Introduction
The Value Creator (VC) is an innovative educational concept developed by a team of lecturers at the BBA Global Project and Change Management (GPCM)1 programme at Windesheim Honours College (WHC)2. It provides students with a unique learning experience, which enables students to take ownership of their own learning process. Value Creators (VC) sets the focus on alternative and transdisciplinary approaches to challenge-based and mission-oriented education, addressing issues with multiple actors in mind, with the aim of creating societal value (WUAS, 2024). Part of the objective is to create social value by initiating change that addresses complex issues related to the UN Sustainable Development Goals or SDGs (Value Creators, n.d.). VC is anchored on connectivism theory (Siemens, 2005), Theory U (Scharmer, 2009), and communities of practice (Wenger, 1998). These theories allow students to manage complexity and deal with uncertainty characteristic of global sustainability matters.
The semester covered in this essay is part of the last two years of the four-year GPCM bachelor’s programme. It encourages students to seek knowledge beyond the four walls of a classroom through collaboration with existing networks and professionals in the field(s) of investigation (Windesheim Honours College, n.d.; Alvarez & Rijsdijk, 2017). It involves engagement with a challenge and interdisciplinary networks on multiple levels (e.g., through reading articles and books, participation in conferences and webinars). This is to gain a better understanding of the root causes of specific issues, explore network dynamics, and identify leverage points for creating systems change by adding new creative perspectives or expanding networks on the topic (Alvarez & Rijsdijk, 2017; Value Creators, n.d.).
This essay describes our VC learning journey of exploring the challenge of reconnection to self, others, and nature (SON), which applied the tools and approaches enumerated above. This essay is structured as follows: first, the VC methods and processes are presented, specifically the 4E-Model of change (Explore, Engage, Elaborate, Evaluate); second, a more detailed insight into each phase of the 4E-Model is provided by describing a case that elaborates on the root causes of disconnection, the intervention points that were identified as a response to the former, and the engagement of networks and target groups; lastly, the semester’s outcome is highlighted through an evaluation of product value and relevance, put into perspective with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and Inner Development Goals (IDG). This essay concludes with a short personal reflection on our experience.
VC Methods and processes
Theory U by Otto Scharmer (2009) laid a philosophical foundation for the work on the issue of disconnection from oneself, others and nature. The theory supports an awareness-based way of working on future transformation and is a way of interacting with systems involved on a deeper level. The U process is based on the concept of presencing, which combines being present and sensing (Scharmer, 2009). In this process, individuals are invited to immerse into a higher state of attention to the system through careful observation. Once the individuals tune in with a given system, they develop a feeling or sensing of the emerging changes, and act as facilitators of the change a system requires (Scharmer, 2009).
In order to apply Theory U in practice, the 4E-Model of change created by WHC was used (see Figure 1). The E-Model consists of four phases: Explore, Engage, Elaborate, and Evaluate which guide the VC teams in the process of addressing the complexity of the challenges at hand and creating societal value.
Figure 1
Theory U with the Value Creators 4E model, from Value Creators Toolkit, VC Team (2023).
Translating the E-model into actual practice, we started the Explore phase by familiarising ourselves with the challenge of reconnection through relevant academic literature, current academic work and other accessible material, such as podcasts, documentaries and other similar materials. We attended conferences and events, including the Conscious Festival in Paris, France (https://www.theconsciousfestival.com), relevant talks, panels and workshops on how reconnection can be addressed in contemporary Western society.
By making use of the 4E-Model game specifically designed for the VC process (Alvarez, n.d.), we mapped out the network sectors that could potentially be involved in the chosen challenge. Based on that data, we identified the root causes of the issue, which shaped feedback loops reinforcing the issue at hand. Finally, within the feedback loops, potential intervention points for introducing systems change were identified, carving the direction and focus for the next phases.
Having laid that foundation, we proceeded to the Engage phase where we established initial contact and formed partnerships with the representatives of the identified sectors and networks. We discussed with our network partners their views on disconnection as well as their ways of engaging with it through their current and past work. In this phase, individual, non-structured conversations with 22 experts took place, ranging from systems (thinking) scientists to somatic work and indigenous healing practitioners. Moreover, two co-creation sessions (offline and online) were held with network partners who exchanged their viewpoints on dis-/re-connection based on their different backgrounds and expertise. Insights were gathered through messy/systems maps and then visualised through multi-hub and interview insight maps, which helped with identifying patterns and reoccurring themes. That constituted the identification of the main target audiences whom the work of this VC journey addresses.
