The 4D Community - Dreamers, Doers, Designers and Doubters Podcast

In our latest 4D Conversation, Professor Venkat Venkatraman explored the ideas behind his latest book, Agentic Intelligence: Strategy at the Speed of Data, co-authored with Manish Sood.

Prof. Venkatraman is Professor Emeritus at Boston University Questrom School of Business and author of The Digital Matrix and co-author of Fusion Strategy. In the session he challenged us to rethink how businesses, organizations, and individuals will create value in a world where human and machine intelligence increasingly work, learn, and evolve together.

* First-principles agentic intelligence: In agentic intelligence, human intelligence and machine intelligence start to come together framing problems jointly and then letting the machine solve the problem. Humans and machines co-create intelligence.

* The addition, multiplication and exponential framework:

* Addition helps us work faster but not fundamentally differently.

* Multiplication is when humans and machines start to interact.

* Exponential is where humans and machines learn and co-create together.

* Economies of expertise: In the industrial age, economies of scale needed physical assets. In the intelligent age we have AI factories built to produce intelligence, which makes the old economies of scale less relevant. And the concept of agentic intelligence is about putting the economies of expertise into practice.

The discussion also dived into what this all means for society, education and all our futures. In this new age, how do we preserve human judgment, agency, and responsibility?

See what you think and let us know below!

We talk a lot about the “metacrisis” here but what if that just isn’t a healthy way to find our way towards a better society?

What if focusing on problems just creates more problems and keeps us from finding solutions not just independently but in our existing systems?

In this conversation I talked with Ingela Svedin on why our 20th-century ideas are breaking down and how we can transform our institutions into living systems. Ingela has had a long career in places like the Swedish Institute and the Swedish International Development Agency, as well as leading Inner Development Goal work at Klustret Ekskäret. She tied together a host of ideas and movements (links below) that changed the way I see the big picture today.

Explore references from conversation:

* Nora Bateson, International Bateson Institute: Warm Data

* Planetary Boundaries

* Kate Raworth and Doughnut Economics

* Hospicing Modernity: Facing Humanity’s Wrongs and the Implications for Social Activism : Machado de Oliveira, Vanessa

* Tomas Björkman

* Yuval Noah Harari

* Theory U | Leading from the emerging future - Otto Scharmer

* Inner Development Goals (IDGs)

* Quintet of change

* Loud Summer

As artificial intelligence becomes more powerful and increasingly present in our lives, one question becomes fundamental: How do we preserve our ability to think critically - and what does feeling have to do with it?In this 4D Conversation, Ida Helena Rust explores artificial superintelligence, critical thinking, faith and what it means to remain human in the age of AI.Drawing on her research, Human Critical Thinking and Creativity and the Rise of the Artificial Superintelligence God, Ida examines what may happen as we increasingly outsource parts of our thinking to AI - and how the technology itself begins to change the way we think.The conversation moves beyond intelligence and reason into something deeply human: feeling. Ida explores emotional trust, our growing relationships with increasingly human-like AI, intuition, lived experience and our sense of self. Her central proposition is provocative: feeling may not be the opposite of critical thinking, but part of its foundation.How do we use AI without losing ourselves in it? Can mindfulness and awareness of our physical experience help us create distance from the technology? And as AI becomes more capable, where will human agency, judgment and creativity come from?A fascinating 4D Conversation about AI, philosophy, critical thinking and being human.

At the end of the conversation, Casimiro Juanes also introduces our journey towards the 4D Community Gathering in the Azores in October 2027 - and a simple way of thinking about the road ahead: 8 weeks - What do I learn? One year - What can I build? Ten years - What did I achieve?

A fitting invitation to turn reflection into movement. Solvitur Ambulando.

In this conversation with Anna Plotnikova – Assistant Professor of Strategic Change at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (VU Amsterdam) – we discussed the metacrisis.

Anna’s main focus of concern is disinformation and the fact that we are losing our sense of truth.

We discussed many topics, including raising two children in this world and her concerns about helping them become truly good citizens.

Enjoy, and let’s continue the discussion on understanding the metacrisis, not only from an intellectual and rational perspective, but also as individuals.

Host Nathan Hegedus sits down with Alon Rozen, the Dean of the École des Ponts Business School in Paris, to explore our ongoing theme: What is the metacrisis?

Alon shares why the metacrisis is less about a dictionary definition and more about a distinct feeling of “ick” amid the realization that we are facing a barrage of crises with no values-based leadership to guide us forward.

Together, they also dive into:

· The “hamster wheel” of AI: Why the rapid pace of technology is fueling a backlash against techno-optimism.

· AI as a Socratic tutor: How to avoid using AI as an “intellectual crutch” and instead use it to ask deep questions that sharpen your own thinking.

