|
|
 |
|
2008 Exponentials CRASH -actually 2008 saw some of the best news in a generation in the new economic maps being published by muhammad
yunus and his alumni. If you agree why not join in blogging at http://collaborationcafe.blogspot.com
When the Bottom Line Is Ending Poverty BusinessWeek - Feb 29, 2008 While Gandhi's goal was the end of colonialism, Yunus' is just as grand: He means to
reform capitalism to make it a tool for ending poverty
The Stories of Sheep & Peoplepower : In the 19th
century my twice great grand father’s main job was to host an open space on the Isle of Arran. Islanders walked the
length & breadth of the island. The truth invitation was always the same: now the English governing our nation are sending
up quarterly accountants whose management con advice is that sheep are more profitable than people- what shall we do? The
innovative solution was to negotiate with land owners to be reconciled with enough money to sail the 4 hemispheres. By 1850,
the majority of Scots had been expatriated –to be www networked, free marketing and community-building practitioners
using strange arms like bagpipes to flow cross-cultural understandings.
changing economics Death of Distance (compound priorities viewed from The Economist in 1984) 007 Lower
Down- Economics Rubik Cube Yunus Puzzle: System-Deepest Purpose Rising**Prahalad Puzzle: Entrepreneurially energising brilliantly focused
trust-flow organisations or networks**STERN
Puzzle: Economic Maps of Future's Compound Exponentials 007 Brilliant Videos 1 2 3 4 5 -please vote in others info@worldcitizen.tv Professional loss of sustainability I dont know one hard
profession - economics, accounting, law, investment analysts, risk prevention, insurance - that is compounding human sustainability
transparently. Back in early 2001, I interviewed Margaret Blair chairlady of
the Unseen Wealth report published by Brookings economists and Georgetown scholars of social law. She had revealed that unless
accounting of global organisations plugged the missing audit, ever greater risks would compound. She was sent to Coventry
(in the US that appears to be Tennessee!) by the incoming administration from Texas for daring to release such news. Then
every quarter from summer of 2001 what she predicted has compounded. The missing
map, though always grounded in contextual details, is truly not that complicated. It posits that human relationship
systems coordinate trust-flow around 10 main branches : 5 input flows (how organisations are served by people and resources);
5 outputs: what customers, employees, owners, local societies and humanity as impacted by the consequences of global market
sectors truly values most. Unless the world's global market sectors are audited by this map with the same attention as
they quarterly spreadsheet how much they take from the world, sustainability is not what the networked generation will pass
on. Ironically, my father summed up his 40 year career at The Economist with a trilogy of surveys and books on Entrepreneurial
Revolution - the last of which in 1984 forecast that the networking generation 1984-2024 would spin one of 2 opposite futures-
sustainability or termination of ours species. 24 years ago it was forecast that this type of above zero-sum value multiplying
economics would urgently need to be implemented the world over between 2005-2015 - http://www.normanmacrae.com/netfuture.html Will we be in time in open sourcing the MAP or not? Love to hear your views,
questions etc. We also seek to convene 1000-person reunion in 2008 around this question, also to commemorate my dad's
85th birthday http://erworld.tv Debating Spaces: we'd happily debate Q&A on why all our sustainabilities depends on the
world's largest organisations being trust-flow audited by 10 coordinates of human relations systems. mail info@worldcitizen.tv to connect a debate - currently active spaces include: blog http://valuetrue.blogspot.com facebook - risk group http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=4272322357 | Unseen Wealth: The Map Economists lost in navigating truth integration's future locally to globally (first
debated Spring 2001)  In accounting terms, the world's biggest maths mistake is caused by to failing to
map goodwill's compound consequences/truths transparently. How economists forgot that theit unique competence involves
helping people to simply see compound arithmentics futures is a human interest media stoy and an entrepreneurial crisis unlike any the world has witnessed since free market maps were first made in late 1700s | A
similar map found summer 2007 
|
which are your 2 favourite organisational economies of 1976-2005? ... vote info@worldeconomist.net our intrapreneurial benchmark is SW Airlines; our Death of Distance Above Zero-sum Networking benchmark
is Grameen - open source Microcredit An open letter to David Bornstein and alumni of How to Change the World (see below) This seeding
of micro-entrepreneurship as Muhammad Yunus 1 has called it is what 200+ years of Scot's Adam Smith's Free Market models have openly forecast
and mapped.
