This year, I made the decision of approaching future development of Perspective Mapper, for the most part, spontaneously.
In other words, I’ve surrendered most of my timelines for the project, replacing them simply with general areas of focus.
Why did I do this? Well, there are a whole host of reasons:
- Finding new approaches to human conflict is still, as of yet, largely unexplored territory. It’s hard to plan in advance what that looks like.
- Creativity needs flexible space and time to arise.
- There is an artificial layer of ‘tension’ introduced from a timeline.
- There is profound clarity that comes from tapping into the wisdom of the moment.
- Every task for this project has its own inherent value. We hope to not be a means-to-an-end.
- It’s difficult to gauge how people react to conflict, and we aren’t interested in persuading people to respond in a ‘certain’ way.
- Timelines can inhibit transparency.
- Timelines can inhibit flexibility.
- Timelines can constrain organic growth.
- Timelines can encourage taking shortcuts.
- Timelines can increase procrastination, by dismissing the present moment.
There are many benefits of a clear project timeline and sequence for many projects. It can provide direction, coordination, accountability, and tangible results. However, for Perspective Mapper, having a timeline is not aligned with the project’s outlook.
Perspective Mapper continues to maintain a robust vision, mission and directive. Also, it is grounded on meditation, and insight that stems from meditation. That isn’t changing — in fact, it is perhaps sharper than its ever been. However, the reliance on a timeline for the reasons mentioned above, with the notable exception being specific client requirements.
Ranjeeth Thunga
rkt@perspectivemapper.com