To address this bigger question, we must invite people with multiple perspective to the narrative-constructing and decision-making table. It is only through the sharing of diverse visions and ideas that we can build a compelling—yet realistic—image of the post COVID-19 future. We should listen to our learned colleagues, like Drs. Osterholm and Christakis, who are engaged in epidemiological modeling of the virus’s behavior, documentation of the way we have responded to the virus, and identification of policies that are required to successfully confront the virus. It is critical that we hear and appreciate their “inconvenient truths.” We must respect the way in which multi-tiered data can be processed and interpreted as a dynamic system. The contemporary system dynamics inheritors of Jay Forrester’s and Donella Meadow’s wisdom might lend a hand.
I propose that this is not enough if we are to address this broader question about our collective future. We should recognize that the epidemiologists and system modelers do not have all the answers. Christakis (2020, Chapter 7) notes that COVID-19 has had an impact that spreads far beyond the domain of medicine. We should bring many other people to the table—including ethicists, historians, economists, and sociologists. This virus has taught us about our environment. It has forced us to notice what happens when humans aren’t pumping quite as many fumes into the air. The virus has also encouraged us to learn about home cooking and sanitization. We are learning how to be more comfortable in disclosing the status of our health and we have gained greater appreciation for the important role played by many “essential” workers who we previously ignored. Perhaps most importantly, the virus is teaching us about the very nature and existence of mortality. These are lessons that extend far beyond medicine and human body.
If we are to successful in not just formulating a compelling vision of the future, but also implementing this collective vision then we need yet another set of experts at the table. Communication experts are needed who know how to help leaders conduct fireside chats in a considerate and compassion manner. We should knock on the door of religious leaders to help us make sense of a God who both gives and takes—and to help us find the best way in which to wed our secular and sacred perspectives, concerns and future actions as they relate to future pandemic viruses. Perhaps, an invitation should be extended to psychologists and behavioral economists. They do know something about human decision-making (at its best and at its worst), as well as the ways in which we, as human beings, change our perspectives and practices. As experts on the dynamics of groups and teams under conditions of intense anxiety, human relations experts and consultants might help design and facilitate dialogues occurring at the table.