|  | CHANGING
ECONOMICS- CAN YOU BE A GUIDE? *1 *2 *3 *4 *5 *6 *7 *8 *9 Collaboration Book: what 5 most revolutionary truths can people & communities demand of economics? | info@worldcitizen.tv : Help us search 1 From Goodwill (transparency) to Great willpower (sustainability's compound exponential's
rising) systemised through hi-trust audit maps |
|
 |
|
Yunus SBE : intro All News *Branson *
Selection Kenya audacious prahalad a stern changemakers.info futurestocks.tv

CGI: Yunus Transcript; other Year 17 of Corporate Brand Research on Unique Organising Purpose (UOP) Highlights
from First 17 years: If the corporate brand organisation is mapped as a system of productive and
demanding relationships spinning round its UOP, then purpose will be lost every quarter unless a context-specific metric representing
the deepest value multiplying purpose we want to serve has the same organisation-wide attention as making quarterly numbers.
Should there be any conflict between the most context specific metric and taking money out
of the last quarter that is the most vital information of a forward innovation challenge that the Boardroom can get.
Not monitoring this information is to be certain of compounding unseen wealth (as intangible valuation crisis experts
call it), to be extremely risky to any partner (indeed a criterion for not partnering you), ultimately where a brand's
promise deviates from earning trust and goodwill. When a cancerous cell of lost purpose enters
into an organisational system, it always costs far more to cure this later than earlier; moreover at a certain stage the downward
exponential takes over and the true purpose can never be recovered. (source tracking implosion of dozens of multibillion dollar
corporations since Maxwell on - local note in the 1980s I was a director of a company that was taken over
by Maxwell; as the only vote against I left the same week; within 12 quarters the Maxwell empire had vanished and the captain
had jumped ship .For this reason, I started chartering research of UP 17 years ago. Mathematically
have found that all standard brand valuation algorithms are not context specific enough to ensure governance of purpose. If these
valuation algorithms are being used as part of the negotiation process of selling a company then it is a case of buyer
beware; if these algorithms are being used to steward a company, sustainability investors should short it. In 17 years of research, the simplest corporate brand purpose question charters have found to date is to empower
all employees to debate the transparency question: what would the world uniquely miss tomorrow if our organisational system
ceased to exist (probe by each productive and demanding coordinate whose quality of pairwise tensions explain how healthy
or ill your company's future goodwill is compounding).  
A best for the world game for our networking
century The World Economist invites you to transparently construct
the rules of the game of globalisation and sustainability. The rule selections made by the first networked generation
1984-2024 determines consequences for all future generations. Along with any mathematical rules (R), transparency asks us
to list assumptions (A). In trying to map a minimal simple set of rules, we delight in open questions, debates, benchmarks. Our
senior economist has been rehearsing with us the rules and assumptions for 24 years now since writing this death of distance (now aka in USA as World is Flat) Future History. Assumption 1:
In designing globalisation, we need to encourage everyone to interact in a way that includes integration of
every local society's sustainability. Incidentally, this is natures rule and technically Darwin was wrong: when
we ask any biologist today they can show us: nature's survival of the fittest values the connections between
cooperation and competition not just one loop round DNA's double helix. Rule 1 We make A1 because
the first rule of system theory is whatever is excluded from a system's governing map (and measurements that everyone exchanges valuation
around) is not just left out: over time exclusion (externalisation) will compound destruction. Suppose the globalisation our networks search/interact exclude
the right to life from any children born in one or more places. Then the globalisation our evoltuin constituted
will compound destruction of these childrens' lives, and this badwill design will spread like a cancer destroying
more and more childrens' lives and families and communities. PeaceCentury begins with valuing all children's lifetime exponentially wholly and as increasingly interconnecting. If you ask
everyone you know, who were the 100 most trusted people of all the world's history - at least one of Einstein, Gandhi
or Montessori may appear in your rankings. They would all support the view of children we have tried to state though your
searches will find much more passionate, diverse and practical ways of exploring this rule's systemisation than we
can hope to summarise Back in 1984, we were extremely cautious about prescribing
best. Apart from reconciling a very few common sense rules, our Scottish internationalist and family-loving intent was to let each community tap into the maximum of its diversity to iteratively select good enough pathways forward. Like
google's vision 1 2 founding values for sustainability investment, we would concur that simplicity of contextual good begins by declaring the transparent commitment to interact no evil.
