Home » Posts tagged 'business' (Page 2)
Tag Archives: business
Pioneers of a new world
Introduction
This has become a long blog again. I introduce a solution for all humanitarian problems in the world and all related crisis. It requires a lot of explanation because it involves all current institutional powers in a new setting. And finally comes back to the power of our individual selves. Soon I will publish a booklet on the issue but my sense of urgency is so big that I cannot wait to reach out to those of you who can become already changers of the world after reading this. For humankind it could be the most important blog ever as long as I can reach out to you soul and make you aware. Please take some time to absorb the information and place your own self in perspective. See what happens when you suddenly realize that humankind could get to depend on your own next steps. It is fun AND a huge responsibility. Can you handle it? That is up to you. I am ready to help you when you are.
The destructive force of our institutions
Over the years we have grown dependent on institutional activities because of the impact they have on our lives. The unique capacity of an institution is that it can enlarge a single activity into huge proportions. A single human being cannot do that. We have grown to depend on the institutions because they provide us luxury articles, financial means, governance, jobs with related salaries, scientific knowledge, etc.
Most current institutional structures of today were born already some 150 to 100 years. The conditions in the human world were right back then to allow such fragmented focus to occur with the related growth of institutionalized power. Still now the discussions in this world only talk about growth and more growth as a single sign of strength. Due to this fragmented focus these organizations can only take responsibility for their own small field of highly specialized attention. They started to relate via this specialization to compliment each other in their objectives. A manufacturing company in the 19th century would have its own transportation system, energy supply, uniform making unit for their personnel, etc. But gradually in the 20th century the further specialization allowed institutions to focus on their core business and select suppliers to outsource their surrounding needs. In the middle of the 20th century the patchwork of specialized institutions because so large and so competitive in their mutual interaction that a chain of dependencies appeared and with it new techniques of managing the chain.
Due to the focus on fragmented institutionalized interests the awareness for “the whole” disappeared entirely. Things like pollution, usage of natural resources or humanitarian issues became subject to competitive policies. Institutional survival became more important than the consequences of such survival decisions. Non of these consequences could be challenged by any single authority. What authority should do that? A local government has no global authority to regulate. Yet they do have a dependence for economic growth, imports and exports as well as labor and tax perspectives. Global authorities on the other hand have no formal jurisdiction in the countries or in the institutionalized business enterprises and banking policies. They may have a bureaucratic influence on awareness (like VN resolutions) and certain fragmented authority on addressing common institutionalized interests (like military actions in Afghanistan or embargos on certain countries).
As fragmentation of power grows further, the chain of interdependence becomes more complex. Despite the competitive fragmentation and specialization each individually could grow due to globalization of markets. The competitive shakes outs would start the intense optimization processes in each of the institutions to remain competitive and attractive in the chain. As time went by we see each of them weaken in quality and strengthen in financial speculation. CEO’s and Country presidents became bankers and debt managers rather than protectors of value driven identities.
The overall shortage of resources started to demand its toll on the global organization of giants that could not feed themselves anymore on natural value creation. The liberalization of money from a valuable collateral (s.a. gold) allowed speculation to flourish as only remaining resource to sustain institutional fragmentation and growth. Access to the available resources became available to the highest bidder. Countries who wanted their populations to survive while active with some labor and high debt programs had to grow their debt themselves. The growth of institutions is still the blind common culture of executives and politicians but growth is already for a long time not possible anymore. Not as a natural process of value creation anyway. The only financial growth that can be achieved is through speculation around shortages but this is controlled only by the powerful and has nothing to do with the general public anymore. They are just manipulated to accept a debt they did not ask for and that solves nothing. Humanity is in the hands now of institutionalized, destructive, fragmentary focused financial robots that have no morality nor sense of responsibility except their own self interests, creating crisis after crisis, chaos upon chaos.
The pioneer
Now we go back to the beginning of this blog. The true power of an institution is its possibility to enlarge any fragmented specialization to huge proportions. Their handicap is that they cannot take responsibility other than for their own piece of specialized power. That goes for regional governments, business enterprises, educational institutions, etc, etc. None can take responsibility for true human values yet they all have interest in it because they are part of the institutional survival. Without consuming, demanding, debt creating, voting or working public the institutions will eventually die.