· The complex rise of the “Digital Twin”: When you build an AI agent that thinks, writes, and acts exactly like you on the job, who owns it? Alon explores the complicated legal and ethical future of our virtual selves in the workplace.

Please also read Alon’s 4D Community excellent posts on AI and doubt, as well as watching his in depth 4D Conversation on complexity.

Your Mind is Not a Prompt: How AI is hacking your cognition stack… and how to hack back!

Doubt is a Superpower. Here’s How to Use It!

4D Conversation: Decoding Complexity: From Concept to Reality

We have a theme in our podcasts examining “what is the metacrisis?” I don’t have that answer but, for me, it involves a sense of overwhelm. How do we get things moving again? What’s our starting point?

In this episode I had the privilege of talking with legendary management thinker Henry Mintzberg about his ideas on rebalancing society. We do not come to any hard conclusions but, as someone who did grassroots work on building civil society once upon a time, I love his insight.

And after we talked, I was deeply inspired by a presentation from New_Public, in which they see opportunities (at slide 40) for AI to actually make it easier to organize and coordinate sustainably without everyone burning out. I’ll have to follow up with Henry on this!

Here is a transcript of our conversation:

The Balanced Society

A 4D Conversation with Henry Mintzberg

Nathan Hegedus Welcome to this edition of 4D Conversations. Today I am with Henry Mintzberg, one of the most influential management thinkers alive. His work on strategy, organizations, and leadership has shaped how we understand how institutions work in reality. Later in his career, he turned his attention to society itself and wrote Rebalancing Society: Radical Renewal Beyond Left, Right, and Center.

Henry, welcome and thank you for joining.

Henry Mintzberg It is my pleasure to be here, Nathan. Thank you.

Nathan Hegedus I thought I would start with the through line for your career, because your career started with a very hard look at how organizations actually work. What is the connection between that work and the rebalancing society work that you are doing now?

Henry Mintzberg The first thing I looked at, even before organizations, was how managers actually work. Sometimes people call me a contrarian, but I am not a contrarian at all. I don’t take counter positions for their own sake; I take them because the popular position just seems wrong to me. If I read textbook definitions saying that managers plan, organize, coordinate, and control, but then I sit in their offices and nothing they do looks like any of that, I say so.

In 1991, I visited Prague, two years after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia. This popular idea that capitalism had triumphed just seemed dead wrong to me. Capitalism didn’t triumph. Balance triumphed.

It wasn’t just about balance across two sectors, either. I wrote an article a year later making the point that it was the importance of a community sector that established true balance. Ever since then, I’ve looked at American history more closely. The secret to American success over the last 200 years was not just business being effective and government being constrained. It was also community activities that were absolutely key to the development of the country. They were just as important as business activities, something Alexis de Tocqueville wrote about back in the 1830s.

Eventually, I came to call this the plural sector. You don’t just have public and private, or economic and political—you have the social sector. I call it plural for two reasons. First, there is a huge variety of organizations within it. They are either owned by their members, like co-ops, or they are owned by nobody. When people ask what it means for an organization to be owned by nobody, look at Greenpeace, McGill University, or Harvard University. They are trusts of one kind or another. It is a massive sector, and using the word “plural” helps people see it taking its rightful place alongside the public and private sectors.

Nathan Hegedus Does the current moment seem different to you? There is democratic backsliding in places, the rise of AI, and we talk a lot at 4D Conversations about the meta crisis. Does the reality of 2026 change anything in the way you see things?

Henry Mintzberg You could say I saw it coming—not in these exact details, but one thing was quite clear. Capitalism became the be-all and end-all of everything in the West, and everywhere else except for a few communist countries. It was only a matter of time before that went out of balance, just the way communism went out of balance.

Under communism, business was weak, and communists did a great job of suppressing absolutely every plural sector community movement they could because it posed a threat to their power. Today, I am amazed that people in the United States don’t get it. They just don’t see that the power of business has become absolutely, unbelievably lopsided.

Nathan Hegedus And why do you think that is? What happened?

Henry Mintzberg It has been a long time coming. If you look at history, business has always sought to be dominant in the United States. There were battles right from the beginning—there is even a letter from Thomas Jefferson warning about business trying to take over the country. That advance moved steadily.

However, the plural sector used to be very strong in the United States. As de Tocqueville described, America was a deeply community-driven place. That community element weakened for a number of reasons, but I think the main culprit is technology. Every new technology that has come along has driven us out of community and deeper into ourselves.

When the automobile came along, you didn’t walk on the street or see your neighbors anymore. It’s like putting police officers in a squad car versus having them walk a beat—one is inherently more communal than the other. Then television arrived, and we ended up watching things at home alone. People stopped interacting socially.

