World Academy of Art & Science

I observe the ongoing discussion with great interest. The core element of WAAS mission could be to develop a new functionalism for the governance of the World. The topics which are touched are all excellent and should be condensed to five points as

1. Political collaboration (including human rights and responsibilities, global justice)

2. Economy based to the experiences of the last month, there is a lot to do.

3. Security in all forms

4. Environment

5. Ecumenism in the cultures including interreligious dialogues and culture.

May I propose a short mission statement for WAAS as follows:

"Role of WAAS in promoting a smooth transition into a knowledge based, sustainable, prosperous and peaceful global society of the 21st century".

I'm  interested in the proposal made by John Allen. I think that for waas it would be difficult to  make new and interesting contributions  to such fields on global policy as environment,gendre equality,discrimination betwen those who have and those who have not etc..; all these items have nurished hundreds of books and meetings, originated specialized organizations  and associations of "experts", political meetings etc.

For this reasons I believe that debates such as the proposed Cutting edge ,science, avangarde and creative history might be more congenial to waas mandate. When I mention a new Humanism I have in mind the beginning of Renaissance with people like  Leonardo able to give the same considaration to engeenering, science ,art an technological creativity. Or Giovanni Battista Alberti scientist,artist, economist and entrepreneur. They were all humanists at the time in wich science, technology, economics and politics ( Macchiavelli) were all interlelated. Of course we are no Leonardos or Albertis but waas could give us the oportunity ,with its large costuency to debate such important subjects.

I agree with Augusto Forti’s ‘international think tank for a new humanism’; and Sesh Velamoor’s ‘need to clarify mission in clear, succinct fashion;

On Arthur Cordell’s remarks, I think the unique factor in WAAS is the planet-wide association on an equal basis of artists and scientists. I think strengthening this interaction between artists and scientists (values and facts, experiencements and experiments), finding the right form to continue its creative growth for the next crucial century, would make a good twenty-five year planetary scale project for the Academy. Objective: a  world community of interacting excellent artists and scientists. Increasing and deepening this interaction would in itself bring many positive changes in the world.

For example, sponsoring a series of annual conferences (and/or long-running e-forums) to accelerate this action: some might be:
Art, Evolution, and History

Cutting Edge Science, Avant-Garde Art, and Creative History

Images/Symbols, Nerves, and Molecules of Emotion

Paleontology, Archeology, and Architecture

Music, Time, and Astronomy

All the best on your stirring things up. Potentialities: immense.

Why do we need a Mission Statement at all? We need a Mission Statement to --

• Define the basic purpose of the organization so that we are sure we agree on what we are trying to accomplish
• Inspire the organization to achieve a meaningful purpose beyond the honoring of its distinguished Fellows and perpetuation of its own existence.
• Guide us in making crucial strategic decisions that will decide the future of the organization, such as criteria for membership, types and criteria for programs, etc.
• Guide us in the formulation of specific goals, objectives, strategies and plans for execution
• Communicate to prospective and new members what the organization stands for and is trying to achieve
• Communicate to the general public who and what we are and what our broadest objectives are

A Mission Statement can be defined as a broad statement of purpose that serves as a useful guide to the formulation of strategic decisions and to communicate the organization's purpose to the general public.

Mission vs. Vision: A Mission Statement is often usefully distinguished from a Vision Statement. A Vision Statement is a idealistic statement of what the organization seeks to become and/or achieve in the relatively distant future. A Mission Statement more specifically desribes what we are and what our purpose is in somewhat more pragmatic terms as a bridge between the Vision and shorter term goals and objectives. Regardless whether we have two separate statements or one, in combination they should convey the ideals and inspiration that have given rise to WAAS and which it aspires to promote and realize. Goals and Objectives usually relate to a specific period of time, e.g. 1-5 years. Goals are broader and longer term, objectives more specific and near term.

Preamble: To be effective, a Mission Statement should either clearly imply or specifically include as a preamble a statement of the context, challenges or opportunities that are the rationale for the Mission. In a company, this purpose is largely implied, because it is confined to the field of profit-making business. Our task is more complex because there may be many different views on why an organization such as the Academy needs to exist, what it should seek to achieve and through what broad means. Therefore, I believe WAAS needs a preamble to place the mission in clear perspective.

Questions WAAS Mission Statement should answer:

1. Who are we? What characteristics define our organization and membership and make us similar or different from other organizations?

2. What business are we in? Are we a group of intellectuals who come together out of professional or personal interest to foster our own individual fields of work or a group which sees a common need and shares a common aspiration to cooperate and work together to address larger social issues stated or implied in the preamble?

3. What is our main product or service? In broad terms, what do we have to offer to the world? Specific concrete activities such as research, education, conferences, seminars, publications? Or is our real product something more abstract -- generation of new ideas and integrated perspectives that changes the way people think by bridging the gaps between fragmented fields of knowledge and gives rise to truer, more ethical and effective conceptions, diagnosis of social problems, solutions, public awareness, and policy decisions?