So in one way or another any institution has the intrinsic need to connect again to integral human values but cannot do that for the whole, just for a small part of it, competing for it. So when we talk about the taking of responsibility for human sustainable progress no one can or will stand up to take responsibility other than maybe some local politicians. They tend to promise responsibility that they cannot handle because it s beyond their control. They try to solve it in four year periods which many do not complete, by raising taxes and public debt with solving anything.
Only one can take responsibility and that is the pioneer. It seems funny that with all those incredibly big and seemingly powerful institutions the sole responsibility of human progress could lie in the hands of a bunch of pioneers. But it is true and makes perfect sense.
The pioneer positions him/her self in the field of sustainable human values and progress
The robotic institutions can be our enemy when we see their unconscious destructive force while preserving their self interest in their fragmented world of material power, but they can become our friends when we can get to use their institutional powers of expansion in a proper way.
Thanks to the de-institutionalizing powers of a crisis, in which the organizations need to go into survival mode, decreasing in size due to the lack of resources to draw from, they become also often sensitive for new ventures and responsibilities in which their field of expertise can excel. This is an opportunity for the pioneer but also for the institutions. How does it work?
The pioneer takes responsibility for a complex humanitarian progressive proposition. He or she subsequently invites all necessary institutional powers to help enlarge it.
Institutional powers can be used to enlarge humanitarian interests
The role of the pioneer is to define complex progression based on human values. When inviting the institutional powers to join the pioneer they are asked to enhance the responsibility with their own institutional powers. To make a holistic proposition of human values one cannot just rely on a single empowering institution. If that were the case the institution would have done this already by itself. The complexity of the whole is that it needs the entire mix of authorities of a society to become effective, with the pioneer sitting bang in the middle.
Sustainocracy
In sustainocracy the pioneer takes the lead and invites the four key authorities that are needed to expand the human values into common wellness and progress:
- Local government
- Technological innovators
- Educators & scientific researchers
- The local public itself
Drawing all these authorities from the field of fragmented interests, they unite in the field of common responsibilities together with the pioneer. Seemingly contradicting interests suddenly start complementing each other as the focus lies on progressive goals outside the scope of self interest. The self interest can be complied with only if the common interest is achieved. This forces the authorities to enter into co-creative processes by trying to understand each other and join forces. The pivot is the pioneer who safeguards the humanitarian interests in a battle field of institutional giants.
In the Netherlands I have started experimenting with this pioneership. It resulted into a series of initiatives that are proving their value from a humanitarian perspective but also the institutional positioning into a new world. Each of the authorities has a chance to excel in its own field of competence, not by competing or creating interdependence but by combining the individual competences into a common goal. Since executives and personnel in such institutions are human beings too we find that the sensitivity of the hard material robotics become more soft to address human wealth issues through new types of policy makings.
The institutions change slowly into supportive and facilitating identities that gather new public admiration. They truly become extenders of human progress to which they attached their fragmented by highly specialized competences with new perspectives of survival first but institutional sustainability in the long term. The field of chaos can now be managed with the perspective of an institutional alternative, not just to create value but to contribute to a greater cause, enhancing it and expanding it.
Training school
To extend these finding globally I have started a training school for sustainocracy, training pioneers as well as institutional executives on their new age responsibilities and challenges when entering the field of sustainable progress and all related differences with the old paradigm.
http://www.eventbrite.com/myevent?eid=3558815513
Pass the word and help change the world.
The day after economics
Economics is out. We cannot keep progress or wellness away from people who cannot afford it. We cannot morally play with lives of millions or billions of people to fill the pockets of a few deadly soles. The era that this was tolerated is ending fast. We are entering a new era of wealth, the one that is not based on economics but on something else. I have called it Sustainocracy, just to give it a reference to talk about. What is the difference?
Modern economics is “the financial science to deal with shortages”. It has to do with money that is spend to purchase material goods, valued against the degree of desire and scarcity of the object. Entire nationwide economies are based on this system that places the availability of resources in the hands of people who make it available only to the highest bidder. Maintaining shortages raises the economic perspectives and it has become a game to deal with this in a globalized world for the benefit of those who can control certain material elements. We see this in commodities, housing, energy, food, loans, etc. This automatically means that people need money to gain access to wealth. Money is only made available to those who have work and work is only valued with money if it fits in the robotics of the system. In an other blog I already asked why the care taking activities of a housewife with small children was not valued in a money system while the labeling of packages in a logistics process is. Is the one more valuable then the other? Of course not, but the system determines what gets paid and what not. This regulated choice creates a society and the morality in it. The woman with small children gets no money and has not right to access wealth and the factory worker does. It is a choice and this choice needs to be turned around because it does not suit the general purpose anymore of sustainable progress. On the contrary. Extremely talented people necessary in all kinds of human needs are forced to work in the system on positions that contribute to problems simply because the system is organized that way.
