Economic Design Thinking

Economic Design Thinking [Type text] Page 1

A Mindset to Create Heaven on Earth
Paul Umbach
AMDP Individual Project – July 5, 2016
Concept Overview
Economic Design Thinking is a mindset to make the impossible possible. This mindset shift can
dramatically accelerate the development of projects having the most benefits to
neighborhoods, cities, metro regions and entire societies. Our current collective mentality
focused on short‐term economic return on investment is a fundamental design flaw in moving
development projects with high social value from idea to action to impact. Yes, with new
thinking we can have heaven on earth.
So what is Economic Design Thinking?  It’s thinking in a different way about economic solutions
at the intersection of collaboration and creativity.

This change in thinking can drive funding to high social value projects like education and
wellness that have long‐term return on investment to society.  Applications of this approach


include innovations to lower the cost of public infrastructure, encourage public and private
collaborations resulting in greater value and lasting impacts as well as implement urban design
practices and public policy transformations that encourage cost savings and economic vitality.
This thinking also lives at the individual level, as people choose to spend money with locally
owned businesses, which in turn dramatically increases both economic and societal health.
Economic Design Thinking can be seen in every community including mine. Pittsburgh’s free
subway system, buy‐fresh local food movement, urban bike transit program, the Pittsburgh
Promise (where high school graduates from the public school system receive a free college
education), and PNC’s carbon neutral skyscraper are only a few examples.  With the highest
quality of life of any city in the United States and among the highest quality of life of any city in
the world, my community is a living laboratory on thinking differently about economic and
societal impacts.

During my year of study at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design I discovered that a
fundamental mentality shift in economic thinking is already happening in both my Pittsburgh
community and throughout the world.  An important shift in the mindset of developers from
viewing municipal requirements for open space, affordable housing and contributions to social
services infrastructure as only costs; to a broader understanding that these mandates represent
an investment in their projects and their community at large.  My mostly private real estate
oriented classmates from fifteen countries became my first converts to economic design as
being just as important as physical design, social design, and political design in creating
successful projects.
My project team “Team Z” anchored our project’s business model around an innovative
Societal Impact Model. Although we didn’t win any of the prizes, my team which included
members from England, India, Turkey, and the United States believed deeply that a percentage
of traditional economic ROI must be shared with society to have lasting impact.


My individual project, which grew out of our Team Z experience, is to brand and provide a tool
kit for the Economic Design Thinking movement. The result of this movement is to promote
innovative societal impact approaches to advance healthy people, healthy communities, and
healthy economies worldwide. This thinking has the power to dramatically improve economic
and social conditions at the neighborhood, city, regional, national and societal levels.
So why promote an economic design movement if we already know the needs, how to
measurably improve just about every societal issue and how to unleash funding? Consider the
recent announcement by the City of Philadelphia to impose a tax on soda to fund Pre‐K
education. While people are heavily divided on this approach, just about everyone agrees on
the logic of moving dollars from a social cost (childhood obesity) to social benefit (quality early
childhood education).  The issues preventing the embrace of societal economics are rooted in
fear of government control and perceived danger of having limits on individual choice.
Economic Design Thinking can free the perception of societal benefits as a cost imposed by
government rather than an investment with a positive return for everyone. The idea of
investing significant resources to fix societal issues requires a mentality to fix deeply‐rooted
issues in the first place.  Further, it can lead to a fundamental change in our collective mindset
about the benefits of solving these issues at their root and a radical change in our view that
money is a limitation. While programs developed in a fixed mentality, such as traditional public
housing, can take years or even decades to fund and implement and have marginal impacts, a
fresh outlook at the community level can occur in an instant and have dramatic lasting impacts.
My experience over the past 30 years as a community planning consultant demonstrates that
such fears are greatly diminished when government is no longer in the driver’s seat mandating
sin taxes, set asides, quotas and zoning requirements.  Public support grows dramatically when
representatives from broad‐based community collaborations develop and implement socially
beneficial programs.  The most successful projects have coalitions with representatives from
private, public and philanthropic sectors as well as persons directly impacted by the project.
An economic design movement driven by a global network of community based coalitions can
direct trillions of dollars toward projects that generate significantly more economic and societal
returns than traditional projects undertaken by public, private, or the non‐profit sectors
operating in a vacuum. Therefore, the power of Economic Design Thinking, often
conceptualized at the macro economic level, is activated at the community level. At this level a
simple mental design shift has the opportunity to most effectively produce happy, healthy, safe,
sustainable, and economically viable communities.