As far as we can see and map: starting with the idea of not destroying the right of any child or any future generation's
sustainability is the most common value that unites human beings and cultural views across the world. Certainly all major
faiths connect it if you search why the rule of relationship reciprocity is commonly agreed to be the golden rule, As
far as the particular segment "businessmen" of humanity goes, guidemaker networks advocate that you search the views of Chairman Ray Anderson of Interface (video link, other links 1 2). For over 10 years now he has explicitly integrated the right to future life into his business model. He calls
this purpose Mount Sustainability. He agrees it takes a few years to systemise this. But it becomes clear that it compounding
sustainability and compounding profitability go hand in hand from all the experiences of Ray Anderson's Interface
Corporation and an increasing network of organisations that are building a zero waste carpeting industry connecting
Ray Anderson's minimal map of sustainability, as well as the annual american guide of 50 bets places to work
which has taken the unprecedented step of voting in a carpet manufacture - rat's Interface Corporation - into
the top 50 organisational systems to work around.
|
 |
|
 
As soon as it is recognized that some sort of policy will be required, simple
economics says that taking the least cost approach means starting now. GARY W. YOHE,Professor of Economics Wesleyan
University The Center’s lectures on the Yale Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change, February 2007
Introduction & Presentation Presentation - Part 2 Presentation - Part 3
Discussion - Part 1 Discussion - Part 2 Discussion - Part 3 On April 27, 2005 Second Permanent Secretary to Her Majesty’s Treasury
of the United Kingdom, Sir Nicholas Stern, delivered a lecture entitled “Making Development Happen:
Growth and Empowerment” at the World Bank headquarters in Washington, DC. The event was part of the World Bank’s
Presidential Fellows Lecture Series. Ian Goldin, Vice President for External Affairs of the World Bank, welcomed
the speaker, the distinguished guests in the audience, and World Bank President-Designate Paul Wolfowitz,
and introduced a video message from World Bank President James Wolfensohn. In his video message,
President Wolfensohn expressed his gratitude to Sir Nicholas Stern for his invaluable contribution to and involvement in development
and urged the audience to read Stern’s new book, Making Development Happen: Growth and Empowerment. Stern
focused his presentation on the tremendous evolution in ideas that has occurred throughout the past decade and gave an overview
of where this evolution has taken the development discourse. He emphasized that the development process is characterized by
constant fundamental structural change and dynamic processes, and described how these changes have influenced the development
agenda. He described the “two-pillar” development approach adopted by the World Bank that focuses on the importance
of building a positive investment climate and on empowering and investing in people. Stern also spoke briefly about the Commission
to Africa report and pointed out some of the significant challenges facing the continent that need urgent attention Transcript web origin  Sir Nicholas Stern - Making Development
Happen: Growth and Empowerment
|
|
My family (*1), like several Scots clans I know, is choc full of economists, journalists, educators and internationalists
including missionaries. My dad wrote the most editorials at The Economist, joining just after world war 2 and retiring late
80s. While some admired his systemic future histories (*2,*3) such as his famous survey identifying a Rising Japan(*4) in 1962, I admired most an entrepreneurial trilogy he began in 1976 and completed in 1984. The third part (*5) was the original "world is flat" (though in 1984 we called it "death of distance"
*6) which provided timelines for whether the generation 1984-2024 would sustain or end the world for
future generations. In our 1984 book, most of the crises (*7) mapped so far have come to pass. Regarding sustainability
of all of us, the timeline datemarked 2005-2015 as the most critical decade of systemic change (*8). Above all a revolution in economics was called for. In 2 books being prepared for dad's 85th
birthday in 008: we can see the world citizen call for economic revolutionary networking today: in Stern's sustainability
exponentials, Yunus' purposeful social business enterprise stockmarket, Prahalad's order of magnitude transformation
of corporate models to engage bottom of the pyramid peoples, Mandela's call for media attention on such greater communal
"truths" (*9) as hi-trust civic/open society leadership and transparency mentors of youth..
