#WEF Davos 2016...The Industrialist’s Dilemma? @EcoAhead @Massoud_Amin @UMNCSE @UWMadison https://t.co/OJUr3VEKol pic.twitter.com/hAfnvtY6Mx— Jose A Vanderhorst S (@gmh_upsa) February 16, 2016
Will Wall Street 'secret summits' extend even more the prevailing tyranny of soaring #OWS #15M inequality? https://t.co/LZJqjWGkiq #EuropeIN— Jose A Vanderhorst S (@gmh_upsa) February 16, 2016
Starting 1st Golden Age @EcoAhead of the #SystemicCivilization which with #GreatCapitalism will serve them both with #DD_SM trust & honesty— Jose A Vanderhorst S (@gmh_upsa) February 16, 2016
A Better Decade Require the End of the Prevailing Style of Management, that says “As suggested by W. Edwards Deming, the main barrier to basic innovations, like the EWPC-AF, and an increased standard of living, is the prevailing style of management. A better decade is thus dependent on the adoption of Deming’s System of Profound Knowledge.” Such emphasis on technology would mean that global society has lost a technological revolution due to the Groupthink of representative democracy.
It is easy to see that the tyranny of Management 1.0 is strongly linked in the main text with the Great Decoupling. What the insight also reveals is in the preface of the second edition of his book “The New Economics For Industry, Government, Education,” published in 1993 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center for Advanced Engineering Study, where the late W. Edwards Deming wrote:
This book is for people who are living under the tyranny of the prevailing style of Management. The huge, long-range losses caused by this style of management have led us into decline. Most people imagine that the present style of management has always existed, and is a fixture. Actually, it is a modern invention – a prison created by the way people interact. This interaction afflicts all aspects of our lives – government, industry, education, healthcare.I add that Steve Denning warned us in the section "The Risks Of Wall Street’s ‘Secret Summits’," of "a number of worrying elements about what is going on." As you may see from his article it is self dealing to keep in place the Management 1.0 tyranny. In the introduction of his article Denning wrote:
Over recent months, a group of the world’s largest firms, banks and asset managers on Wall Street has been holding “secret summits,” the Financial Times reported last week. The goal, says the FT, is “to hammer out proposals for improving public company governance to encourage longer-term investment and reduce friction with shareholders.” The firms include BlackRock, Berkshire Hathaway, Fidelity, JPMorgan, the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and the activist hedge fund, ValueAct. The most recent “secret summit” took place in December 2015.
The key evidence to extend even more the prevailing tyranny of Management 1.0 soaring inequality is that "BlackRock’s CEO, has written to the chief executives of all Fortune 500 companies warning them of the risks of 'short-termism' and urging them to develop “'long-term visions.'” Such evidence Denning wrote is that "the 'long-term time-frame' is only three years." Having learn that we are against a clear lack of leadership, this is what it is suggested in the moonshot "Redefine the work of leadership," under Moon Shots for Management, by Gary Hamel, on the February 2009 issued of the Harvard Business Review:
Natural hierarchies require natural leaders—that is, individuals who can mobilize others despite a lack of formal authority. In Management 2.0, leaders will no longer be seen as grand visionaries, all-wise decision makers, and ironfisted disciplinarians. Instead, they will need to become social architects, constitution writers, and entrepreneurs of meaning. In this new model, the leader’s job is to create an environment where every employee has the chance to collaborate, innovate, and excel.
Can a Management 2.0 update help CEOs face Pope Francis’ wealth, vanity and pride temptations?
Considering Pope Francis as an example of a Servant Leader, that is going well beyond the scope of the Catholic Church, we find the article In crime-infested Mexican suburb, pope rips wealth, vanity, and pride as an excellent evidence to address the existence of the global Great Decoupling soaring inequality with the intent of what CEOs can do about it. In that respect, please consider the following tweets:
#Servantleaders will try to overcome @Pontifex temptations of wealth, vanity & pride in #SystemicCivilization with #GreatCapitalism & #DD_SM— Jose A Vanderhorst S (@gmh_upsa) February 15, 2016
Can a @profhamel Management 2.0 update help CEOs face @Pontifex wealth, vanity & pride temptations? https://t.co/LZJqjWGkiq #OWS #EuropeIN— Jose A Vanderhorst S (@gmh_upsa) February 15, 2016
Pope Francis @Pontifex - May the Lord help us overcome the temptations of wealth, vanity and pride which seek to destroy the truth of the Gospel.