Economic Design Thinking forces the word impact to be the exclamation point in the process
flow:  Idea to Action to Impact!  Clearly the development and promotion of tools for measuring
of economic and societal impact is the key to moving ideas to action in every culture and every
geographic scale from neighborhood, city, metro region, state, nation, and world.
The magic of this mindset happens when existing financing mechanisms1
are supercharged with
trillions of dollars in accumulated wealth to create a mindset of “it’s possible” ‐‐ that education,
health, housing and economic development projects with high societal impact can happen at
the scale necessary for lasting impact.   Instead of federal or state level implementation (I call
this Dinosaur thinking), my concept shifts the scale of implementation to metro regions and
communities, where projects can be most effectively planned, implemented and evaluated (I
call this Cheetah thinking).


1
The developed world has three principal levers at their disposal to improve the quality of communities: 1) The Public Sector,
2) The Private Sector and 3) The Non‐Profit Sector (a wide range of quasi‐governmental authorities, faith based and secular
charitable organizations, foundations, and charitable trusts to name just a few).


Without a fresh societal benefit mindset and a new way to view return on investment, issues
such as providing high quality nutrition, healthcare and education for all children will continue
to be considered impossible, as the return on investment for these issues is too low for the
private sector and the price tag is too high for the public sector or the non‐profit sector acting
alone.  The key to success is to galvanize existing sectors and unlock the power of the world’s
accumulated wealth in order to solve the most impactful community challenges and to do this
at the geographic scale that builds the highest trust and accountability. Creating a new “it’s
possible” cheetah mindset can be accelerated from an understanding and application of
economic design thinking.
Since the early 1990s my firm Tripp Umbach2
has completed more than 1,000 community
engaged planning assignments where a diverse representation of community stakeholders
come together for the purpose of “collective dreaming” about solutions to solve community
needs.  My experience over the past 30 years shows that the “magic happens” when a simple
shift in mentality instantly connects purpose, place, and people making the impossible possible.
As a pioneer in the Healthy Community movement, our work in communities throughout the

2
www.trippumbach.com
Fight for closed
models
Rely on
“prehistoric”
funding sources
View all others as
competition
Keep programs in
separate facilities
Adjust quickly to
new funding
environment
Make fast
decisions
Conserve energy
Operate
efficiently


world has resulted in billions of dollars in societal cost savings, health status improvement and
economic advancement.  My project leverages my experience before and during my year at
Harvard resulting in the promotion of a bold mindset to create heaven on earth.

Understanding Societal Return on Investment
The first step in promoting an Economic Design Thinking movement is to instill a belief that
communities, metro regions and nations have more than enough money to do what it takes to
fix every issue, instead of the traditional mindset of inaction because of “limited” financial
resources. At the macro level, consider that the total wealth of the United States is
approximately $200 trillion, or $1.7 million per person. About 1% of our nation’s wealth or
approximately $2 trillion is held in charitable foundations, who distribute only $50 billion per
year to every conceivable societal cause. The practice among charitable foundations to
distribute roughly 2% of their assets after administrative overhead has become ingrained in our
collective thinking. Even the thought of spending a penny of the asset capital on charitable
missions would be considered an extreme breach of fiduciary responsibility.  Board members
and executives of these foundations, who typically come from the financial sector, view the
purpose of their charitable foundation as to support the foundation overhead and to pass along
a small percentage of excess earnings for its intended charitable mission.
With this traditional economic mindset, our society receives very limited impact from charitable
foundations.  Our current economic model has $50 billion annually distributed by charitable


foundations chasing about $1 trillion in estimated social costs for pressing social issues such as
education, housing and public health.  I am using rough numbers here for illustration as the cost
of these three issues may indeed be less than a trillion, especially if appropriate best practices
and outcome evaluation methods were followed by a coordinated national network of
community based coalitions.
Economic Design Thinking can instantly lead to multiple creative considerations for funding our
most pressing issues. For example, this new mindset can force the radical consideration of
spending most if not all of the capital locked up in charitable foundations on socially beneficial
projects.  This mindset movement already underway as The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation,
which includes $44 billion in assets from the Gates’ and Warren Buffet, plan to give all of the
money away within 20 years. Buffet plans on giving his money away even faster. If more
individuals adopt the radical Gates and Buffet mindset of distributing the corpus of charitable
foundations as well as their personal wealth on societal beneficial projects, a positive economic
tsunami could begin rolling across the United States.
Consider the impact if $1 trillion, which is one half of 1% of our nation’s wealth, was distributed
to our nation’s 100 largest cities over a ten year period.   The average city in the United States
would receive about $1 billion per year for ten years to be invested in programs that reach root
causes for the most pressing social challenges – education, housing, public health and economic
advancement.  Remember that this additional $1 billion per city per year for 10 years would be
in addition to billions already invested by government, non‐profits, and the private sector.
Spending only a droplet of our nation’s total wealth on key societal issues would result in
trillions of dollars in additional economic benefits from a healthier and more educated
population, with $1 trillion still remaining in charitable foundations for additional investment.