The Elaborate phase covered ways of realising the intervention points in practice that allowed us to develop a “You & Me” approach. This approach inspired the introduction of more regenerative practices within higher education and finally the curriculum re-development project of GPCM, which ultimately also became the final product of the VC processes and of our learning journey.
In the final Evaluate phase, we mapped out and performed impact and outcome assessment of both the VC journey and the future processes it ignited, as well as its contribution to the SDGs and IDGs. Next to that, we sought feedback from our network and clients, through which the relevance of our work was confirmed.
To conclude, the 4E-Model emphasises the wickedness of the challenges students face and the interdisciplinary nature of the systems they ultimately become part of. Through applying the 4E-Model, students learn to understand and work with systems, design thinking, power of networks, and a shift from problem-solving to dancing with the system.
The following section elaborates how we carried out the 4E-Model in the value creation process.
Explore
Identified root causes
As a first step, an elaborate exploration of the challenge of disconnection and the mapping of its complexity was performed. Through this Exploration phase, we observed the patterns of modern and mostly Western societies, which we refer to as mainstream culture. This is characterised by separation and silo-thinking, increasingly distancing itself from a collectivist mindset towards a more individualistic and egocentric existence, showing a significant reduction of generative qualities of relating (Weig, 2021). Individuals from mainstream culture particularly stick to cognitive schemes and values of selfhood (Komatsu, Silova, & Rappleye, 2022), with their actions being influenced and controlled by motivators guided by the outside world, such as highly urbanized and consumerist lifestyle characterised by a disconnection from nature (Kesebir & Kesebir, 2017; Rizkallah, 2022). Social belongingness in modern society and within mainstream culture is characterized by being deeply rooted in a narrative and culture of consumption and isolation where value is determined by material possessions, status, and lifestyle (Ives et al., 2018). Subsequently, the issues we have attempted to address concerning the challenge of disconnection stem from human egocentricity, self-isolation, and lack of empathy for others and nature, resulting in unsustainable practices such as destructive social and environmental behaviours.
Moreover, throughout our journey, we have developed a deeper understanding of the challenge and have discovered more root causes of disconnection, some of which being the lack of diverse or indigenous points of view in everyday life as well as decision-making processes, and the prevalence of mainstream culture over regenerative practices (Wahl, 2016; Wahl, 2019). For instance, while material wealth and economic prosperity have grown with industrial civilization, value-based, and ethical behaviour seemed to have diminished, leading to a “crisis of faith”, “moral slippage”, and “loss of value” (The Scientific World, 2021, Modern Lifestyle and Health section, para. 12). With this value shift, indigenous and traditional ecological knowledge, such as respect for planetary boundaries and environmental care that have been seen as an act of self-care (Sutoris, 2021) are now increasingly neglected. While mainstream cultures represent the concept of selfhood as such (Komatsu, Silova, & Rappleye, 2022), regenerative cultures emphasise interconnectedness, conscious thriving for a healthy planet and life where sustainability is first and foremost the most relevant in achieving systematic health and resilience (Wahl, 2016; Wahl, 2019). Within regenerative cultures, humans are viewed as a beneficial key stone species preserving inhabited ecosystems rather than partaking in extraction and degeneration of ecosystems and the planetary biosphere (Resilience, 2021). Ultimately, regenerative cultures embody avoiding harmful influences and promoting positive impacts on environmental and human health, by introducing a new way of relating to oneself, others and all nuances of life (Wahl, 2019). However, societal prejudices against regenerative practices and a lack of awareness and understanding of unconventional or alternative ways of living and thinking have presented as major barriers for adopting more regenerative practices (Energy For Living, 2019; Goeckeritz, 2020; Holmgren, 2011; McKenna, 1993; Plotkin, 2007; Resilience, 2021; Tucker & Grim, n.d., Wahl, 2016; Wahl, 2019). As noted by one of our network partners:
“The Western culture, particularly patriarchal Western culture, has tended to emphasize strident individualism and self-righteous independence. And the result has been hyper-competition and disconnection.” (A. Laszlo, personal communication, November 16, 2022)