worldcitizen.tv*worldentrepreneur.net SUGGESTION - WHY NOT START CHANGING ECONOMICS FOR : HERE & NOW , chris macrae inquiries welcomed info@worldcitizen.tv us tel 301 881 1655
|
 |
|
Prahalad & The Sandbox 1 
Peter - sounds great. I have applied to
go. I love Prahalad's work though I sometimes feel he needs to be bridged between academia and practice entrepreneurs.When
Competing for the Future was current in 1994, I proposed to his co-author Gary Hamel that practitioners needed to present
brand architectures as a collaboration/partnering frame for leadership to map/see the open-flow connections between organisations
in search of deepest service/intrapreneurial passions. Unfortunately Coopers and Lybrand, whose phone I was using to talk
to Gary, were not very pleased with the idea. (Nor 4 years later were Andersen when valuetrue multiplier models were
shown to them of how worthless they were making their global brand) As
a reformed global branding expert interested in media transparency, I buy CK's "sandbox" idea that many
global organisations could simplify branding they use for rich citizens to offer a basic service to rurals at one fiftieth
of the cost (no loss of quality other than meaningless image-laden excess of choices and a society-wide commitment to
a trust contract that like Microcredit says neither side will use lawyers in trying our best as service providers and communal
customers). I assume its not particularly surprising to us that many of the earliest 50 times better value cases identified
by Bottom of Pyramid Alumni turn out to be in health areas. (Of course if organisitionally a global branded
corporate finds it hard to have one department charging wealthy citizens 50 times more than the marginal cost
to you of also serving the poor, you can always make a start by doing a partenership with Grameen -though if the
missing audit of goodwill was required to save the world from Delaware corporate lawyers, truth would immediately be
valuable as well as conveneinet ) If you need more references
to CK's sandbox or BOP ideas than appear at http://worldeconomist.net, please say. In so doing they could find Unseen Wealth's last exit of reforming their globalisation
systems wherever these are currently measured tocompound of externalities - profiting from putting the weakest
or most ignorant at risk of what theitr industry sector specialises in knowing most about) (Basically while truth media experts now know that over 50% of the cost of everything in global markets is liable
to be wasted on media and channels, the idea that media*law already wastes 98% of everything on life critical markets
shows how near the end of sustainability loss of empowerment & truth systems of entrepreneurship have reached) Tell me if you are coming - perhaps we could host a collaboration cafe immediately
afterwards so that anyone in Washington interested in how grassroots colaboration entrepreneurs can end malaria can make
a connection cheers chris macrae 301 881
1655 http://www.normanmacrae.com/netfuture.html http://macrae.tv/_wsn/page3.html Ending media corruption http://changemakers.net/en-us/node/224 and mapping goodwill's missing audit Peter Burgess wrote:
Dear Colleagues
Is this
an excuse for me to come to Washington?
Or a waste of good time?
Peter
---------- Forwarded
message ---------- From: NextBillion NextBillion Date: Mar 13, 2007 5:59 PM Subject: Invitation: The Next
4 Billion publication and BOP panel discussion To: NextBillion@wri.org
The World Resources Institute and the
International Finance Corporation cordially invite you to the presentation of the report:
The Next 4 Billion: Market Size & Business Strategy at the Base of the Pyramid
Discussions of base of the pyramid (BOP) markets
have relied principally on business case studies and rough estimates of market size. WRI, with the cooperation of
the International Finance Corporation, has leveraged unique access to national household surveys for the purpose
of understanding low-income communities as sources of entrepreneurship and as potential markets. Drawing on income data from 110 countries and standardized expenditure data from 36 countries across the globe, the report is an important
first look at the market opportunity represented by four billion individuals who make up the BOP. This briefing
on the report and the follow-on discussion of business strategy and market research will be the first public review of the report and its data.
