\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/Which key-notes would you like to share with all of us?

Ornament and gesture are remaining fuzzy concepts from my perspective. I ask myself whether it would have been a good idea to define them. The fuzziness itself might be the appropriate (meta-)concept, since from the perspective of modern organization studies we can leave “sharp” management concepts aside. Management world is full of elaborated concepts that guide manager’s behaviors – in the more or less right direction. At least most management concepts lead into a short-term perspective and prefer short-term goal setting instead of sustainable value systems. So what is it that fuzziness enables? I just don’t know yet. On the one hand, the manager has to be clear and un-fuzzy to his employees. Otherwise they would not understand and not perform. And the manager has to be un-fuzzy to the superiors to not lose his job – who would accept a middle manager who is not able to give “clear answers” to “simple questions”? On the other hand, and on a meta level, managers as parasites are the most fuzziest persons ever. By naturally losing contact to the organizational operations themselves over time, managers have to maintain the illusion of productivity even if the organization is corrupt, disrupted or not really productive any more. So, a major note from the WOF for me is, that fuzziness itself is a model for the unproductive productivity.

\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/What is the relevance of WOF in your work? How do its aspects reflect in your current projects and how could you imagine integrating the questions WOF raised in future projects?

WOF, as my personal think tank, is helping me to identify moments of fuzziness; my personal ornament. And gesture might be the sensation of moments of fuzziness for example in the Fablab, in unusual teaching projects like DiBuDeCo, or uncommon communication settings like Crealab.