To further parse the identified root causes of the issues of disconnection, we created a hierarchy of Dynamics of Change (see Figure 2). As we learned in our engagement with a variety of network partners, some of the reasons for cultural disconnection can be traced back to psychological processes that form the basis for our beliefs and values, ultimately triggering our behavioural patterns and actions. Some network partners have pointed out that humans are deeply controlled by signals and habits that are mainly rooted in inter-generational, collective traumatic experiences that can lead to stagnant cognitive and behavioural schemes. Nonetheless, experts suggest that humans cannot disconnect from the SON, as “the very idea of disconnection in itself is an illusion” (M. Nelson, personal communication, November 16, 2022). The greatest challenge therefore was to identify the underlying values which have an impact on human beliefs and behaviour and to address those through practices of self-exploration and alignment with the natural environment. After further exploration of the idea, however, it became evident that the need for a holistic understanding of engagement and interconnectedness within systems and our minds is crucial. Hence, inspired by an exchange with a network partner, the Dynamics of Change Framework has been updated accordingly, with the shift of focus from an academic classification of the matter towards an emphasis on its interdisciplinarity (see Figure 2a).
Figure 2
Dynamics of Change (original).
Figure 2a
Dynamics of Change 2.0.
“As soon as you start making a structure, also with volumes and hierarchy, you pretend to know, but truly you do not know.” (M. Donker, personal communication, November 16, 2022)
As a result of the Exploring phase, we saw an urgent need for a wider individual and ecological consciousness and meaningful re-embodiment of increasingly digitalised cultural communities. This brought us to the question: How can we, as a modern society, reconnect to nature, others and ourselves again to be able to deal with the current social and environmental challenges of our time?
Intervention points
The insights gathered within the Exploring phase also laid the groundwork to find possible intervention points to address the issue. Such points describe the spaces in the system where a targeted intervention might successfully disrupt its operation and create possibilities for change. Understanding these various points allows organisers to create a plan that identifies the optimum places to intervene with the upmost impact (Reinsborough & Canning, 2017).
Means for moving towards more regenerative cultures emerged through research conducted in the Exploring phase (see above, e.g., Energy For Living, 2019; Goeckeritz, 2020; Holmgren, 2011; McKenna, 1993; Plotkin, 2007; Resilience, 2021; Tucker & Grim, n.d., Wahl, 2016; Wahl, 2019) and conversations with network partners. The topics explored included embodiment, breathwork, deep ecology, spiritual intelligence, indigenous wisdom, thrivability, systems thinking, psychology, and alternative healing. This allowed us to see the interconnectedness of the matters and realise the potential for reconnecting modern science and mainstream society with traditional, indigenous views and regenerative practices. The interests on this journey have been diverging from getting insights into human psychology and neuroscience to shamanism, spirituality, and indigenous wisdom. The latter three spark intense debate, more criticism, and scepticism in academia and mainstream society, in general.
An important part of the process of identifying the right and most impactful intervention points was transferring predominant themes and aspects of the library research and co-creation sessions into feedback loops. In this context, feedback loops refer to reoccurring dynamics and patterns which reinforce themselves, leading to iterating results (see Figure 3). Several thematical feedback loops have been created in this regard, focused on topics such as consumptive behaviour, community belongingness, technological dependency, and societal demands.
Figure 3
Feedback Loop.
The most elaborate and representative feedback loop was concerned with the interaction of (intergenerational) trauma resulting in either positive or negative feedback loops (see Figure 4). Especially interesting in this context was the emphasis on both strongly negative or positive connotated experiences, which can either create an openness for change in individuals, and increase consciousness and awareness, or lead to negative feedback loops, such as addictive behaviour, resistance and disconnection. Physical, mental and spiritual experiences play a massive role in such a transition and are proven to trigger feelings such as liberation, grounding to self and reconnecting to nature, as well as a stronger feeling of connection to others. However, excessive exposure to new experiences may lead to trauma, which generates greater resistance to change in the future. Addressing the trauma over time could lead to a more profound cognitive shift, changing people’s core while in the most vulnerable state. Such intervention can lead to a greater sense of belongingness, an increased level of consciousness, and ultimately reconnection. Hence the focus of our work emerged to address this cycle of creating experiences that lead to an increased openness for change, and ultimately reconnection on multiple levels.
