A crash course in changing the world.
Episode 3 STORY: Did the EVOKE Network fail?
What do you think of the story so far? Discuss what happened in Episode 3 here.
Tags: ep3
Views: 213
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Luuk van Breda on -
the story is an effective way of getting people to understand the worldwide situation about energy.
There are , howver manu sources of energy,the one described, wind power,coming originally from the Netherlands, it is used often effectively.However, other sources are necessary, waste energy, bio thermal energy and others.
Maybe it is necesary to develop the story and see were , with the advise and help of the evoke connections we could get solutions for the many instead of for the few.
-
Permalink Reply by Patricio Buenrostro-Gilhuys on -
I think the EVOKE Network didn´t fail. It made the people in the Favelas happy. It might have failed to acknowledge the local needs and aspirations. Soccer is a very big part in national pride, identity and part of the daily life in Brazil for a lot of people. The Evoke Network should always have as objectives to listen and understand the needs and dreams of locals.
-
Permalink Reply by Cian Gregory Accuardi Shelley on -
i think that the C Xer bro is gonna get converted.
-
Permalink Reply by Nathaniel Fruchter on -
I think you've hit the nail on the head. Wasn't one of the secrets of social innovation to learn whether or not your idea works in a local context? They tripped over their own shoes on this one—or at least one of the agents did.
Patricio Buenrostro-Gilhuys said:I think the EVOKE Network didn´t fail. It made the people in the Favelas happy. It might have failed to acknowledge the local needs and aspirations. Soccer is a very big part in national pride, identity and part of the daily life in Brazil for a lot of people. The Evoke Network should always have as objectives to listen and understand the needs and dreams of locals.
-
Permalink Reply by Ken Walling on
-
The EVOKE Network can only fail if it gives up. So, no. they didn't fail.
As a CISSP (Certified Information Systems Security Professional), I'm happy to see that the story is integrating the obvious need for Information Security. So many organizations operate on the Internet without utilizing a third party (such as my company) to validate their security stance.
I have been helping local folks with their systems recently. One person asked me to upgrade their memory, because their system was "slow". As it turned out, the system was had been compromised by a malicious hacker and was participating in a bot-net. This might not mean much to those folks who aren't in my line of work - so I'll put it plainly. Someone else had complete control of this person's system - and the true owner of the system had no idea.
I'm glad to see that Alchemy is using some sort of IDS (Intrusion Detection System).
Metajunkie
-
Permalink Reply by Nate B on -
oh for sure...
Cian Gregory Accuardi Shelley said:i think that the C Xer bro is gonna get converted.
-
Permalink Reply by Vladimir Samborskiy on -
Whenever we find the will to do something for the good, we should be looking for a motivation within ourselves. We should not be acting with expectation of reward or understanding.
We should provide people with a possibility to evolve but to the level of their understanding. We can not force people in to the level of comfort they are not looking for. It is the motivation of people we should be looking for and helping them in the same direction their motivation is going. Find additional possibilities in line with people motivation.
-
Permalink Reply by Jane A.W. on -
Clearly the Ashoka proverb is meant to imply that the wood was kindled once in the favela... and the next opportunity for social innovation may TAKE fire, given this ostensibly 'failed' intervention.
But I agree Nathanial and Patricio - that the intervention failed only to take note of the fact that for the people described - sitting down to watch football (gee whiz at least one night anyway) was the best thing they could imagine their electricity for. WHile it might frustrate the timeline of a grant funded project or 'development agency' timeline - more than likely - once the TV was on all the time and folks got beyond that - they'd start to make more windmills to have refrigerators or some other goal that the outsider, Ember, envisioned as the goal.
-
Permalink Reply by Joanna Chaplin on -
One thing I have been struggling to come to an understanding of is that what is valued differs between people. Some might value land ownership, and see getting a job and saving toward that end as "responsible and diligent." Some might value time with their family, and look down on those who leave their children in daycare. Some might value a life learning and enjoying, planting no roots. While I feel that education can improve lives in ways people cannot imagine, westernizing the world is not the same as improving quality of life. What people consider as a high-quality life changes. Yes, some of that is exposure. Some of that is a difference in values.
