We know about Relationship Marketing
We are experts in loyalty and incentives · We like to create unique experiences
Information sessions Masters Marketing and Branding UPF-BSM Sign up!
The UPF-BSM marketing training opportunities will guide your professional growth.
Change, change, change? Change is the protagonist of the time that we have to live. It is a requirement for us, our knowledge, our companies, our way dubai phone number example of relating and learning, our way of governing ourselves. Are we in an Era of change or in a change of Era? What difference does it make, as long as the world revolves around change!
We are addicts and apostles of the exchange, the exchange, the barter, the barter, the move ?, and, with them, of the transience, the versatility, the variability, the eventuality of what until now has guided our behavior and our beliefs ; all of which is submerged in the black hole of transformation, metamorphosis? of change as the axis, in all its meanings and with an exhibition of synonyms.
The freshly painted change
We haven’t really discovered anything. Life and nature are built on the change imposed by the passage of time and the natural evolution of everything that is alive. The difference is that now change has been given a coat of paint so that it “sees” more, is progressive, versatile, and marks distances with the past and with immobility (“naturally” impossible, on the other hand), so that we must look to the future, to all the good that is to come (as long as we make a clean sweep of the above, of course), thus advancing a new Era that will emerge from the seeds of positive thinking, mindfulness, self-help and pulpits doctrinal popping up everywhere.
The change, however, as a vital philosophy and justification of social, economic and political theories has its risks, the result of the little consistency of some approaches. I read it recently: “we overestimate the change in the short term, we underestimate it in the long term, and we forget that the more accurate a prediction is, the more likely it is to fail.” The statement – with which I agree – perfectly illustrates that the problem does not come from the concept itself but from the use we make of it, urged as we are for immediate responses and to use change as a solvent for the old rather than as a binder of the new that comes day by day.
Innovation is an action of change that is a novelty. It is about adding value to an idea through creativity and looking for a profit. It is used to associate with improvement, progress …, although it also happens that novelties can cause dangerous transformations (transmute something into something else), when not definitely harmful. The term identifies, for example, one of the foundations of any productive advance worth its salt, but it also permeates territories such as politics, education and others, sometimes used as a synonym for “renewal”, although there is a nuance differential: innovating means substituting in order to improve; renovating aims for improvement, but not necessarily for replacement.
In line with the above, novolatry is, in the strict sense, the cult of the latest novelty, of what has just emerged, be it in the cultural, social, economic or spiritual sphere. The new, understood in this way, is, by definition, the good, what must be listened to and followed, simply because it is new. The term, by the way, was coined by the French philosopher and humanist Jacques Maritain.
New technologies have fueled the obsessive search for novelty. Now it is as simple as it is tempting to change information, friends, landscapes on which to imagine stories, your own and other people’s opinions.
If I do not understand or I do not like what (and who) surrounds me, Google and social networks immediately offer me alternatives wrapped in gift paper (understand: anonymity, lack of commitment, superficiality, wisdom in tutorial version …, to choose).
It is not, however, this obsession to turn the sock of our life, customs and knowledge that is worrying. Every era has had its eagerness and the pendulum has always taken the way back after leaving a trail of beneficial news. The problem arises when change is assumed as an obligation and its goodness acquires the status of an axiom, especially if it runs through territories as delicate as education.
Everything happens and everything is?
The philosopher Gregorio Luri published some time ago, on his blog El Café de Ocata, the list of his pedagogical convictions that, in the form of a warning, refers to whoever invites him to participate in certain related meetings. It is not wasted, so I will allow myself to select some such “convictions”.
I understand novolatry as a symptom of the decline of pedagogical discourse.
I do not believe that technologies (new or old) are anything other than anthropological prostheses that amplify, for better or for worse, what each one already is.
I am a firm – increasingly firm – defender of the weight of knowledge in the formation of a person.
I think the discourse on the so-called “21st century competitions” is an intellectual scam.
Recently I myself wrote about ” circular dubai phone number example intelligence “, daring to apply to knowledge and training the concept that is already spreading in economics (the so-called Circular Economy). “It is convenient to relearn what we already know,” he said, “to reuse what we know, renew what has already been overcome, repair accumulated errors, recycle our training and restore the value of our intelligence sometimes subjected to the sheer snobbery of modernity.”
For this reason, this interest in assigning all the pedagogical benefits to the latest imported from Silicon Valley or from Finnish schools should be passed through the sieve of a slow analysis, by adaptation to different circumstances and receptors and by a distant subsequent evaluation of the enthusiastic snobbery we like so much and, if that’s the case, don’t be ashamed to apply some “circular intelligence” in return.