Figure 4
Network Sectors.
Engage
Engaged networks
The Engaging Phase involved working on increasingly connecting and interacting with the networks affected by the issue of disconnection who, at the same time, serve as crucial actors in initiating systems change. VC emphasises that interaction with network partners is always a symbiotic process of sharing and exploring the issues together. Hence, we do not refer to these moments as interviews, but rather conversations.
The networks identified and engaged with in the VC process were classified as: Futurists, Healthcare Sector, Business Sector, Outdoor Enthusiasts, Indigenous Communities and Individuals, as well as Behavioural Scientists (see Figure 4). The engagement was further expanded to networks of Education/Academia, Ecology/Eco-Social Design, Performing Arts, Spirituality/Healing, and Yoga/Bodywork.
Individuals representing some of those networks were consulted to create a more holistic approach on the spectrum of both mainstream and regenerative cultures. Initially, the partners were approached separately, where insights, opinions, and aspirations about the future of reconnection work have been shared. During the conversations, we explored what disconnection meant for our partners and the systems they work with. The individuals were then brought together in groups with the aim of forming new and different areas for interconnections between businesses, entrepreneurs, and individuals to both spread their work, experience, and expertise in their disciplines, as well as gain insight from varying opinions. It was crucial to ensure that different networks were present in each session, which would then lead to stimulating exchanges and exploration of the challenge of reconnection from a variety of perspectives. In this regard, co-creation sessions, both online and offline, had been set up to engage and interact with the various actors. A strong emphasis in those co-creation sessions was made to provide a space for diverse perspectives to be heard and to tap into creative ways of interweaving and connecting those representative societal groups.
In the evaluation of co-creation sessions, some participants indeed pointed out being surprised by the realisation that people from diverse environments and backgrounds have similar goals and hopes for the future in the context of reconnection to SON. The participants were encouraged to learn from each other’s perspectives and adopt new behaviours in their private and professional lives.
On the one hand, regarding the core idea of interaction with the networks and the value created for them, we wanted to emphasise and facilitate the implementation of reconnecting and regenerative practices to create new dynamics, incentives, and a shift in narratives that bring about change not only on an individual level but also on a larger societal and environmental level. On the other hand, we also wanted to offer indigenous communities, spiritual healers, as well as embodiment facilitators, specialists, and teachers a greater and different platform to operate and spread their valuable insights, knowledge, and expertise. That also includes adapting their practices to different contexts while keeping their core values and intentions.
Target groups
As previously mentioned, within modern society, we have identified two broad yet distinct groups: regenerative and mainstream culture. Throughout our work, however, our perspective shifted from two distinctive groups into a spectrum that is constantly in motion. The spectrum represents a variety of nuances in how people perceive one another, live together, and value each other. We saw that clearly during an interaction between our different network partners. Those whom we have strictly allocated to one group or the other showed a surprising and most importantly genuine degree of interest and openness towards the ideas presented by the opposite group. Inspired by the exchange, some individuals clearly expressed their willingness to adopt unfamiliar practices, both in their personal and professional lives. Resulting from this insight, two ways to approach and impact the two groups/cultures (see Figures 5 and 5a below) became evident.
Figure 5
Society Spectrum Approach 1.
Figure 5a
Society Spectrum Approach 2.
The first approach (see Figure 5) targeted society from a generic level, inducing changes subconsciously by subtly introducing sustainable policies and practices as the new standard without emphasising its regenerative benefits. In this way, a broad spectrum of society, including both mainstream and regenerative cultures, could benefit from regenerative practices without experiencing possible aversion towards or polarisation caused by sustainability-related issues. However, change would remain on a surface level, dependent on external motivators. The second approach (see Figure 5a) aimed to engage society on an individual level, more specifically individuals who already have contact or interaction points with some form of reconnection. Targeting the individuals’ intrinsic motivation possibly enables profound changes in values, beliefs, and ways of thinking, influencing change on neurological and psychological levels resulting in more holistic and long-lasting change. Inducing dynamics of deeper change to those individuals and creating a system of shared beliefs could result in a depolarisation of the two groups hence a foundation for greater societal change.