And if you have no job you are obliged to get a debt in order to maintain a degree of wealth or wishes to survive, no matter what talent one has. Some do not even have access to the debt system and perish, supported by this inhumane system.
Dead end
The system of economies that are based on speculation around shortages are making our lives unsustainable, expensive and unstable. These systems collapse and receive a growing opposition of the general public that is willing to rise against those who block abundance to the masses. We simply have to recognize that economics has reached a dead end. Economies of growth only mean that they expand further the disaster just to finance the unbalanced debts of the past. The debts of countries rise simply because they produce only costs and no value anymore, despite the massive amount of talented people they contain.
There is a desperate need to deblock these human talents and make them work together on sustainable progress. That is what I call “the day after economics”. What is this other option?
Sustainocracy
We need to recognize that our resources on Earth are finite, but our talents grow in abundance. The more finite the material resources (food, water, oil, etc) are the more valuable they would become for all people if we want to sustain a minimum of living standard or even survival. We cannot sustain a financial system that speculates on the availability of resources in scarcity. It becomes a source of blackmail, not just over the pockets of the people but also playing with their lives. Capitalist economics are likely to become the genocide of the 21st century where certain people are willingly, for their own benefit, to keep life supporting and saving resources away from the public by pure financial speculation, causing death, war and disaster. We have already seen the consequences of this in commodities like grain, wheat, water, oil, etc. and the effects on global stability.
Sustainocracy therefor represents the “science of talented abundance through cocreation”. This meand that human scientific knowledge, productivity and progress is owned by the species and not members thereof. Human talent is value of humankind and should not be dealt with in confinement of scarcity but in abundance for progress. This means that every invention, every insight should reach all members of the species not just a selected few.
In Sustainocracy only one continuous goal is important for all members of a community: sustainable human progress, according to the definition described in a previous blog:
“continuously working together on a healthy, vital, safe and dynamic human society within the ever changing context of our natural local environment”.
This statement allows no political debate or speculation since the goal is for all members of the global community. Everyone can take responsibility for this sustainable progress by contributing with one’s own competences, talents and energy. All elements of such society are measurable, feeding in open reflection the interaction of people in the community. Application of knowledge and personal energy is key to address the changes provoked by any change that is being made. It gives a common purpose to a society.
Sustainocracy is Talent + Energy + Purpose = Sustainable Progress
The community based on sustainocracy does not necessarily need money to produce progress. Resources are used but only become valuable when introduced in the result driven processes. The results are delivered to the benefit of everyone in the community. There is no need to speculate with scarcity of resources since the community will become creative, using the local means that it has available to it. Communities become cohesive in human interaction on a local for local basis trying to avoid dependence on other communities. If such relationships are needed to exchange material resources then reciprocity is organised in exchange of talents. Payment in times of needs are not done in money but in talent which will help communities to deploy automatically the human and material resources needed to assure community progress and intercommunity relationship, even if particular communities have scarcity of resources but abundance in talents.
Money could be used to value the individual contributions to progress making the variables of “talent” (competences, knowledge and creativity) and “energy” (motivation, teamwork, involvement, etc) instruments of value that can receive recognition on individual level and maybe some sort of adhered status. The level of value can be determined by the community in a democratic process.
In all cases the local for local communities would become small local pearls of self sufficient centers in which sustainable progress would be carried by all members of the community. A woman who gives birth would as important as a man who helps to build a house. Community choices would be prioritized according the level of sustainable progress everyone desires, lead by the circumstances, not greed.
Sustainocracy represents peace and progress, a modern new way to step up the human evolution using our accumulated abilities and levels of awareness for the benefit of all, starting with the future perspectives of our children and the way we educate them today on how to take responsibility using talent and energy.