4. What are we trying to accomplish? -- to promote generation of knowledge? exchange of knowledge between individuals or between disciplines? generate new and better ideas that can impact on society? disseminate ideas and take other steps to actually effectuate social change? etc.

5. What do we stand for? What are the core ideals or values we seek to promote or uphold? The answer may form part of a mission or separate vision statement, but is particularly important an organization such as WAAS. Is the ideal we pursue idealistic or practical? moral and ethical or mental and intellectual? the furtherance of science and techcnology for their own sake or for their potential contribution to the fulfillment of human aspirations for a better world and better life?

Once defined, the Mission Statement will serve as a basis for formulating 3-5 year goals, annual objectives, strategies, program criteria and specific plans of action. 

WAAS is nearing its 60th anniversary. The world is very different now then it was when the Academy was founded, but the basic underlying need for an organization like WAAS remains remarkably real and urgent. Our founders were visionaries. Perhaps the time has now come when we can recast their vision into contemporary terms and make the kind of impact on the world that they aspired for when they created the Academy.

It appears to me from the posts to date that:

1.  We are deeply committed to making a differnce to the truly strategic issues of the 21st Century.

2.  We do not yet have a basic agreement on the question, "What is a mission statement?" "What kinds of things does it include and exclude?" "How does it differ from "Goals", "Vision statements",  "strastegic intentions", etc.

Therefore, let me say that to me a "mission" statment is a summary statement that captures and crystalizes the kinds of differences that our work in the world will make over a fairly long time; at least a generation or two.  In the language of the '60s it answers the question, "What are most deeply and truly about regradless of the immediate project or activity in which we are engaged?"  

I do not insist that we agree on my understanding of a mission statement.  I do recommend that those running the strategic planning process agree on what a mission statement is and is not and tell us, so we know at what kind of target we are aiming.  

The image of our "mission" that come to me from our history and the current discussion runs something like this:  (I am not wedded to the langauge.)

The mission of WAAS is "to develop and nurture the knowledge and ways of knowing that we require as a 200,000 year old and newly-powerful species in order to survive and possibly thrive in the emerging conditions and requiremnts of the 21st Century."

I recognize that such a statment does not define the Goals we should pursue over the next few years or the kind of projects in which we should engage.  In my view, no well-fromed mision statment does that.  However, it does specify the particular contribution of WAAS to any goal we set or project we undertake.

Ruben

I read with considerable interest and appreciation the current efforts to clarify the mission statement. It struck me that Garry Jacobs draft comes close to what I think the mission of the Academy is or should be. Below I attempt to recast some of these ideas in a way that I think may make for a tighter fit in terms of the objectives of the founders namely, that the activities of the Academy focus distinctively on the social consequences and the policy implications of knowledge. The proposals do not address the question and insight implicated in the terms policy implications. Some concerns stress that there is a clear divide between the production and distribution of knowledge and the specific issue of policy making. Here I think the sense is that policy is institutionally a matter of politics at different levels of global governance. There is another possible take on this. This may be that in the process of generating and integrating knowledge we should be aware that this process itself generates knowledge, which implicates policy. This implicates the notion of intellectual and scientific responsibility for the uses to which knowledge is put and requires that science, the humanities and even the arts be more explicitly focused on the implications for scientific, humanistic and even artistic appreciation of the interface of policy and social consequences triggered by intellectual activity. The question then is, can the role of a scientist, humanist or an artist be blind to the issue of policy implications in the execution of their roles in the institutions specialized to enhancing the knowledge base of society?

The fact that the founders thought that a policy sensitivity or awareness is critical to the mission of the Academy therefore suggests that a particular focus of collaboration should be the way in which knowledge is mapped onto policy and decision-making. This also requires that we understand the nature of policy and decision-making, its architecture and the way in which policy may in fact determine research agendas and matters of global salience. There is a lacuna in the way in which our discourse approaches this issue. Possibly, it requires us to be more refined about the nature and functions of decision in the process of influencing policy. For example, a former President of the Academy (Harold D. Lasswell) spent a lifetime on unpacking the architecture and functions of decision-making. This is useful not simply for the institutions of politics or law, but also for scientists, specialists in the humanities and the arts to more carefully understand the policy implications of their work. Thus, the functions of decision-making include intelligence, prescription, promotion, invocation, application, termination and appraisal.

The critical question is if we analogize the knowledge base to the intelligence function of decision-making, then it is obvious that we must ask discriminating questions about the control and uses of such knowledge or at least the parts of that knowledge that have important social consequences and implicate policy. This implicates a better understanding of communications theory about who is authorized or mandated to communicate what, about what, to whom, with what results, and effects. Also implicit in this is the notion of intellectual responsibility for the scope and character of networking and disseminating intelligence. It will be obvious that the nature of the knowledge generated will have an impact on other decision functions implicating the prescribing of regulatory rules or norms, and these may be outcomes of both private and public decision-making. In addition, there would be the promotion function, which seems to have moved members of the Academy in terms of promoting its scientific intelligence capacity. There are other aspects of policy implicated in the functions of decision-making I have listed above.

