Thinking “3D” in a 3D world.

MOVING FROM 2D TO 3D

If someone is looking at a multi-chapter geography book, not knowing it’s contents, saying that it is just a geography book would be correct, but it neglects the internal layers; the interdisciplinary contents, the depth of subjects in nature, human effects, the many phenomenon that take place in human and world geography or history to show those have happened. It is simplistic. This lesson can be applied to almost all types of information recorded into the collective knowledge base which we humans rely on, especially scientific literature. What is harmful about “2D thinking” is a blatant refusal to even attempt to incorporate deeper fields of data and therefore meaning into the study, rendering the study obsolete. It would be akin to reading a newspaper article about climate protests and then writing a full report on what little one gauged about climate change.

On the other hand, three-dimensional thinking prevents you from moving into the realm of convergent thought, a form of problem- solving thought. Three-dimensional thinking provides you with a format with which you can develop and orient your thoughts, thus leading to new ideas.?

At the United Nations, time and time again, we are integrating what we call the “three Dimensions of Sustainable Development.” This is not just a framework, but also a tool.

We understand the integration of the economic, social and environmental dimensions is key to achieving sustainable development. There is, in general, widespread acceptance of why the integration of these three dimensions is necessary; but there are also many questions as to “how” this integration is to be achieved. Policymakers still need to be assisted in addressing the question of how to achieve integration across the policy cycle and to assess levels of integration appropriate for solving real-world challenges.

Foundational concepts, such as systems thinking, have been introduced to underline the interdependence of the three pillars, the need for holistic thinking and the potential for “leverage points” for policy intervention.

Let’s take the example of education. While content knowledge is still a part of education standards, there is a lack of focus on teaching students how to engage with new knowledge, answer questions and solve problems, and make connections between the different scientific disciplines, as well as relating science to the real world. This is where three-dimensional learning comes into play. It empowers students to become real-life problem-solvers.

MULTIPLE CAPITALS

The concept of multiple capitals is important to highlight the integration of the three dimensions of sustainable development. This is different from the definition of 3D thinking, but very applicable in how we apply the 3D thinking concept in real life. The three siloed pillars require balanced investment in and across different forms of capital. Focus cannot be limited to only one form of capital. When it comes to integrating sustainable development, the various investments in the different forms of capitals need to be used to create feedback loops. This would example 3D thinking and highlight inefficiencies, risk and thus opportunity.

Allow me to introduce a commonly used tool of integration here. Qualitative scenario building is a methodology that can support stakeholder learning, dialogue, and social innovation by visualising uncertain but possible futures. Scenarios provide narratives to describe what life in a particular region in the world might look like in 2030 if all the sustainable development goals (SDGs) were to be achieved. This method is no longer suitable for integrating the different dimensions of sustainable development because it fails to account for future scenarios, introducing a lack of imagination and systems thinking in modellers, thus creating current suboptimal outcomes.

We need systems thinking here: Any decisions and actions to advance any one SDG will likely affect the achievement of the others positively or negatively in any particular region. This builds a demand for the need to better understand the interactions between SDGs, in particular trade-offs, synergies and unintended consequences. For instance, a campaign used to achieve good health and wellbeing (SDG 3) is related to the environment–human linkages, for example. vector control, while other action, such as vaccination programmes, is not. These environment–human linkages may be very influential in some spheres and not so much in others. So, it makes us think. What is a scenario of storylines that can explore interactions between such linkages? 3D thinking. Systems-thinking.

BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN PERSONAL EDUCATION AND WORK VIA DECISION MAKING

Specification of personal and organisational learning objectives is absolutely essential. The following concrete differences should become noticeable as a result of the student’s’ educational activities:?

1. How may the student’s work portfolio be tailored so as to provide optimal support for the accomplishment of the learning objectives??

2. Which possible adjustments of the student’s hours invested into studying may enable him/her to allocate adequate time and energy to educational matters? Dialogues between student and educational leaders should be repeated at regular intervals so as to adjust and optimise expectations.

Another tool often used for the integration of SDGs is Action Research. One of the main challenges in Action Research is that no recipes or solutions can be provided in advance. The main task of the research that can be translated into action is, first, to identify organisational problems worthy of joint attention and then try to make positive changes through a series of minor experimental action sequences. The research calls for continuous planning adjustment in order to match the organisational development process resulting from the research process itself. Ends and means must be changed or adjusted as participants get feedback from their own actions, providing them with an improved platform for moving on in the research process. Action Research is shaped through a series of cyclic interventions, each intervention paving the way for the next.

Broadly speaking, it is my experience that a well-designed curricular Action Research project implemented by the student in her home organisation offers a unique opportunity to get the best of both worlds: involvement and commitment, to the point of entanglement, combined with observational distance and reflexivity allowing clarity and a broader vision to emerge. We must encourage our students to form Action Research teams or duos. Eco projects are ideal; A green space for students to grow organic vegetables, or using a school composting site that could be used to help green spaces flourish. Even statistical studies in relation to traffic around, assess how people travel each day and campaign for more public transport by sharing this research. Ideally, this furnishes the Action Research project with a combined, mutually enriching insider perspective (commitment, something at stake) and outsider perspective (coolness, clarity, curiosity). Applying scientific standards of rigor, transparency, and quality in analysing your own work environment and your role within it, is often experienced as a fierce challenge by our students. Yet, they also recognise that the unfamiliar perspective is what helps them achieve a more nuanced understanding of themselves as organisational change agents. Unfamiliar is unconventional - it is “outside the box”. It is intriguing to students because it opens up pathways to work on something not been done before, something that will not be boring or a replica. Something that challenges what is happening. For example, it should be a practice for students to be able to ask, but “why is this the only solution? Has anyone thought about X? I understand that it sounds impractical, but can I try it”

A university level master’s program, for example, holds up a mirror to the students in their capacities as individual actors and team players. Their student position lends them the opportunity to experiment and make controlled self-and-other observations in their day-to-day work setting, while at the same time working hard to succeed in their daily tasks. Action Research methodology helps them gain knowledge of the interactive processes lying behind and facilitating – or blocking as the case may be – organisational productivity. Emerging literature shows that organisational productivity has been falling for many years. This could be partly due to the fact that Action Research - like all man made processes - is two dimensional, ignores feedback loops, and systems thinking. However, systemic thinking is not an approach to action research, but a grounding for action research that may broaden action and deepen research. By this action, we can broaden the decision space. Insights are gained about the functioning and learning capacity of the organisation. This knowledge is brought about and shared by groups of people in the workplace. It is our hope that the procedures of joint reflexivity, that are exercised in the workplace context while the program is running, can take root and be maintained (i.e. transferred) even after student graduation. This is why it is often expressed: “Educating a student is educating an organisation”. But our modern-day systems still fail to bridge the? well researched and evidenced skills gap between college and the workplace.