|
|
 |
|
I am reminded of a story of 3 lawyers trained
at the Bar of London : one was Mahatma Gandhi, another grandfather, another uncle. 007 is centenary year of Mahatma’s Satyagraha -dramatise peaceful truth. In 1880s it was hugely innovative for an Indian to go train at
Bar of London. But it had not empowered Gandhi to do much in his first 15 years as a barrister. Then whilst travelling First
Class on a train in S Africa, he was thrown off the train for having the "wrong" skin. From that moment on
Gandhi knew that changing the law peacefully was the greatest innovation ever sought. By the 1930s, my grandad was near the
head of the British Raj judiciary in Bombay and there are court proceedings on record where his duty was to send Gandhi
to prison for causing unrest through peace protests. 15 years later my grandad was converted: he was writing the constitutional
law for India's In dependence mediated between Gandhi and the British Secretary of State for India. I knew my uncle
who was a Queen's Council much better than grandad. His "hobby" was to compile a quantum databank on fair
rewards for people who suffered horrific lifetime injuries. By making these benchmarks clear and fair to all sides as
every case developed, the English legal system has not yet become the peak ambulance chasing lottery that the US now has insuring
healthcare. However, my uncle's last major act was to lead a rebellion that ending in the "sacking" of
a Lord Chancellor who made errors with compound arithmetic and then refused to correct the erroneous legal precedents
he was setting. If you believe as WorldEconomist has debated since 1984 that the next decade integrates more change
than the world has ever seen before then it would be illogical not to expect that economics and laws will also need changing.
We invite you to explore what constructs can help every culture and every peoples in mapping futures that compound goodwill
for all, and not the loss of sustainability of all our children's I have
been making some guide notes from my father whose economics surveys and leaders at The Economist of the 1950s to 1980s focused especially
on two Q&A lenses: 
a) systematic entrepreneurship : of which the 3*greatgrandmasters were Scot's Adam Smith
(theory) and James Wilson (practice) the 1843 founder of The Economist, as well as arguably JB Say (theorist) who
founded the term - transform market's value exchange systematically to take (preneur) between (entre) assets
- so that all involved in the productivities and dmeands of a transparent marketplace can sustain ever greater value
multipliers of health and wealth http://www.normanmacrae.com b) future histories, based on understanding the long-term conflicts within
and across societies as well as who know had the greatest lifelong learning curves to evolve higher quality and lower cost
http://futurehistory.jp http://changeworld.net 
I think that from the 200+ years since the term entrepreneur emerged, we are now in a pretty hi-trust position to map the top 10 flow lessons that anyone systemising entrepreneurship should help all connected
to Q&A around the gravity of individual systems and through the boundaries of networks mapped as system*system*system
including the triangularisation which mathematically defines systems as spiralling micro to inter to macro 1 Simply mapped : it was always the future view of the entrepreneurial school of economics that healthy
lifetimes and transparent societies compound strong economies not vice versa. You can see this in the entrepreneurial revolution
trilogy my father published in The Economist between 1976 and 1984 -eg http://www.normanmacrae.com/intrapreneur.html 2 Unlike those who specialise in economics of big gets bigger, entrepreneurs always spiralled around
the triangle micro to inter to macro , http://futurehistorian.tv/ NOT macro to inter to micro. It wasnt particularly popular with big business when my father
reported in part 1 Entrepreneurial Revolution : almost all breakthrough innovations for humanity began with one inventor's
lifelong explorer's gravity or a small social innovation network who loved this explorer's human inspiration.
The only innovations big corporations came up with were patented processes not original solutions that make the difference
of the world as better place for all to be. The article on Pilkington Glass' innovation of plate glass rejoices in
: We are Pilkington's Glass, and if we can beat plate glass by developing float glass,
then every motor car in the world will pay us a royalty, so we will research the last three problems in the way of float glass.. Nobody should underestimate the excitement among a tiny group of researchers when a big firm's opportunity
presents itself. Sir Alastair Pilkington described how his research group into float glass was kept small
to maintain total secrecy, so that experiments progressed for seven years before competitors knew of them; how team members,
after working impossibly long hours, were carried away on stretchers suffering from heat exhaustion; how 100,000 tons of float
glass were made and broken before the great day which produced the first bit they could sell. But, as Jack Kilby says: each
invention presents a profile of opportunities and requirements, while each company has its own profile of what constitutes
to it an acceptable product. The probability that these two profiles, will coincide is not high. The
result is that many big companies' brilliant researchers are, in conditions of great secrecy, in their seventh consecutive
year of smashing unusable float glass. CITIZEN NETS AS CHANGE WORLD ENTREPRENEURS 2a Around 1980, the rich world had already changed over to being more a service economy than one where
machine investments differentiated advantage. This required the end of top-down only management as well as more investment
in people - something which to this day the mathematics of tangible accounting rules against - machines can be booked in as
an investment; people are costs to cut. Blindingly wrong maths to monopolise governance budgets by. 