.
Moving this model forward will require a dramatic shift in mindset, as having the best school in
the poorest neighborhood is considered both fiscally impossible and morally unfair to tax
payers who spend more in school taxes and expect more for their investment. A mentality shift
in the long‐term value of quality public education for all children is required for existing funding
sectors to have needed public support to work together to achieve the highest level of social
impact. This model saves billions of dollars in costs associated with the negative impacts of not
providing high quality education.
My firm recently entered into a consulting relationship with the Alliance on Excellent
Education3
who has been studying the economics associated raising high school graduation
rates with financial support from State Farm Insurance. High school drop outs cost US
taxpayers government approximately $350 billion in lost wages, taxable income, health, welfare
and incarceration costs. Economic Design Thinking that leads to investing of a few billion
dollars to raise the graduation rate from 85% to 95% would represent tremendous cost savings
to government and generate billions more in economic impact.  It is easy to see why the Bill &
Melinda Gates Foundation is committed to ensuring that all students in the United States have
the opportunity to receive a high‐quality education.


3
www.all4ed.org


Next Generation Economic Development Models
At the heart of Economic Design Thinking is a social impact diagram where the X axis is Societal
Impact and the Y axis is traditional financial return on investment. My model, which grew out of
our Team Z project illustrated below shows a breaking point where social impact cannot be
achieved by government, private enterprise or the non‐profit sector operating alone.  Economic
Design Thinking must “kick in” to make higher socially valuable projects possible, as by their
nature these projects have lower traditional financial return on investment.  My simple societal
impact model is presented as a starting point for fresh dialog by people throughout the world
who are working to make the impossible possible.

This model explains the present economic design of most every city, state, and developed
country on the planet.  Traditional fixed economic thinking, where return on investment is the
prime consideration has over the past 50 years led to a proliferation of hotels and big box
stores at interstate highway exists, while downtowns only a few miles away are devoid of
economic energy from the lack of lodging, retail, or restaurants. The absence of economic
energy in downtown areas is also directly related to societal costs for homelessness, under


employment, and substandard housing as well as a weak municipal tax base to pay the cost.
According to a University of Texas two‐year survey of homeless individuals, each person cost
the taxpayers $14,480 per year4
.  According to a report in the New England Journal of Medicine,
homeless people spent an average of four days longer per hospital visit than comparable non‐
homeless people. This extra cost of $2,414 per hospitalization, is attributable to homelessness.
The downward economic spiral in downtowns throughout the United States caused by highway
exit development, leads to billions of dollars in lower tax base to support public education,
public safety and wellness.  A new urban planning and municipal revenue model piloted in the
Charlotte, North Carolina region is helping communities avoid land use decisions that can be
costly in the long term. This model leads to decisions on density that will positively contribute
to the communities’ fiscal health5
. The tool assesses the costs and benefits of downtown
revitalization, versus suburban development, infrastructure upgrades, and community
investment, so that decision‐makers have access to the longer‐term impacts of various
development patterns on their revenue or expense streams. For example, the report found a
significant difference in tax revenue per acre produced by big box sites vs downtown
development sites.