The reference to policy implications and social consequences also implicates a level of self-appraisal about the scope of scientific humanistic and artistic responsibility and the tacit prescriptions that should inform this level of responsibility. In this short statement, I have not referred to the broader impact of policy in terms of national and global reach. However, it seems to me that the self-awareness of these challenges for science and the arts are an important starting point for the development of a mission statement and for the normative guidance, it might provide for the particular initiatives that have emerged as recommendations for focus and action.

 There are at least three central issues of global concern

1. The dangers of global pollution and climate change.
2. The dangers of nuclear and biological war and terrorism
3. The damage of mass unemployment and failures of economic and financial coordination.

The Academy should try to be a moral and scientific force on all three.

I would add only 4 words (in green) to the vision statement offered anonomously on July 1st.

A Vision and Mission for The World Academy of Art and Science 

Over the next five to ten years, our vision for the World Academy of Art and Science is to become widely recognized in the world by being seen as a preferred global platform where thinkers and organizations from all regions can collaborate effectively to create and offer meaningful innovative responses to the greatest challenges facing humankind. 

Our work will make significant positive differences, have lasting impacts, and attract participants of global caliber and potential in every arena of our focus.

This vision will be the chief criterion guiding the World Academy as seeks its Fellows, facilitates and assesses their work, arranges collaborations, and organizes its activities and operations.

While our vision will not be preemptive of other activities and goals of the World Academy, it will always be our first priority in making every decision in planning, managing, and funding its activities.

July 13, 2009

I am interested in taking these subjects through a series of conferences at the great universities of the world testing ideas and disciplines around serving a dominance model or liberation.

Jonathan Grannoff

Dear participants in this debate, and other Members,

Although I am following this discussion from the beginning I am participating for the first time today..During global (trans world !) economical crisis is of vital interest to discuss about the role of science in knowledge based society from all aspects. In developed countries ( Scandinavian, UK, Germany, Japan, USA , Korea and some others ) society in general ( scientists and inteligent politicians !) understand the role of excellent basic research and high education as crucial elements (= prerequisite ) for social and economical advances. However, this is not the case in poor countries in Africa, some Asian and Latin American countries, and in the majority of Eastern EU countries (EU-12 )! There are tremendous problems in all levels, which urgently need to be solved. Even in EU we face up the growing differences between EU-15 and EU-12 . As I understand there is the will among the members of the Academy to be pro-active. Therefore I support the idea of one or two areas of importance where we can act effectively . In this direction our Academy can play crucial role in the near future. Start with action ASAP.

Vito

June 12, 2009

Dear Fellows
        I have not joined this WAAS debate to date, but this recent exchange has drawn me in.  
        This organization (WAAS) obviously has tremendous intellectual resources, and if it so desired, could become a useful think tank, provided it raised money, developed appropriate political skills, and made enough connections. However, Augusto Forti has made a very good point: why does the world need yet another think tank? 
        If it is true that the original purpose of WAAS was not to achieve political influence, but rather to try to bridge the two cultures of academe, (which by now have probably become three), then I fully support the notion that we should stick to the pursuit of this very important goal, and expand our influence within academe, globally. This would be a very challenging objective in its own right, without trying to take on all the major issues confronting the G20, which seems almost what we are contemplating. 
        It was my understanding when I accepted to join that the WAAS was dedicated to an inclusive, cross-domain dialogue within academe on a number of issues that tap the wisdom of all three domains of academe: science, the humanities, and the social sciences. Have we, and have the executive and leadership of WAAS, given up on this? Or is this objective still in force, and still at the very heart of WAAS? 
        If it is still in force, there are many issues waiting for our attention, from our global educational objectives, to the uses of technology, to the definition of human dignity and human nature itself.
Best wishes,
Merlin 

July 10, 2009

I would add to this discussion something I proposed when I was on the Board of Trustees.  I think it may be useful as we consider future directions.

While all of the ideas advanced thus far contribute to and lay the basis for future activities, the current discussion provides an opportunity for Fellows to explicitly and formally begin a strategic discussion on our vision and goals, on our resources and assets....and how best to use them. What is the unique contribution we see WAAS making and how does the Board facilitate the process?

Looking forward to the continuing discussion

Arthur Cordell

July 10, 2009

it seems to me the great strength of waas is its members. they have a great wealth of intellect and experience in so many diverse fields of intellectual, scientific and human affairs to share with the world. yes i agree with joe and mike, the issues of datelines, focus and institutional support have to be addressed. but how? waas should not become another action agency or think tank. let waas advertise its willingness to be called upon by think tanks, universities, corporations and governments to contribute ideas and perspectives. groups of interested members can then be assembled to blitz an issue, any issue to turn knowledge into policy where ever it is relevant and required. to do this, waas should make available to potential partners its capabilities. waas may even go on a media blitz and let possible partners know the possible contributions waas can make to their agenda. waas can also make known its special areas ofpolicy formation it is interested in. this way,funding and time tables will be established with funding agencies and partner institutions.