Elaborate
To address the deep-level change of ideology and behaviours (for both individuals and networks), we have developed the “You & Me” approach, which emphasises the need to focus on individuals, who would then become advocates of change in the future, radiating positive change and inspiring others with their actions. Through the “You & Me” approach, practitioners can facilitate spaces for various regenerative practices (e.g., co-creation sessions) to address the prevailing need in understanding and developing people’s perspectives towards reconnection to SON. The “You & Me” approach further emphasises the relevance of concentrating on smaller social groups and networks who are already connected with regeneration and sustainable movements to some extent. The GPCM community is a perfect example of such a network, as it is focused on both sustainability and project management, bridging both mainstream and regenerative cultures. Individuals who are part of this network are all to an extent familiar with the idea of reconnection to SON, which makes it suitable for an intervention by using the “You & Me” approach.
To integrate the approach in practice and establish its relevance, we have attempted to integrate more regenerative practices into the mainstream higher educational systems, with the hope of initiating both personal and systemic-level changes. This paved the way for laying the foundation for our final value product: an extension of the work from VC into the Managing Projects for Sustainable Development (MPSD) semester. MPSD enables students to work in multidisciplinary teams on a real-world complex project assignment for an external client abroad or within the Netherlands. The project assignment relates to one or more of the SDGs with emphasis on skills beyond traditional project management, such as leadership, collaboration, critical thinking, problem solving, and creativity (WUAS, 2024). With this, we initiated a collaboration between our student team and professors of our faculty on re-developing the GPCM curriculum in favour of more holistic and regenerative methods. The objective is to implement the “You & Me” approach by pro-actively radiating change into our immediate environment, striving for a deep-level change within our own community, and disrupting the hierarchical system prevalent in mainstream education by exercising agency over not just our own future at GPCM, but that of the whole learning community.
In considering the implementation of the “You & Me” approach or other similar frameworks, it is of upmost importance to understand the network in terms of their view of reconnection to SON and possible unspoken differences or conflicts related to it. It is also necessary to establish the goal of the intervention and the desired impact it will have on the network. Moreover, there is a need to apply the approach in smaller groups where strong interpersonal connections are possible.
Evaluate
Product value & relevance
The aim of the MPSD semester is to expose project management into an intercultural setting, and informing project deliverables through interdisciplinary research, both of which provide a valuable opportunity to bring narratives, other than western ones, into the discourse. Within that work we aimed to integrate more regenerative practices into academia by exposing students and professors to previously undiscovered ways of experiencing education, and encouraging shifts form rational thinking to intuition and presenting. In that way, we could ensure that those individuals feel more empowered to listen to themselves more closely, become more connected with others, and find their purpose in a wider variety of directions of sustainability, thus enhancing thrivability as change agents for the 21st century.
We saw the continuation of this project as an outstanding opportunity both for ourselves, GPCM staff, our existing and future network of partners and mentors, as well as the whole GPCM community, since it would allow us to address the questions, we have raised prior on this journey and transform them into something tangible and practical. We saw such collaboration as an inspiring example of the balance of power and exchange between the students and decision-makers of GPCM. This will allow students to take ownership of their own education. With our work, we aimed to introduce a new, more holistic way of thinking, give students the freedom to go beyond the traditional sustainability framework and encourage them to explore more diverse practices in the context of project management and change agency. Regardless of the outcomes of either VC or MPSD we aimed to raise awareness among staff and students about the tremendous value of spirituality and regenerative practices in our lives, providing a space for discussion and action on the matter.
The VC journey has taught us the colossal power of networks, where we witnessed moments of aspiring and meaningful cross-disciplinary interactions, which fed into this project as well as the work of our partners. By providing our network partners with necessary resources, we encouraged them to stay connected and allow future collaborations to emerge.
Connection to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
Our VC and MPSD journeys and their outcomes contributed majorly to five different goals of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with specific indicators being addressed directly (Figure 6).
Figure 6
Addressed SDGs and indicators.