4
www.endhomelessness.org
5
www.connectourfuture.org


Research completed by Todd Litman6
at the Victoria Transport Policy Institute working in
partnership with the London School of Economics, estimates that sprawl costs the American
economy more than $1 trillion annually, or more than $3,000 per capita, and that Americans
living in sprawled communities directly bear $625 billion in extra costs, and impose more than
$400 billion in additional external costs. Described more positively, smart growth policies can
provide large savings and benefits, including direct benefits to the people who choose to live in
more compact, multimodal communities, and indirect benefits to society overall.  For example,
Litman’s research shows that “Smart Growth” communities tend to have far lower traffic
fatality rates than sprawled communities. By increasing walking, smart growth also tends to
increase public fitness and health, which significantly reduces healthcare costs associated with
physical inactivity and obesity.
My research indicates that as monumental shift in mentality is indeed occurring throughout the
world and such a mindset is poised to dramatically impact the built environment in
communities for decades to come.  The movement of thought from non‐sustainable designs to
“smart growth” based on societal investment represents the most significant planning
paradigm since the introduction of the automobile more than a century ago.
Economic Design Thinking can be applied at virtually every geographic scale to turn ideas into
action into outcomes. Individuals can promote the thinking in their daily life as they make
choices about investment, companies can adopt Economic Design policies that focus corporate
endowments on social challenges. Economic Design Thinking lives at the intersection of
Economics, Community, and Design, three areas that until recently were more characterized by
misalignment and conflict. Working together represent a pathway to an economically and
physically sustainable planet.

6
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2015/06/01/urban‐sprawl‐costs‐the‐american‐economy‐more‐than‐1‐trillion‐
annually‐smart‐growth‐policies‐may‐be‐the‐answer/


The marriage of these forces results in a fundamentally different economic development model
for the future. My literature review suggests a growing movement from a traditional real
estate mindset to a complex social‐driven economic impact model for securing sustainable
economic advancement at the community, state, nation and goal levels. According to the
Brookings Institute7
, economic development must focus on more than just job creation as an
absolute measure to even come close to addressing issues of global poverty. Economic
development leaders throughout the world are adopting a broader vision where social value is
a more impactful category.  Studies consistently show that economic expansion alone doesn’t
create lasting value and new models for social value assessment and tracking long‐term societal
value are needed.
Tripp Umbach’s economic development experience in hundreds of communities throughout the
United States show a shift between viewing economic development through the lens of real
estate development to a multifocal understanding that includes public infrastructure, quality
education, community amenities, quality of life, civic happiness, and wellness. Economic
developers today are more concerned with the availability of talent than with the availability of
low cost land, buildings, and financing. I believe that the next generation of economic
development practitioner will spend more time focusing on grade schools than industrial sites.

7
www.brookings.edu


Moving a Mindset Movement into Practice
So I come back to the same question, why do we need to create a mindset movement if we
know the needs, know the solutions and have more than enough money to fix our problems?
The principal barrier to change is fear.  Fear at every level – fear of success, fear of failure,
losing control, having control, others winning, others losing, those not having now having and
the fear of those having now not having.  Fear of having our human rights taken away and
suspicion deeply rooted in giving others an undeserved boost in quality of life must be
combated by an equally strong economic argument that shows positive impacts for everyone.
So the easiest part of my project is explaining how Economic Design Thinking works, why it is
needed, and how change can happen.  Even the difficult challenge of measuring the economic
and social impact of such change is doable. What seems impossible is changing fear‐based
thinking, because positive change occurs immediately after replacing a fear based mindset with
a love based or opportunity based view. Research on love based thinking developed by
Marianne Williamson indicates that meaningful change happen in a “Holy Instant.” This magic
moment cannot happen unless a diverse group of committed individuals come together in a
creative space with encouragement to dream about possibilities before dealing with constraints
and fears.


My research indicates that a community forum with diverse stakeholders from a broad cross
section of the population, including end users of proposed projects, is the optimal setting to
apply Economic Design Thinking techniques. For decades I have found that creativity and
collaboration are essential elements that must be in place to move from “fixed thinking” to
“design thinking.” Consider that thousands of public, private, and philanthropic organizations
are already working to solve the world’s problems – hunger, homelessness, housing, education,
predatory lending, nutrition, safety to name just a few without measurable success. So
economic design thinking must have collective creative collaborative approaches to be
successful, as this new movement dies if this intersection is missed.  I found this intersection
while completing my project in Leon, Guanajuato Mexico.
Case Study – State of Guanajuato Mexico

While working on my individual project I had the opportunity to test Economic Design Thinking
through participation in a social housing cluster project in Leon, Mexico with my Harvard
classmate Monica Healy. The housing cluster, consisting of public, private and non‐profit
leaders in Leon was formed a few years ago with funding from the Mexican government to
bring together diverse stakeholders who are involved with social housing.  Participants include
representatives from government at all levels, private developers, builders, banks, planners and
policy analyst from academia. Multiple Issues led to the formation of the housing cluster
including:  1) Complicated government regulations facing both housing developers and Mexican
workers who qualify for government grants and loans, 2) Economic realities that force the
location of housing far from the city center where transportation and amenities are scarce, 3)
Housing types that discourage multi‐generational living and multiple social benefits that come
from upholding traditional living arrangements.