2b In our 1984 conclusion to ER we looked ahead to the sustainabilitty networking generation
1984-2024. As grandmaster theorist Einstein (accompanied by grandmaster practitioner Gandhi) had first asked the most interesting question to start this unprecedented human relations communications
revolution with is : will this generation's rush to worldwide connectivity sustain or set in motion irreverisble loss
of sustainability? Back in 1984 one goal our future maps set : 30000 vital social projects to be identified for
interlocal replication - all over the world of deepest human needs by 2010. WE identified 7 crises each flowing into each
other; each wholly capable of globalising the end of the human species before Century 22. Any questions before our next 8
lessons review these crisis compasses (including what was recently reported by HM Treasury as the biggest failure of
markets ever) and ask for ideas on how to popularise world changer guides up down and through them all? chris.macrae@yahoo.co.uk us tel 301 881 1655 
|
|
|
Borstein letter: The Economist, over its first
145 years: my sources tell me that editors of The Economist were guided by one connecting truth investigation : Free
Markets. Here is some communal knowledge they shared with us: What Adam Smith and his alumni "the entrepreneurial economists" intended
by the idea of free markets has over the decades been disliked by big powers (be they corporate , gov professional, media
or even NGO) so much that these powers are always consciously or unconsciously looking for an academic
or other body to rewrite free market economics the exact opposite way round from true value multiplication True free markets are contextual; community rising; rely on completely transparent
and free information so far as all purposeful interactors are concerned in systematically improving for humanity the market’s
productivities and demands. The Economist's Entrepreneurial Revolution trilogy 1976, 1982 and published in books in multiple
languages from 1984 on clarified much more than this from thousands of cases and interviews of hi-trust people (the kind who had united cultures, ended wars, nurtured transformative innovations for the good of the human
race) Provided markets (their media, meeting spaces, mediators
etc) are always asking future questions and not relying on past certainties, over the long run the mutual interests of
the customers most concerned with the future social consequences of the markets context and employees wanting to make
a difference with their lifetime are the key value multipliers to integrate into organisational systems. Those who invest
money in such system uniting the best of employee service and customer-social demand win-win-win : 8 times more over a generation
according to built to last research, up to 100 times more in the case of the very deepest intrapreneurial (service economics)
companies of the last three decades. We invite you to
explore these principles and vote for compound goodwill candidates at http://futurestocks.tv Expect to be surprised. For example, the best work being done on saving the lives and educations of the world's poorest
children is not being done by a government. The world citizen organisation BRAC has discovered through trial and error than and 30 years of absolute devotion that both health and educational professionals must
live inside the communities of the very poorest not be professionalized above them. Once you accept that model
- by all means inventions in terms of health care and the wisest forms of education you can serve to children may be made
form around the world - but they must prove themselves in terms of being serviceable by workers who are in the community
and loved by the community and know any diverse contexts which give that community special sustainability opportunities.
| ABC of WORLDwide ECONOMICS There
are 3 connecting ways that World Economist encourages everyone to value true leaders. A) Hi-Trust - Does leader truly understand entrepreneurial gravity- how to govern trust-flow around an uniquely valuable
purpose, so that the system keeps spinning ever more lively productivities and demands without all the elasticities snapping,
or bigger taking over from deeper communal service? B) TRANSPARENCY: In Death-of-Distance's blossoming internetworked world, does the leader understand the critical transparency of boundary flows ?
And how transparency's zero tolerances for conflicts & misinformation will wave ever more vitally as value
multiplies through networks C) SUSTAINABILITY:
Does the leaders understand compound future exponentials as the integral measure wof where everyone’s productivity and demands will curve sustainably up or down
towards death of the organisational system and any other systems linked into it which in globally connected markets can be
whole sectors (witness dotcoms or indeed the planet witness climate crisis What happens if you discover a leader does not understand all these? You can either
try to help this person learn or you can advise everyone in your communities and social networks to get away from that leader
as fast as possible. Unfortunately goodwill is not yet measured in a truly systemic way and until its (known) maths is adopted by open source movements you may need to appeal to everyone’s co-creativity in exploring
the truth. With all due haste and presence, as Al Gore has given us one extraordinary demonstration of, and youth 1 2 3 gives us more. Any questions,
chris.macrae@yahoo.co.uk or dad (world economist) at N.A.Macrae.42@cantab.net (NM1) | The most crucial valuation measurement of a system connects
with how fast its spinning future growth, or destruction. Mathematically, a purposeful gravity of human relationships compounds
over time and can be modelled through value multiplication of its coordinates. A healthy coordinate has constructive tensions
(trust-flow elasticity) with all other coordinates - give it an index above 1; an unhealthy coordinate is in conflict with
other coordinates or disconnecting from gravity, give it an index below 1 where 0 means it will zeroise the whole system.