Inner Development Goals (IDGs)
Considering the intertwinement of the SDG agenda and the challenge of reconnection, it is needed to touch upon the IDGs as this emerging framework values skills and qualities that we have been missing in the SDGs (Inner Development Goals, n.d.; Transition Makers Toolbox, 2023). The IDG framework emphasizes the cultivation of inner and personal capacities, such as self-awareness, empathy, and emotional intelligence while promoting holistic development for leadership, personal growth and collective well-being, all of which are vital for effectively addressing global challenges. The IDG framework distinguishes five categories of transformational skills: Being (relationship with self), Thinking (cognitive skills), Relating (interpersonal skills), Collaborating (social and teamwork skills), and Acting (driving change through commitment and integrity) (Inner Development Goals, n.d.).
We believe that developing these skills in harmony with reconnection to SON has great potential to foster change in academic and institutional settings. Consequently, all five IDGs have been addressed within our VC journey, influencing our individual and team processes, as well as affecting the well-being and work of our environment.
Personal reflection
Overall, Value Creators has been an outstanding journey for us as a team, as students and professionals, but most especially as human beings. However, throughout the journey, we have experienced certain limitations imposed by academia and criteria requirements. Anything that cannot be measured, clearly documented or proven is not recognized as a reliable source within academia. However, especially concerning the challenge of reconnection to SON a multitude of practices and (trans-)generational knowledge becomes relevant which is often not documented or measured in ways that adhere to or fulfil Western academic criteria. This is why other bodies of knowledge became increasingly relevant in the VC process. For instance, embodied practices, attending conferences, workshops, and seminars, engaging in (non-structured) conversations, and learning from (non-academic) books and practitioners of various kinds, such as somatic work, plant-wisdom or mindfulness, helped to diversify our pool of expertise and perspectives. A combination of both academic and other resources then facilitated a holistic and inclusive approach to knowledge generation and value creation, therefore strengthening our engagement with the challenge. The VC process showcased that the academic perspective does not have the monopoly in shedding light to the topic of reconnection to SON. Ultimately, we have established that for systems to change innately, there needs to be a diversification of voices in the debate.
Despite difficulties, we have managed to gain incredible insights on the challenge of reconnection to SON. Initially, we all came into this work with a set of personal beliefs and vision for a better future, which expanded exponentially throughout the VC process. We have experienced tremendous personal growth in terms of our cognitive and beyond-cognitive development. We express gratitude for having an opportunity to do so in an academic context. Through the MPSD semester, we have ensured the accessibility of this knowledge to other students, so that those who come after us could experience their study as a space of holistic and multi-dimensional growth and development.
Notes
[1] GPCM is an international, residential four-year BBA program. The program gives high priority and focus to sustainable development. The program is characterised by its small and intensive setting, with a small community and intimate staff-student relationships as well as project work with real-life clients from Year 1 onwards. The first two years form the foundation for project and business management, whereas the last two years are characterized by learning beyond the classroom with four different modules, including two minors, a free choice or study abroad semester and the final internship semester (WUAS, 2024). The two minors of the program, Value Creators (VC) and Managing Projects for Sustainable Development (MPSD) formed the context of the challenge illustrated in this essay.
Acknowledgements
We would like to extend our sincere gratitude to everyone who contributed to the successful completion of this team project. First and foremost, we would like to thank our team members, Luisa Roerich, Jonas Kaffka, and Luuk Reurink, for their unwavering commitment, expertise and vision, which we have shaped and shared together during our VC and MPSD semesters. We would also like to express our sincere gratitude to María García Alvarez, our teacher and coach, for her guidance, insightful feedback, and support throughout our VC journey. We are immensely thankful to all our network partners, without whom this work would not have been possible, for their constructive discussions and encouragement. Finally, we would also like to express our appreciation to the Glocality Team for supporting us in writing this essay.
For more information on our Value Creators team’s journey and contact details, see our blog entry via https://www.valuecreators-whc.com/post/finding-space-for-reconnection-in-a-mainstream-society.
If you are interested in learning more about the concept of Value Creators, visit https://www.valuecreators-whc.com for more information.
If you are interested in learning more about the Managing Projects for Sustainable Development, send a message to the MPSD Coordinator, email: whc-mpsd@windesheim.nl.
Competing Interests
The authors have no competing interests to declare.