The theme of the full‐day conference, held on July 29, 2016 at the Innovation Center at
Universidad de la Salle Bajío, was to develop higher density vertical housing was less about
housing typology and more about economic design as the issues discussed and the challenges
facing Leon and elsewhere in the world are rooted in economic geography, urban design, public
infrastructure and fixed thinking finance.
Hosted by my Harvard classmate Monica Healy, Director of Research for Infonavit (the Mexican
agency that provides housing funding vouchers for working class citizens) the event also
included prominent guest speakers, classmates Michael Peters, Frank Dobrucky, and Sociologist
Diane Davis and Architect Florian Idemburg from the Harvard University’s Graduate School of
Design. As the main facilitator of the event, I encouraged the 80 participants to engage in
creative dialog using the following model:

While my formal morning session included a few slides to help present the Economic Design
Thinking concept, the key to event was having open dialog with the participants and listening to
their creative solutions about taking immediate action to implement innovative social housing
solutions. Presenting the “inspiration step” as collective dreaming about the perfect future
with eyes wide open quickly engaged the participants and led to small group breakouts having
many creative ideas. The “Hail Storming” process was important to test ideas in the context of
multiple barriers to developing high density solutions for vertical quality housing, including low
rise culture, fear of corruption, and costs of high quality well located housing.


Testing economic design concepts worked perfectly when Architect Professor Florian Idemburg
facilitated a session where participants designed the ultimate social housing solutions in mixed
teams. You could feel the magic in the air as five groups presented their models that
incorporate physical, economic and policy design.


Participants were able to collectively dream with their eyes wide open and boldly moved to
acting on their collective dreams.  Again, the key to success was to have multiple stakeholders
collaborative in a creative setting.  The photo below shows the intensity of focus as one of the
younger participants presented his workable solution to others.

The event proved that Economic Design Thinking must be highly integrated with urban design,
policy design, and social design in order to be effective.  This learning will be helpful as I further
develop the methodology and tool kits for communities worldwide. Just as a diverse group of
participants need to collaborate, a interprofessional collection of professionals in planning,
finance, architecture, public policy, health, education and the arts must also make up the
“coaching staff” to most effectively help communities move projects forward.


Promoting Economic Design Thinking
Certainly a new idea with the tag line “It’s Possible” comes with high expectations and may
pose a threat to others already working hard every day in community development, economics,
social policy, government and community foundations to name just a few.  While we intuitively
know how the impact of the most impossible but needed projects ripple through a
neighborhood, a city, a region, a nation and an entire society, our society demands proof.
Forging lasting collaboration between manifold sectors will require bold communication of the
successes of real projects like our ongoing work in Leon. The ultimate success of the Economic
Design Thinking movement will be the development, application and promotion of tools that
quantify both economic and social benefits.
Since societal impact projects often have a radically different expected time horizon for
economic return than traditional real estate development projects, pioneers who bring this
mindset to their communities will need substantial encouragement and support. I plan to move
forward with active marketing of Economic Design Thinking through a multi‐platform approach,
including:
Articles and a Book: I will use my AMDP capstone project as the foundation for an article and
book entitled “Economic Design Thinking – A Mindset Movement to Create Heaven on Earth.”
Writing about economic design will set the stage for the launch of a mindset community.
Speaking Engagements: I have now successfully promoted Economic Design Thinking at several
community planning sessions throughout North America since developing the idea in the fall of
2015. My intention is to continue to advance Economic Design Thinking to national and
international audiences.

Charitable Trust: I am considering developing a charitable trust where my personal assets can
be directed to fund the ongoing development and growth of Economic Design Thinking as a
global mindset community.

Multi‐Media Tool Kit: I will develop a comprehensive tool kit, including an interactive website
and media platform, under the banner of Economic Design Partners. I plan to further develop
and distribute economic and societal methodologies free of charge that communities can apply
to their most pressing community planning and design challenges.