Most organisations or networks in today's service economy and globally networked markets can mathematically model their
system's future value like this: valuetrue=K1*K2*K3*K4*K5*V1*V2*V3*V4*V5 Knowing how these quintuple helixes of productivities
& demands will flow ever way round over time's lifecycles has extremely interesting impacts on choices of investors,
strategists, cross-disciplinary organisational designers, regional policy making and indeed every communal role in which people
interact with productivities and demands. The compound valuation consequences become 10-win or 10-lose for singular organisational
systems and at least 100-win or 100-lose for networks of systems*systems. This model and map provides the simplest open source
standard for resolving the Unseen Wealth challenge (2000) that has caused crises (1) amongst experts in intangibles valuation, risk analysis, sustainbility investment fund selections, political
leaders and all their professional counsels, let alone 6 billion human beings forever more connected by whether we virtuously
develop or viciously extract the globe's natural footprint. learning games | Inputs serving | Outputs
demanded | | K1:Work by Individuals | V1:Employees | | K2:Work by Groups | V2:Customers | | K3:Organisations | V3:Owners | | K4:Networks of Organisations | V4:Business Partners | | K5-:Societies/Cultures | V5:Local Societies & World Citizen Partnerships | 1-3 : Service Economy 3-5 : Global Economy of Networked Localities ; K4*V4*V5 - Grameen's No Loss Corporation |
http://worldeconomist.net email info@worldeconomist.net delicious: tour of world economist debates WorldEconomist Live ABC: A B C D E F G G1 H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z World Economist Historic ABC: E Keynes Smith Wilson
Can
you help us improve this definition so that it is more inspiring for all 6 billion beings? ... NetworkEconomics maps
the critical Q&A -open knowledge flows for sustainably value multiplying exponentials of productivity and demand around
hi-trust gravitaional purposes (investing money, people's lifetimes, and societies living (eg children, open source education
and co-mentoring, social network spaces and goodwill neighbouring) & natural resources (eg clean water,and systemically
harmonious climate) Entrepreneur schools of economics in 1984, 1982, ... 1843
inquiries chris macrae info @worldcitizen.tv us tel 301 881 1655 ; us office 5801 nicholson lane suite 404, North Bethesda,
MD 20852 USA - uk 80 queens road, suite 30, wimbledon, london sw19 8lb Mapping is a process of discovery. It explores how to make the invisible principles and practices of
real wealth creation visible, and therefore useable. Our planet needs case studies underline the search for new win-wins that
build ‘system integrity’ Trust-flow is the unseen wealth to invest sustainability in. Tranpsaremtly
mapped it develops a goodwill gravity tyhat invites with roleplayer in a community to multiply goodwill while sustaining
their own cashflow.. Trust is not some vague, mushy, abstract warm-hearted sentiment. It is an economic powerhouse –
probably just as economically and socially important as oil. The point is, there are specific things you need to do
to get trust flowing, just as there are specific things you need to do to get oil flowing. And like oil trust has a dark side.
Right now, the world is awash with the carbon emissions which threaten the stability and sustainability of its ecosystems.
Right now, the world is also awash with the ‘carbon emission’ of trust – mistrust. Indeed it may well be
that our ability to tackle the one issue – the threat of environmental catastrophe – depends on our ability to
tackle the other issue: how to generate, deepen, extend and sustain trust.>br>But what is the best way of doing this?
One thing is for sure. You don’t build and sustain trust via some sentimental exercise of goodwill to all and sundry.
There are three very simple principles at the heart of effective trust generation. First, trust is generated via
win-win relationships. It’s virtually impossible to generate or sustain trust without mutual benefit for those involved.