I use a joke about modern highways. When somebody tailgates you on the highway, their attitude is “get off my road.” It is a deeply individualistic environment. But who tailgates you on a sidewalk when you are walking? Someone who is reading an iPhone. They bump right into you because they aren’t even looking at you. It is technology all the way.

Nathan Hegedus I am interested in the fact that the plural sector seems to have trouble organizing itself. Why do you think that is? In my own writing, I’ve looked at the work of Theda Skocpol and the fact that the modern plural sector in North America is run almost entirely by professional managers and professionals. Are they just unable to agree, or is the high level of professionalization an issue on its own?

Henry Mintzberg They certainly have a degree of competition with one another regarding fundraising and resources, which causes them to be wary of each other. But I think the fundamental issue is a question of mission.

The mission of Greenpeace is climate change. The mission of Doctors Without Borders is healthcare. The mission of Amnesty International is social justice. What they don’t realize, or don’t care to realize, is that they will get absolutely nowhere with any of those individual causes until we rebalance our societies. Because our societies are so lopsided, it fundamentally drives these problems.

Look at the COP climate conferences. They are “cop-out” conferences. They are jokes. Everybody flies around, comes home, and makes plans. But they don’t make four-year plans to match their four-year governments; they make 40-year plans. Then the next government comes along and cancels it. It would be laughable if it weren’t so tragic.

Nathan Hegedus So what is the work you are doing now? How do you address this?

Henry Mintzberg All I can do is write about this in a way that asks people to wake up and see what is actually happening. I am writing a pamphlet right now called Balance Now for the Sake of Survival, and I mean it literally. We will not survive this—whether it is wealth inequality putting us against each other, wars, climate change, or anything else. We will not survive a completely lopsided world.

Nathan Hegedus What would you recommend for the average person? How do they contribute to rebalancing society?

Henry Mintzberg I am mapping that out right now. People always ask, “What can I do?” But the “I” question must have a “we” answer. What I can do individually is get together with other people and work directly within our local communities to start changing things. That is the core of what I am writing about.

Nathan Hegedus Right, and I guess that is the trick. People get involved locally, but how do you actually scale that momentum up?

Henry Mintzberg I think the closest historical model we have is the Reformation. The framework I am using follows distinct stages:

* Individual Engagement: You read, you research, you realize what is going on, and you wake up.

* Communal Action: You get together with others to answer the “we” question. You engage in localized social initiatives.

* Institutional Reform: As you advance, you begin to reform your institutions. You don’t start with central leadership or top-down institutional reform; you reform the institutions once you have built a massive underlying movement.

* Global Consolidation: Finally, you consolidate those pieces globally.

Nathan Hegedus Do you have examples of countries or societies today that are operating with more balance?

Henry Mintzberg The Scandinavian countries and Canada are good examples, as are a lot of smaller nations functioning well—places like Costa Rica, Uruguay, and Botswana. They all face populist movements, but for the most part, they maintain balance. Canada, in particular, remains a very balanced place.

Nathan Hegedus Thinking back to de Tocqueville, he saw this immense, unique energy in American society. Is there any practical way to recover that energy today?

Henry Mintzberg I have a friend who is a business consultant in the States. He, another friend in Canada, and I get on regular calls together. He often tells me, “Henry, I feel so hopeless all the time, but when I get off these calls, I feel like there is hope.” Everyone needs to be able to find that feeling.

For a concrete blueprint of what this looks like, people can look up an article on my website—mintzberg.org/articles—about Coop Sapporo, a cooperative in Hokkaido, Japan. It is a phenomenal model for what I call a consolidated social economy.

Hokkaido, the big northern island, faces severe depopulation issues. When traditional businesses moved out because it was no longer profitable, Coop Sapporo moved in to fill the void. If a village doesn’t have a grocery store anymore, the co-op sends out mobile vans so people can shop. If there is no bank left in the village, they send out a van equipped with an ATM. They provide care from cradle to grave—handling everything from baby supplies and meals for school kids to funeral arrangements. They stepped in communally where the private sector failed.

Nathan Hegedus Wow, that is amazing. One last question, Henry: what, if anything, makes you genuinely optimistic right now about the future?

Henry Mintzberg Models like Coop Sapporo. My friend Jeremiah who finds hope after we have our conversations. And young kids who want to do something meaningful. There is always that energy out there. We just have to tap into it.

Nathan Hegedus Yeah. Well, that is great. Thank you so much, Henry.

We start our series “What Is the Metacrisis for You?” strong with Gaspar Wosa.

A serial intrapreneur (at Ericsson) and entrepreneur, Gaspar challenges the dominant narrative of crisis. Instead of seeing our time merely as a metacrisis, he proposes something different - a meta-opportunity.