My Economic Design Thinking tool kit will assist leaders as they navigate the following process:


 Inspiration:  Facilitating Inspiration and collective visioning among key stakeholders.
 Idea Showering: Community engagement and openness to all possible solutions.
Groups dreaming together need ground rules such as avoiding using the word
“can’t”, “impossible”, or “we have failed in the past.”  Groups are encouraged to
adopt a mindset that money is not a barrier so that they can focus on planning
workable solutions and moving forward with solving the most pressing issues.
 Hail Storming: In this most important step, the group must acknowledge past
failures, the need to balance power, build trust, release old beliefs, embrace new
plans, and boldly develop a financial model based in creatively and collaboration.
This must all happen in the hail storm step in order for successful projects to be
developed.
 Testing / Measuring Outcomes and Societal Impacts: Developing and using tools
that measure societal and economic impact are critical to long‐term success of the
Economic Design Thinking movement.
 It’s Possible! Celebration and bold promotion of Idea to Action to Impact.  .
Final Thoughts
The “how to” create heaven on earth has evolved throughout my year of study from creating of
a non‐profit entity that would complete urban planning projects in underserved communities,
to the establishment of a worldwide “mindset” community of Economic Design Thinkers. My
original idea of creating Economic Design Partners as a non‐profit organization was destined to
go down the path of a traditional non‐profit economic development agency. However, I still see
the need at some point to develop a formal structure to hold the movement together, which
could involve staffing and support beyond myself.
Moving toward developing and promoting a “mindset” called Economic Design Thinking forced
me to also have a radically different mindset. I struggled throughout the year at many levels
with my project, abandoning it on several occasions as my doubt overcame my passion of
launching an “idea design” with so much potential. I questioned everything, including my
undergraduate education at Concordia University, where I was enrolled in the Seminary
program before my obsession with economic geography pulled me away from formal ministry.
The mindset design shift presented in my project stands in opposition to American culture
where individuals take responsibility for their economic position in society.  I was torn between
Jesus’ comment that “The poor will always be with us,” and the Lord’s prayer that “Thy will be
done on earth as it is in heaven.” Could this be my ministry after all?
My experience in Mexico reinforced that I must develop and promote the marriage of
economics, community, and design to solve societal issues. The documentary “I am” by Tom


Shadyac was must helpful in moving my project from just another consulting platform to a
mindset movement.  Shadyac concluded that a mentality shift was needed before meaningful
change could be achieved.  So, while there are many consulting firms and non‐profit community
development organizations working to develop innovative projects that package funding to
birth complex socially beneficial projects, the Economic Design Thinking movement can be a
resources to individuals, communities, and elected officials through multiple platforms,
including a book, website, and motivational speaking. Specific examples on how Economic
Design Thinking is already having an impact needs to be amplified to a level where the concept
is “branded” on the cover of leading magazines and other multi‐media sources.
While on‐site in Mexico my project transitioned from a mostly academic experiment to pro‐
active promotion and implementation of Economic Design Thinking in a real life setting.  I also
came to the realization that I have already been promoting this thinking as a consultant for 30
years. I returned ready to move forward with actively promoting of Economic Design Thinking
at three levels:
 Economic Design Thinking  ‐‐ Promotion of a global mindset community
 Economic Design Partners – A formal vehicle for collaboration among individuals and
organizations who want to apply Economic Design Thinking principles, and
 Tripp Umbach – A private consulting resource for organizations who require outside
assistance.
The graphic below was developed while completing a certificate in Leadership Design Thinking
at Harvard in March 2016 to depict my personal evolution as being separate from Tripp
Umbach and Economic Design Thinking. My Harvard program represents the one and only
thing I have accomplished professionally outside of the boundaries of Tripp Umbach and
provided me with encouragement to develop a “Paul” Umbach brand as a teacher, writer,
researcher and speaker.


Finally, as a professional geographer, I began the program with the goal of improving my skills
in the physical realm ‐‐ urban design, economic development and community planning, but
ended my year of intensive study floating more freely in the architecture of dreams.  A quote
from T.S. Lawrence remained in my mind as I completed my project, “All people dream ‐‐ most
dream at night only to awake in the morning thinking that their dreams cannot come true, but a
few dangerous people dream during the day with their eyes wide open, acting on their
dreams.”

The power of the AMDP at Harvard existed for me in the collective dreaming of 28 brothers and
one sister from all over the world.  Never feeling completely comfortable with the direction of
my project or for that matter me is perhaps the essence of education. So I move forward on my
journey in uncomfortable shoes with eyes wide open.


