viernes, noviembre 06, 2015

Do we want to claim our humanity with a paradigm shift to generative dialogues?

This is a narrative of a plausible vision of the future that claims our humanity and enables us to act.  Such a future has been emerging as a new civilization that has been suggested as the systemic civilization. What follows takes visible and invisible inputs from the 7th Global Drucker Forum 2015, “Claiming our Humanity – Managing in the Digital Age,” where the good, the true and the beautiful mutually reinforced each other.

John Hagel III, Director Deloitte Consulting LLP; Co-Chairman Center for the Edge, said that he expects that the Big Shift is a transition, which we can interpret as a transition from one civilization to another. While the vision of the new civilization is based on such a Big Shift that signals that the future is by far no longer a continuation of the past, under the industrial civilization strong paradigm we will continue to be where the most that can be done is to agree that the future is a continuation of the past.

In line with Alvin Toffler’s Third Wave, such a vision enables stable long run production capital decisions, for example, to have solar panels financed all over the world as deregulated long term investments to end users that address systemic problems. It can be seen that implementing such a disruptive  example will disolve the climate change systemic problem. As Peter Drucker suggested the 4th Information Revolution that supports such a vision is not unprecedented as it happened with a Big Shift on the 3rd Information Revolution 500 years ago.

This vision is for the world of increasing returns that are enabled by the internet infrastructure that’s supporting the sharing economy where trust is migrating from big business to end users. The 'invisible wedge' described by Toffler in The Third Wave, that separates production from demand, was reported in the Forum to have started to disappear to eliminate under the emerging civilization the unfair advantage that production has over a huge number of emerging prosumers.

Unless we agree that a new civilization has been emerging for several decades it will be nearly impossible to develop the vision of the future and will remain stuck, for example, having central station renewable energy projects concessions and transmission lines infrastructure expansions, under unstable regulatory short run supply side financial capital decisions on the industrial civilization. Such unstable system results in privatization of the benefits and socialization of the losses.  This is the world of diminishing returns that has myopically over expanded installed capacity. This is what makes all the sense for the sharing economy of the new civilization.

Being stuck agrees with Fortunes Magazine editor Alan Murray that “The world is in the midst of a new industrial revolution.” We are here proving that such idea is wrong if we agree that there is a plausible future in the horizon, which allows us to shift from the debate paradigm to generative dialogue paradigm about how to reach such a vision.

As Andrew Hill, the Conference Chair, Associate Editor and Management Editor, Financial Times, told us the conclusions of Day 1, he said that there were "important contradictions." While those important contradictions might be very negative as it divides us if we don’t have a future vision, they become very rich indeed and align us for the generative dialogue as we have a vision available for the new civilization.