Capacity to Design
One doesn’t have to be an artist in order to design something that takes advantage of intangible assets. In fact, the gorgeous thing about them is that they’re intangible; there’s almost no bad way to consider how they fit into a design that might benefit a school. How does one draw know-how, for instance? However, if that know-how manifests itself in the form of a process, and if user-generated content within the school has identified a possible solution for a problem that has plagued multiple schools for years, it is likely that a person — given the space and a modicum of time — can use his/her ‘sense of things’ within the school to design that possible solution. It may be messy, but isn’t that what real learning is? Capacity to ImplementImplementation doesn’t need to be rigidly linear, nor does it need to be the province of one particular person. It can be collaborative and it can be iterative; the important thing is that the item in question (process or product) is implemented. This action can take multiple guises, and a great deal of creativity can be applied in determining what those guises are. The capacity to implement, perhaps in very different ways, is important because it indicates that change is being injected into the system. Capacity to TransformLast but certainly not least, if the design and implementation are reliable and valid, then transformation is enabled. The first two capacities lead to and enable the third capacity to exist, in other words. One can implement something that is poorly designed (whether in thought or deed), and it won’t lead to change (transformation); however, when appropriate attention is given to design, and when implementation is allowed to be meaningful and not necessarily so rigid, learning occurs, and the best learning is transformative by nature. Paying attention to the intersection of organisational capital, human capital, user-generation, and intellectual property can allow schools to become high-capacity environments that prize intangible assets.