Annotated Project References, Resources and Experiences
Experience   Key Learning
Media
Documentary – “I am”
by Tom Shadyac

 Change requires a shift in “mindset” from the problem is everywhere
(not me) to I am the problem.
 Ancient societies lasted for centuries by expelling individuals who
wanted more than their fair share – in fact, people who broke down
this structure for their personal gain were considered to have a
mental illness.
Documentary : Love is
all around  – Maryanne
Williamson and Tom
Shadyac
 God is light and love – existing entirely without the ability to create
or promote darkness and hate.
 Love binds all together in unity and purity – hate pulls everything
apart. Love needs to be are the heart of every project – love for
others more than ourselves.
Documentary: Tiny: A
Story about Living Small
 It is possible to provide housing for everyone for less than $50,000
per unit
 Government laws and regulations need to change to allow everyone
to live in their own home.
Documentary: Design is
One – Leila and Massimo
Vignelli
 Design requires a deep passion for the eternal  ‐‐ lasting simple
design
 It requires a strong commitment to both quality and innovation to
create a lasting brand.
Movie:  Zootopia by
Pixar
 Creating utopia isn’t easy, but change is possible but it takes courage
and collaboration as everyone can make better choices and change
the world.
 Better for one means better for all.
Movie:  Finding Dory by
Pixar
 Teamwork is required to find our way home.
Movie:  The Big Short  The financial system is greed‐focused instead of societal focused
 When the philanthropic, social service, government, and private
sectors are completely disconnected everyone loses.
Books and Articles
Book: Fixing Broken
Cities  ‐‐ book by John
Kromer

 Practical guide to implement urban development strategies written
by a urban planning practitioner  who worked in Philadelphia and
Camden, NJ
 Kromer is not an academic
 The book is a “field guide” to mixing public, private and philanthropic
funding to make project happen – a bit heavy on pubic/private
partnerships and tax incentive models.
Book: Live/work:
Working at Home, Living
at Work – Deborah
Dietsch

 Zoning changes are needed to ensure that home‐based businesses
can be economically viable.
 Excellent reference for capacity building within communities by
creating pathways for developing affordable work/live
environments. (Highest social value is created with walkable
communities where people don’t commute long distances.


Book: The Holy Bible –
Gospel According to
John
 Love conquers all.
 In love there is no fear.
 We are children of the same heavenly father.
Article: Rethinking
Economic Development
– Brookings Institute

 Economic development must include a focus on more than just jobs
– a broader vision.
 Social value is a bigger and broader category than economic impact.
 Economic impact alone doesn’t create lasting value, but must be
fused with social value assessment and models that track long‐term
societal value.
 Top‐line growth doesn’t ensure bottom‐line prosperity.
Article:  An economic
Perspective on urban
Education – Brookings
Institute
 School accountability outcomes have impact of housing values.
 Differences in school quality are a leading driver of class segregation
within metropolitan areas.
Article: The Future of
Design is Economics
 Story in the article about “Million Dollar Murray”, a homeless man in
whose alcoholism let to ether emergency rooms or jail so often that
it cost the state of Nevada to care for him over a ten year period.
 Economics is the driving force behind our entire world and the better
designers can understand it the great we will have to create real
lasting impacts.
 Learned about the Autodesk Foundation and Enterprise Community
Partners as well as multiple research initiatives exploring community
design education, new business models in design, and impact
measurement for design.
Article: Can Design
Thinking Save the
Economic Dinosaurs?
 Dominic Basulto explores how most industries are at risk of
imminent extinction if they do not change.   They get the design part
but often forget the “thinking”.
 Design changes without deep down fundamental change are
destined to failure.  Blowing things up and starting over is the
solution for the most pressing issues facing industries and societies.
Capitalism Needs Design
Thinking
Tim Brown, Roger L.
Martin, and Shoshana
Berger

 Democratic capitalism depends on the vast majority of the citizenry
believing in the system.
 What happens if we radically redesign this system in order to meet
some higher purpose that we are clear about?
 Rather than spending months, years, or even decades  writing
hypothetical reports in policy think tanks, we need the kills of
storytelling that come along with design to help describe and
present new possibilities in ways that lead to action and outcomes.
Article: Hell : Does the
end have an end?
 Article in a magazine called “Signs of the times”
 Learned that hell doesn’t last forever – but in a flash of fire
everything left on the earth is destroyed in “a fire that lasts forever”
after all “saved” humans dead in graves and living are raised bodily
into heaven.
Article:  Todd Litman  Urban sprawl cost the US economy more than $1 Trillion every year
and argues that this may be reduced by encouraging market‐based
reforms to encourage smart growth strategies.
Brochure:  Thrivent  Becoming a member of this and other faith based charitable banks