But beneficial outcomes are not enough in themselves. For trust to be built and sustained, both sides need to signal a demonstrable
commitment to finding win-win ways forward. Such a commitment may require real changes to what we say and
do. Second, real ‘win-wins’ are hardly ever purely financial or material. You don’t build trust simply by
walking away with more cash in your pocket. Trust works at all the dimensions and levels of human exchange. Yes, it’s
about financial and material rewards. But it’s also about purpose (what people want to achieve). It’s about politics
with a small ‘p’: the use and abuse of power, the crafting and application of rules of fair play. And it’s
about emotions: the sometimes overwhelmingly strong emotions, both positive and negative, that are generated when people deal
with other peopleWhat’s constitutes a ‘win’ – a sense of real improvement – is therefore highly
specific. It depends absolutely on the details of who the parties are, what they are trying to achieve, in what context. Building
trus, therefore involves discovering these specifics. Just as oil doesn’t flow out of the ground, get refined and pump
its way into motor vehicles automatically and without effort, so identifying and doing what is necessary to get trust flowing
requires dedicated, skilled effort. It requires a disciplined, structured process, not a vague sentiment.
3) Third,
even if we do steps 1) and 2) there’s still a good chance it won’t succeed. Why? Because it ignores an invisible
third factor. In the real world, purely two way bilateral relationships don’t exist. There is always a third party whose
interests or outcomes are affected by what the other two parties do but who is not a party to the contract. The environment
is a case in point. Producers and consumers may both benefit from buying and selling to each other – but what happens
if, in doing so, they destroy the environment they both depend on?
This raises a hugely important question. When
two parties pursue win-wins and build mutual trust, are they doing so in a way which creates a win and builds trust for the
third party at the same time? Or are they simply pushing the problems – and the mistrust – further down the line
on to this third party? Building vigorous, healthy networks of trust is a different kettle of fish to ‘you
scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours’ win-win conspiracies. It requires a Map of all the key relationships plus
careful consideration of knock-on consequences. It requires a different perspective.
These three simple, basic
steps do not happen automatically. They need to be worked at. The territory needs to be deliberately Mapped and explored.
What’s more, there are obstacles in our way – mental and practical obstacles that need to be cleared. Prevailing
economic theories about ‘rational economic man’ for example, deny the need to commit to win-win outcomes. Instead,
they promote supposedly ‘rational’ (i.e. narrowly selfish behaviours) which actively undermine trust The same
theories insist that the only valid measure of human benefit is money, thereby excluding from consideration many of the biggest
opportunities for improvement. Meanwhile many vested interests do not want to extend the circle of trust to third parties
and complete networks because their positions of power depend on their ability to take advantage of the weaknesses of these
third parties. That’s another job for Mapping: helping to identify and mount such obstacles. The potential benefits
of doing so are unthinkably huge. They start with a simple negative: the relief that comes from when you stop banging your
head against a brick wall. Mistrust breeds wasteful, wealth destroying conflict that tends to feed on itself. Anger and hatred
engender anger and hatred. Simply easing or stopping the terrible waste of mistrust would transform prospects for many millions
of people. We desperately need to find ways of doing this. Then there are the positive benefits. Understanding the real nature
of human wealth – all those dimensions of purpose, ‘politics’ and emotion as well as money and material
comfort – means we can start being human again; human in the way we think, and act. What’s more, many of these
intangible benefits won’t cost a penny. They’re there for the taking, if only we puts our minds to it. But
there’s more, because trust is also an economic superpower in its own right. In the pages that follow we will show conclusively
that material and financial riches are also dependent on trust. In fact, we will argue the case for going one step further.
We will say that material and financial riches are a by-product of trust: the visible fruits of invisible, intangible human
exchange. Once you understand that sustainable cash flows are a by-product of sustainable trust flows, your understanding
of what makes a successful business is transformed. Separately, each of these three fruits – reducing the waste
of conflict, unleashing the potential intrinsic benefits of human exchange, and energising the sustainable creation of material
wealth – are massive in their own right. Put them together and they represent a vast new continent of opportunity. As we said, this book is addressed to entrepreneurs and system innovation revolutionaries. Wherever you happen to
be, whatever the change you want to make is, the principles explored in this book apply. The wish to change and the will to
change are not the same as being able to change successfully. For that you need to understand your territory. You will need new
Maps. 
Powered by Register.com
|
|
|
 |