If we respond with fear, paralysis, or defensiveness, we are likely to repeat old patterns and deepen the problems. If, however, we dare to move forward with courage and curiosity, we may unlock possibilities that are otherwise invisible to us.

Gaspar doesn’t stop at reflection. He brings concrete suggestions for what a community like the 4Ds can actually do - beyond discussion, beyond analysis.

On a personal level, this conversation brought me back to a moment in my own life when I was overwhelmed by fear. My wife gave me a small stone with the words engraved:

Maybe that is what this moment in history is asking of us - both personally and collectively.

Watch the conversation.Reflect.And share your thoughts.

In this 4D Conversation, Henrik Pålsson shares how connectivity and renewable energy helped transform a struggling island in the Philippines into a thriving local community. What began as limited access to infrastructure became an example of how entrepreneurship, smart energy models, and digital connectivity can reshape opportunity.

It is a concrete story. But it also raises a larger question: are we witnessing the early stages of a rural renaissance?

In 1964, Arthur C. Clarke described a future in which communication technology would free people from geography. He imagined a world where you could live anywhere – even in remote locations – and still be fully connected to work, knowledge, and opportunity.

You can watch the short clip here:

At the time, it sounded like science fiction.

When I joined Ericsson in 1997, I often began presentations with a striking statistic:

“Only 15% of humanity has access to telephony.85% have never heard a dial tone.”

Access to communication infrastructure was deeply unequal.

Today, we no longer speak about dial tones. We speak about mobile data, fiber networks, and global connectivity. Billions more people are connected than ever before.

The expansion has been extraordinary. And yet the deeper challenge remains.

Remote communities still lack reliable infrastructure. Energy access is still uneven.Opportunity is still shaped by connectivity. Although technology has evolved and the access gap has narrowed, it has not disappeared. And we are leaving many people behind.

During Covid, Clarke’s vision felt as if it was accelerating.

Like many others, I left the city when offices closed. I moved from my house in the city to our summer house, expecting it to be temporary. Two years passed, and I never moved back. And it was not because restrictions forced me to stay, but because I realized I didn’t want to.

Living closer to nature brought a different rhythm, a different quality of life. Work continued. Conversations continued. Participation in global networks continued. Geography had loosened its grip.

For a moment, it seemed as if Clarke’s vision was unfolding at full speed. Rural and urban no longer felt like fixed opposites.

But after the pandemic, something interesting happened. It seems to me that travel resumed. Business flights returned. And we have cities filled again, with all their traffic jams and stress.

Technology does make decentralization possible. But culture, economics, and human habits pulled many back toward concentration.

Perhaps the rural–urban tension will not be resolved quickly. Perhaps this transition will unfold over decades rather than years.

This is why the conversation with Henrik Pålsson matters.

After a successful career at Ericsson, Henrik chose to work at the margins rather than the center. He focused on transforming an island in the Philippines that struggled with access, infrastructure, and opportunity.

Through connectivity and innovative renewable energy business models, he helped enable something remarkable: a local transformation grounded in entrepreneurship rather than dependency.

Within the 4D Conversations – Dreamers, Doers, Designers and Doubters – we call these stories Little Bigs. They are concrete local initiatives that carry broader systemic implications.

Henrik’s story belongs firmly in that category.

What he is doing is, in many ways, a snapshot of technology for good. But not as a slogan. It is real, giving empowerment and transforming lives and society.

If Clarke imagined the possibility, and global telecom expansion proved it scalable, then Henrik demonstrates what it looks like when applied thoughtfully, locally, and sustainably.

This conversation raises important questions:

• Will rural revitalization remain exceptional – or become mainstream?• Does connectivity decentralize opportunity – or reinforce urban dominance?• Can renewable energy and digital infrastructure together reshape opportunity maps?

Through Little Bigs like this one, we glimpse not only responses to crisis – but a meta-opportunity hiding in plain sight.

Below you can watch the full 1.5-hour uncut conversation.

Watch if you are interested in:

• Rural vs urban futures• Connectivity gaps and opportunity• Renewable energy entrepreneurship in practice• Concrete examples of systemic change• Getting inspiration from a successful social entrepreneur

Timeline

Introduction to 4D ConversationsMeta-Crisis and Global Challenges - 1:23Henrik’s Background and Career Journey - 4:48Rural Connectivity and Innovation - 13:21Solar Power and Energy Solutions - 16:43Connectivity and Starlink Impact - 19:32FinTech and Local Economies - 20:47Empowering Rural Communities - 22:42Urban vs. Rural Dynamics - 23:11Local Ownership and Sustainabilit - 47:04Innovation and Decentralization - 60:21Geopolitical Considerations - 68:48Conclusion and Reflections - 82:59