how to solve these type of communication problems, I suggest using a modified version of a Change Process developed by Kurt Lewin. The First step in Kurt Lewin’s Change Process is known as an ‘Unfreeze,’ which seeks to effectively communicate the reasons for change and how the change will take place

Uncage Human Ingenuity explains how the Podcast-Audiobook is an attempt to deliver this ‘Unfreeze,’ and correct the problem of compromised global communication regarding the Sustainability Crisis.

Viable Underdogs Podcast-Audiobook

A Type 1 Unfreeze-Chain Letter: Laterally Applying Change Management Concepts To Correct Compromised Global Communication Channels.

You can listen to the Podcast-Audiobook here:

https://viableunderdogs.podbean.com/

Here's a link to the first episode: 

EPISODE 1

It’s also available on Spotify, iTunes, & Google Play if you search:

“Viable Underdogs”

You can download a free PDF written version of the Podcast-Audiobook here: 

A Type 1 Unfreeze-Chain Letter PDF

NOTE: some minor revisions were made and additional material was added to better represent the ideas explored. A physical copy of the book can be ordered here:

A Type 1 Unfreeze-Chain Letter

The reason a podcast was chosen is that more information (episodes) can easily be added and updated. The intent was to wait until it had a larger following until more episodes would be added to initiate the later phases of the Change Process. This is still the intent, but gaining traction has proved exceedingly challenging. As stated before, the Podcast-Audiobook is an attempt to deliver the ‘Unfreeze’ as per Kurt Lewin’s Change Process. The episodes in the Podcast-Audiobook can be listened to in sequential order, but there are other series within the Podcast-Audiobook that may assist in streamlining certain ideas and concepts. A guide on this can be found in each of the Viable Underdogs Books, as well as in one of the videos. Here’s a link to the video:

Listening Guide To The Podcast-Audiobook

Series 1: Slow Acceptance of New Ideas

Episodes: 6, 22, 23, 24, 29, 30, 31, and 32.

Series 2: Communication Breakdown

Episodes: 3, 7, 8, 18, 20, 22, 23, 27, 31 & 33.

Series 3: Bureaucratic Inefficiency Present in Politics, Business, and Science

Episodes: 6, 12,14, 19, 20, 21, & 29.

Series 4: The Emotions of Change and Sustainability

Episodes: 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 25, 31, & 35.

Series 5: Global Cooperation

Episodes: 10, 11, 12, 15, 24, & 33.

Series 6: Strict Usage of Terminology

Episodes: 8, 18, 22, 23, 27, & 41.

Series 7: Is science Dumb?

Episodes: 3, 8, 18, 27, & 29.

Series 8: The Jaded Truth

(WARNING: Some content in this series may be offensive to some audiences)

Episodes 9, 17, & 25 

Viable Underdogs YouTube Channel

The YouTube channel has a few videos that may help explain some concepts explored throughout all the books. Here’s one that briefly explains the idea behind Lateral Thinking:

Lateral Thinking, Nintendo, & Global Sustainability

Until more traction is gained, there will be no new videos posted as they are very time-consuming to make. The idea is that there will eventually be helpful videos that provide a better visual representation for all the concepts I present. Currently, there are 8 videos up and all of them are only a few minutes long, so rather than explain them here, I encourage you to simply check them out for yourself.

  

This Blog

Initially, I intended for this blog to be a working manuscript for my second book, Renegades of Disruption, but as I said, the book was completed much quicker than I had anticipated. Rather, I will now be using the blog to post updates and explore different ideas not included in any of the books. To clarify, while the main purpose of the Podcast-Audiobook and Uncage Human Ingenuity is to correct our current Sustainability Crisis (which includes anthropogenic climate change), the main purpose of Viable Underdogs, this blog, and books such as Renegades of Disruption and The Paradox of Civilizations, is to provide realistic strategies to successfully transition our global civilization from a Type 0 Civilization to a Type 1 Civilization.

Here's a list of all the articles on this blog (excluding updates):

ARTICLE 1: Communication & The Fall of Journalism

ARTICLE 2 - Part 1: Lateral Thinking, Harmonics, & Music
ARTICLE 2 - Part 2: Lateral Thinking, Harmonics, & Music

ARTICLE 3: Soylent Green is made of...Climate Crisis Solutions?

ARTICLE 4: A 21st Century Knowledge Revolution

ARTICLE 5: Two-Step Manuscript Submission (in Academia)

ARTICLE 6: Applying Lateral Thinking - Game Theory to Politics

ARTICLE 7: Peak Demand Stagger Strategy

ARTICLE 8: Disruption

ARTICLE 9 - Part 1: Understanding the Numbers
ARTICLE 9 - Part 2: Understanding the Numbers

ARTICLE 10 - Part 1: An Outbreak of Terrible Communication & Leadership
ARTICLE 10 - Part 2: An Outbreak of Terrible Communication & Leadership
ARTICLE 10 - Part 3: An Outbreak of Terrible Communication & Leadership

ARTICLE 11: 3BL, Incentives, & Urgency

ARTICLE 12 - Part 1: Incorrect Global Perception
ARTICLE 12 - Part 2: Perception & Social Media Amplification
ARTICLE 12 - Part 3: Proof of Compromised Global Communication Channels

Consulting

Soon, I will be including information on the consulting services I will be offering. This will likely be a separate entity to Viable Underdogs, but I will be posting any links and updates here as well. 

#YouBuying?

#ViableUnderdogs

Over A Year After The Podcast Started

Happy super belated 2020!

First off, the $5000 Sustainability Challenge that was held on the Podcast and Social Media has now terminated. As expected, I received all of zero entries adding further evidence to my claim of ‘incorrect global perception.’ See Episode 38 for what exactly the challenge was all about.

Great News! The second Viable Underdogs book is now complete.

Renegades of Disruption: How To Overcome Humanity’s Overwhelming Resistance to Change & New Ideas. will soon be made available for download, or you can order a paper copy and/or PDF version here:

The Greatest Book Never Read

I recommend reading Renegades of Disruption prior to reading Uncage Human Ingenuity. Although Renegades was written second, it was always intended to be read first, but I wrote them in this order due to the time sensitive nature of the material in Uncage Human Ingenuity (Kinda thought I’d get some amount of traction with it - oh well - you live and you fail…repeatedly).

Renegades of Disruption also lays out a foundation for the third book that is currently in the works:

The Paradox of Civilizations (Expected completion by the end of 2020).

During the intense, adventurous, and Earth-shattering writing of The Paradox of Civilizations, I am also working to soon release ‘Book Zero’ that would offer episode transcripts of the entire Podcast-Audiobook. Currently, I’m allocating a couple months prior to completion, but I will post any updates here.

As well, stay tuned for an update regarding consulting services that will soon be offered. One of the main purposes of the books (other than to provide the podcast with legitimacy) is to sell my consulting services to any organization, or nation in the world, who thinks my Global Diagnostic Technician skills may prove useful.  

As always, thank you for your support!

To date, I have never received a single email from anyone who mentions having read, listened to, or watched any Viable Underdogs material. I add this in not to vent, but to encourage anyone to get in touch if I do have a tiny audience, and also to provide yet further evidence at the difficulty of introducing new, innovative ideas to the world and our species.

The Epic Saga of Viable Underdogs, John & Carlos continues. Hopefully, our second year in operation yields greater results...