Patricio Buenrostro-Gilhuys said:I think the EVOKE Network didn´t fail. It made the people in the Favelas happy.
-
Permalink Reply by Wasserperson on -
Whether we failed in Rio depends on why we were there.
I've posted my own, further questions here:
http://www.urgentevoke.com/profiles/blogs/rio-a-failure-on-tokyos-t...
By the standards of the Tokyo intervention...
-We did demonstrate a new, promising and creative solutions to the existing problems
-We have not institutionalized those solutions
-We have not distributed the knowledge to put those solutions to work (yet)
-We have not acted under the radar--in fact our best success was very high profile
-We did not avert the crisis...
Seems like a failure, but I have to ask... were we trying to pull off another Tokyo? Who called us to Rio in the first place? Were we responding to an external Evoke? Cruising on our own success/hubris?
Or going out into the field for more experience?
From the field-testing perspective, we gained new insight, new allies, and the exposure doesn't hurt us if it's not undermining the self-empowerment of the local government/community...
So if our goal was a socially beneficial learning opportunity for our network, we succeeded, even if our interventions don't take root.
The question in the end, Alchemy, is how much time do we have to learn from trial and error? And does an appearance of fallibility harm us in other ways as well?
-
Permalink Reply by cameron michael keys on -
And to think that 25 billion dollars were spent constructing infrastructure for the 2016 Olympics just four years before this!!!!! What a terrible allocation of resources by the Olympic committee and the Brazilian ministers of strategic planning (Roberto Mangabeira Unger, where were you on this one?!)
Evoke failed to contact municipal officials prior to the crisis. That's our failure, getting to government leaders before the crisis boils over. I don't blame the football fans. Humans are not immune system cells for the city infrastructure. If you want them to build windmills, you have to make building windmills more desirable than watching football. Learning and action require desire and imaginative engagement to produce efficiency.
Alchemy's failure was simply one of timing. And timing is a mysterious thing. So I cannot blame Alchemy for this. I can't even call it a failure. It's just too bad!
Luckily, perhaps, we can step out of our Gestalt-therapy shadow-boxing match and acknowledge the power we have here in 2010. The Rio Olympics are six years away. What can we do to change the energy infrastructure of that city in the next six years?
Consider THAT an Urgent Evoke, my friends. peace!!! // cameron
-
Permalink Reply by Pradip Dey on -
Dear All,
Good day!
I have thought of it deeply and dig the word out from its various meaning. Fail may have meaning at primary, secondary and tertiary stages. I have already posted details in my blog post:Why I think EVOKE network has not failed (http://www.urgentevoke.com/profiles/blogs/why-i-think-evoke-network...).
Still, many of friends often asked me to pu the main subject also, hence I am giving the post below again:
The question that was troubling me for quite sometimes now is an Alchemy’s post ‘Episode 3 STORY: Did the EVOKE Network fail?’ The mere utterance of word ‘fail’ always troubles me. I tried to dig deep to find this out. I have put it in my blog post. Fail may have meaning at primary stage as: be unsuccessful, ineffective, vain, unproductive, abortive, futile, fruitless, and disastrous.
At secondary stage, it may take the form of: useless, hopeless, and worthless.
At tertiary stage, it means: uncreative, idle, wasted, pointless, unrewarding, catastrophic, ruinous, and terrible.
Now since in one way of looking at EVOKE is a idea sharing platform. Any idea cannot be futile, hopeless, worthless, and uncreative.
Another way of looking at EVOKE is a show of unity. Hence, it cannot be useless, idle, wasted, and pointless.
Still other way of looking at it is empowering, hence it cannot be unsuccessful, vain, abortive, ineffective, unproductive, fruitless, unrewarding, and ruinous.
The other way of looking at EVOKE is positive thinking. So it cannot be terrible, disastrous, and catastrophic.
Overall at the core of the heart, EVOKE is the change for good; hence my answer to “Did the EVOKE network fail?” is a resounding NO.
Thank you all.
© 2013 Created by Alchemy.
