|
Sunday Sep 21, 2008
A Link in the Chain: Closing the gap Posted by Gidi Grinstein
Comments: 1
There are several differences between Reut and other traditional think tanks. Most think tanks operate on the assumption that the central problem is connected to the collection and processing of information. So they deal with research. We say that the central problem lies with the cognitive, conceptual understanding of the problem. We don't provide answers, we ask questions. People in think tanks are experts with knowledge and experience. Our team is young - the average age is 29 and there isn't one PhD among us. That means that we can ask questions, that we can apply ourselves to think about problems in a fresh way. Our expertise lies in the area between disciplines, through creating new knowledge areas and a basis for quick decision making under uncertain conditions. While most research institutes deal with research and learning, we offer services for decision-making. While other organizations deal with knowledge-experts, we employ process experts. While others progress in terms of knowledge, we try to understand the basic assumptions. We complement organizations such as the Israeli Democracy Institute, as we specialize in asking the questions, while they specialize in research. We also commit ourselves to very short reaction times, which are essential for designing and implementing policies in real time. We don't provide advice, we provide a way of thinking. And we are apolitical on all levels of the organization. Through our structure and methodology, we specialize in identifying blind spots, information that the decision maker doesn't know he doesn't know. It's within these blind spots that strategic surprises happen. Such examples are the Yom Kippur war, the first Intifada, Rabin's assassination, 9/11, Kodak's failure to identify the revolution of the digital camera or the textile industry which is desperately trying to survive. It's basically people or organizations that function according to certain assumptions even though the reality is changing and therefore don't manage to close the gap. Closing such a gap requires a fundamental change in values and planning and is very difficult. But it's part of the challenge that Reut has set for itself.
1 |
Roddy Frankel,
Monday May 11, 2009
Perhaps a worthwhile application of your think-tank is optimizing the negotiation process with the PA. Some questions that need to be asked: 1) What principles will define the movement of Arabs and Jews across borders, in both directions? 2) What principles will define land ownership, and citizenship, on both sides, for all religious groups? 3) What principles will define the protection of and access to public holy sites? I think you get the idea. These questions have been largely ignored in any public debates. Isn't it better to resolve these issues before borders are drawn?
|
Top Rated Posts
Tags:Blogroll |