I was at a visioning meeting for a massive organisation yesterday. We were talking about where the organisation would be in the next five years and how it would get there. The feeling around the table was that the company should stick to doing only what is simple, on expansion; because complexity at scale is an invitation for chaos. Here's the question I left with that day. Motivation is a complicated thing, love is, mistrust is, suspicion is...for a revolutionary idea to be scaled up, must it be simple? Is it that transfer of learning is effective when the content is simple or is it when the content is relevant. However complex, if the subject is something one can relate to, isn't it what makes the difference between effective learning and fragmented or rote learning?If the core of lasting and comprehensive learning is that the learner be moved by the content, then it follows, that the learner must allow the his/her Self to get involved with the content. That is the stuff that...