Jose A Vanderhorst S @gmh_upsa - #Servantleaders will try to overcome @Pontifex temptations of wealth, vanity & pride in #SystemicCivilization with #GreatCapitalism & #DD_SMThose tweets suggests the need to help develop Servant Leaders as organization CEOs that are able to face those temptations by starting to create the Systemic Civilization to introduce the Direct Democracy of the Systemic Market starting, for example, with the Electricity Pact of the Dominican Republic. On the reason to create the Systemic Civilization, please consider the article Will Wall Street's 'Long-Termism' Make Things Worse?, under which is the following comment to the author:
Jose A Vanderhorst S @gmh_upsa - Because fair is fair & foul foul @Pontifex let's create the #SystemicCivilization with #GreatCapitalism & #DD_SM starting w/ #PactoElectrico
Dear Steve Denning,It is interesting to consider a quote of Mr. Denning that reflects current Wall Street CEO behavior on the wealth tempetation driven by foul is fair and fair is foul: "Palmisano viewed his role at IBM as a steward of a machine that makes money for the big investors." Do we still need money making Management 1.0 machines?
Thank you for a very timely analysis.
“By no longer ignoring the social dimension… Keynes would had believe that for quite some time fair needs to be fair and foul needs to be foul. In order to dissolve such unfair Great Decoupling of soaring inequality, we must create the systemic civilization under a paradigm of interdependence. Keynes would have agreed to adjust the more than one hundred years that he predicted have already been gone for about 40 years. That’s because the world changed for all practical purposes much earlier than he anticipated as the industrial civilization under decreasing returns had reached and gone beyond its capacity. The Great Decoupling is the result of industrialists foul is fair using the dark side of technology of a new civilization that enabled increasing returns was trying to emerge but has not been created.”
“Here is why Keynes and Schumpeter would be on the same page as open dynamic systems are available that replaced closed static systems. To support the above mentioned great change in the code of morals, which would lead us into the Golden Age that Carlota Pérez anticipated, next is what Peter Drucker said on the need to change from Keynesian to Schumpeterian economics…”
Those are two key paragraphs examples that led to the tweet “Being Keynes & Schumpeter alive, the creation of new civilization with a code of morals were long overdue http://bit.ly/g363mh #EuropeIN”
In addition, in response to your tweet on your article “Four Reasons Why You’ve Got A Rotten Job — Or No Job At All,” please consider the tweet Would Keynes tell us there is just one flawed reason: “foul is fair and fair is foul.”?, which carried the tweet of the new civilization with a code of morals that is what is missing to stop the strategic (marketing) myopia that is running under the power of ‘Groupthink’ that involves CEOs and their boards. Investors, the media, public official and other institutions you have mentioned in other articles.
In what follows the above mentioned concepts are suggested to be part of Management 2.0 as an additional language proposal. The background hypothesis of the proposal comes from the Grupo Millennium Hispaniola Blog, elaborated under an action oriented scientific attitude. This is based on Management 2.0 LabNote Renegade Thinking, which:
… calls for a whole new language and philosophy of management, the concluding plenary heard a plea for implementation of proven but neglected principles, as well as the invention of new ones. In this view management houseclearing – sweeping out the sediment of outdated practices – enlarging the pro-change constituency and building an “implementation engine” were regarded as important as new practices.With a minor change from ‘implementation engine,’ to ‘implementation organ,’ next is the proposal:
Organic (open) systems live or die, while machine (closed) systems operate or brake.
Wicked problems generated in the industrial civilization, signal the existence of artificial life organic anti-systems. Example: Wall Street is ‘operating’ artificially under foul is fair, and fair is a foul, ‘Groupthink’ anti-systemic short run financial market, at a time when money is excessively abundant.
Wall Street investors keep using a strategy of terrain that’s leading them and us to collapse, for example, by expecting to ‘operate’ as they used to "Without clearly articulated plans, companies risk losing the faith of long-term investors." Society should press governments to get out of the ‘Groupthink’ for those investors to support long run production capital.
Instead of being in the Second Machine Age, we need to create the Systemic Civilization under a strategy of trajectory, in which fair is fair, and foul is foul to reverse The Great Decoupling of soaring inequality. This way, CEOs will need to become Servant Leaders, based on the “Fourth update: in a new world order, Servant-Leadership will be prevalent” of the post Can 10 questions above politics help forecast a new world order in 2015?