Federal Credit Union and credit union allows money to be directed toward charities.
 There is an entire industry focused on social good through
investments.
Experiences
Tour: Tiny House  (see
on Netflix’s)

 This concept can bring housing to waterfronts through boat houses,
vacant lots, and industrial areas.
 Zoning laws need to change to allow everyone to own a home.
 Zoning and other laws provide convenient “cover” for persons living
in “desirable” communities who fear interaction with other less
desirable communities.
Tour:  The Tower at PNC
Plaza in Pittsburgh, PA –
Most environmentally
sustainable office tower
in the world.
 Open windows, movable blinds,
 Technology rich projects that save energy and costs can be
developed at the community scale.
 Aspiration to create a carbon natural built environment is possible.
This building becomes an analogy for the power of Economic Design
Thinking.
Participation: Yoga
Classes
 Very important to help me focus my energies and connect my mind,
body, and spirit.
 Taught me about following and trusting.
Participation: Cathedral
Chancel Choir
 My participation in a professional cathedral choir taught me that
Acapella singing is the ultimate team sport.
 Perfect choral singing requires perfect balance between all voices.
 We have become a society of soloists.  Harmony of voices is a
metaphor for economic design thinking.
Participation: Certificate
Program in Leadership
Design Thinking at
School of Design at
Harvard
 I participated in a four day leadership and design thinking
“experience” where I fleshed out both a design challenge (resulting
in the book Economic  Design Thinking) and a leadership challenge
(resulting in the restructuring and eventual succession from my
consulting company.
 The experience formed a deep foundation for the second half of my
professional life.  I saw the design of my life as the trunk of a multi‐
branch tree where my professional, personal, and spiritual life all
share common roots.
Participation:  Housing
Cluster Design Thinking
Retreat in Leon Mexico
 Opportunity to experiment my economic design thinking
methodology in a live setting.
 Learned that the “holy instant” is an important element in Design
Thinking when a group of committed individuals can collectively
dream with their eyes wide open.
Participation: Seminar
on Appreciative Inquiry
 A proven model for change that forces participants to identify “what
is working” and “what has worked before”  “what we have already
accomplished” vs. “what went wrong” and “what never works.”
Interview: Charitable
Trust Leadership at Penn
State University

 There are vehicles for rich people to give money to charity while still
receive a solid return on their money.
 Investors invest in business ideas and get returns.
Interview: Story shared  People who rock the boat too much are almost always considered


by Harvard Classmate
Monica Healy about two
Catholic Sisters who
created their own
economy
“dangerous.”  The remedy in society for the dangerous people who
dream with their eyes wind open and act on their dreams range from
avoidance to death.
Interview:  Karen Rath
from Huntington Bank –
Non‐Profit Banking
Leader
 This is limited enforcement of laws requiring Banks to provide social
good in their lending.
 Banks have non‐profit banking areas that serve mostly large medical
or educational non‐profits.
Interview: Ernie Hogan,
executive director of the
Pittsburgh Community
Reinvestment group
 My original idea of Economic Design Partners to implement specific
projects that have high social email that require a combination of
public, private and philanthropic funding sources already exists.
Ernie Hogan in Pittsburgh implements high social value economic
development projects.
 Ernie assured me that groups like his exist throughout the United
States.
 Fear of losing control of the project or of not getting proper credit is
the main barrio to the three principal funding sectors “getting along”
and singing in perfect harmony.
Interview: John Harmon
– Leading Estate
Planning Lawyer in U.S.
and Chair of Pittsburgh’s
largest foundation
 The charitable non‐profit sector is the third economy (gov. and
market sector are the others) and these three sectors are need some
glue to hold them together – and Economic Design Thinking can be
that glue.
 Encouragement and pro‐active tools are  needed to galvanize non‐
profit, for profit, government and especially wealthy individuals
toward common goals.
Award:  Fisher Award
from Penn State
University for Lifetime
Service
 I was recognized by Penn State University for my work to bring fresh
thinking to the university as they developed the nation’s most
successful on‐line education platform.
Speaking Engagement in
Tulsa, Oklahoma
 I was asked by the International Economic Development Council to
develop and present a program that shows the intersection of health
and economic development.

Economic Design Thinking

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (18)

Similar a Economic Design Thinking

Similar a Economic Design Thinking (20)

Último

Último (20)

Economic Design Thinking