Several of the questions asked last week (eg. here and in Topic 11) fit well into a concept and methodology called “System redesign toward creating shared value” (SYRCS), recently described in a post of the i2insight-blog.
Systems redesign in our context is a transition from the more local and disparate publishing of data to an integrated, harmonized global infrastructure focused on FAIR functionality and quality, specifically geared for data re-use and their application to efforts of solving real-world problems.
Following the concept of system redesign toward creating shared value, change happens and/or needs four stages (text adapted from the post by Moein Khazaei, Mohammad Ramezani, Amin Padash and Dorien DeTombe):
- emancipation and critical thinking
- problem structuring
- multi-criteria and quantitative decision-making
- creating shared value.
Our current questions seem to fit into stage 1, in which we focus on you as stakeholders and query your motivation (sense of purpose and value), your experiences with and thoughts on power (who is in control and who is needed for success), knowledge (experience and expertise), and legitimacy (ensuring that all those affected are involved).
The approach proposed in the blog post is to use ‘is’ and ‘ought to be’ forms of questions, such as “Who is (ought to be) the beneficiary? That is, whose interests are (should be) served?”.
My personal point of view is that the community-driven development of the digital and extended specimen infrastructure and network is an incredible chance. It also shows a strength of the collections and biodiversity communities: to work together and thus having the experiences needed to design, find solutions for and implement complex, shared infrastructures. We are happy that we already reached a wide range of stakeholders, from the humanities and law to conservation and businesses. Please jump in, join the development process and add your experiences and thoughts.