Contemporary systems design requires courageous models to reshape the future. Charles Handy (1989, p. 5) stated: "it is truly an age of change and unreason." Handy was aware that the world required new leaders and believed a new systemic order had to be reestablished for the commonwealth. Human beings should not be afraid of 'continuous change.' Change, is simply another word for improvement, an opportunity for new learning. 
Today, our society is undeniably at risk. Since the early 1960s, after the success of the post-war industrial era, the world has been 'manufacturing uncertainties.' One of the most significant consequences of human actions is the environment's imminent collapse in exchange for technological and economic development (Beck, 2008), creating more issues than answers. 
Demonstrating vulnerability is a way of acknowledging the desire to act adequately. It is imperative to appreciate, recognize, and construct on each other's ideas, to accept that the key to transformation is through communication and collaboration (Coyle, 2018). The world’s current uncertain status is influencing designers to identify, learn, and address challenges beyond their academic scope. The Knowledge Era has unfolded, creating a network society (Castells, 2009) opening dialogs and empowering communality. 
Consequently, shifting our direction towards social innovation needs to be done collectively, effectively, and immediately in a flexible manner (Manzini & Coad, 2015). The time has come for design activism using the hard and soft skills earned from design education in combination with technology. Designers must act as a nexus, "unfolding a continuous field of relations" (Tran, & Turgeon, 2012; Ingold 2011, xii) and knowledge. 
The potential for activism through design networking can be expanded by drawing on the idea of ‘small worlds' and connecting it to the concept of ‘worlding’. The interconnections of social networks reshape organically as they interplay synchronized actions, just like nature (Buchanan, 2003). The effects of this phenomenon require a detailed structure and order. Every system needs a purpose, otherwise it becomes useless and loses traction of time and space. 
By simulating different ecological cycles, open structures in poietic (productive) networks will enhance the possibility of creating positive and reconstructive transitions on the planet (Capra, 1996). Being poietic means to be proactive even in small decisions made to create systemic connections, and eventually, reconstruction at different levels. In this transition, designers need to be slow when it comes to being curious, doing research, and analysis. Using technology as a tool to facilitate the process, not rush it. Yet, the decisions and actions made from comprehensive methods need to be fast and iterative. Finally, all correlations need to be accurate and decisive to effectively approach the Transformation Era and, hopefully, surpass upcoming challenges.

· Beck, U. (2008). World at risk: The new task of critical theory. Munich University and LSE.
· Buchanan, M. (2003). Nexus: small worlds and the groundbreaking science of networks. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
· Capra, F. (2014). The systems view of life : a unifying vision. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
· Castells, M. (2009). The Rise of the Network Society: The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture Volume I, With a New Preface (2nd ed. ed.).
· Coyle, D. (2018). The culture code : the secrets of highly successful groups (First edition.. ed.). New York: Bantam Books.
· Handy, C. B. (1989). The age of unreason. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
· Manzini, E., & Coad, R. (2015). Design, When Everybody Designs: An Introduction to Design for Social Innovation.
· Tran, V. T., & Turgeon, L. (2012). Tim ingold. Being Alive: Essays on Movement, Knowledge and Description. (London: 2011, Routledge. Pp. 288. ISBN: 978-0-4155768-4-0). In (Vol. 34, pp. 329-332).

Back to Top