Sustainocracy has become the system to value talent and reciprocity in Sustainocratic processes)
Youth unemployment – no money = no value?
Recent articles refer to the graph of youth unemployment in Europe as “scary”. Indeed it is alarming to see that in Southern Europe around 50% of all youngsters between 16 and 24 have no perspective of making a living through any form of employment.
The key problem we face is that there is absolutely no relationship anymore between the basic human needs, values, employment and money. Industrial centralization of manufacturing and productivity to areas of high concentration of cheap labor or facilitating policies for volume related, highly automated activities have taken all basic responsibilities away from the general public. If we go back a few hundred years the main concern of every individual was to produce enough for self sufficiency. Most of our time was dedicated to food production. If we sum up today our basic needs: food, clothing, energy, water, shelter, mobility how much of our time is devoted to achieving it? Nothing! All these activities have been taken away from our daily concern from a labor perspective. We only have access to our basic needs through money, not through our energy or talent.
So where should the energy and talent of our populations go to if the basic needs have been taken away from us in centralized money processes of which we see nothing ourselves? There is nothing except the “care for each other”. Care is something that cannot be centralized as it affects us all directly. You cannot go to a shop and buy a pound of health care produced in China or India. The care taking needs to be done on a personal level. Even though care is needed it is not directly seen as a primary value. In many countries it is financially organized through means that come from primary production processes, i.e. a secondary economy that depends on the primary economy of productivity (the making industry), speculation (housing) and consumption. So if the primary economy fails no care can be financed either and unemployment rises.
Unemployment rises due to disconnected values
But does that mean that people do not have any basic needs anymore nor the need for care? No, of course not. It simply means that we have learned to connect the wrong values to the money system. Europe opened up the borders to liberate the distribution of goods as a primary foundation of our economic progression. But these goods hardly contain European labor which means that there is no reciprocity between what we consume and what we personally contribute to our wealth. If there is no direct relation between our consumption and our labor where do the means come from to obtain them? Either by creating a primary economy of care that covers the expenses of the economy of goods and if this does not exist we create a debt for ourselves. From this point of view our debt evolution makes China grow in wealth because that is where the productivity takes place.
Our debt evolution has been camouflaged by keeping up speculation in the housing market and a booming business in real estate but this only covered a part of the economy while producing an economic bubble through speculative forces of banks and politics.
The solution is to be found in transforming our economies back into a direct connection between our individual needs and our productivity with our talents and available energy. This can start by accepting care, human health, vitality and education, not goods, as main value of society expressed in money. All the unemployed youngsters can find things to do in helping their own community into health, social cohesion and support receiving means back for it to sustain themselves. The second step is to become self-sufficient again in producing the basic needs, using modern technologies to provide abundance without centralization of productivity around the world. Food, water management and energy production become than again issues that keep us individually busy and disconnected from the large global dependencies. All people become then again aware of their own productivity related to the wealth we perceive and produce ourselves.
This transformation of the local economies is easily done if we allow ourselves to change our perspective of wealth from the “having” to the “being”. The opposition of course comes from the centralized power positions around goods and financial controls. To break through these impositions local governments have to step out of the economic grip of these systems and introduce new systems of human values that motivate their populations to invest their talents and energy in each other. This will cause a lot of old systems to go broke and stress will be high when the entire world based on old industrial process is forced to reallocate the resources and their own value systems. In between monetary systems will become obsolete and go broke. Large amounts of debt will be cancelled along the way by mere obsolescence of their existence. Since most of these debts are only related to a few in the old hierarchies of power they can be blamed of speculation over the back of humanity and punished by new laws that the new humankind will develop through this new paradigm.
When we look again at the graphics of youth unemployment in Europe time has come to make the transition. Local leaders would be wise to take the first step to show their commitment to their own people instead of luring still with the old hierarchies that are obsolete and already in the historic area of payback demands of humankind asking them to personally take responsibility for their leadership now and over the last few decades. Politicians and business executives would show signs of wisdom if they now choose side of humankind instead of money. That is probably why articles refer to the graphs as “scary” even though they indicate also the build up of frustration that will explode to make way of renewal. Those who let that happen knowing that peaceful alternatives are at hand already as described above, are also to be blamed when judgement day arrives. When we look back at ourselves today in ten years time, what will we see?
Sustainocracy, the new democracy 