This the fourth in our series from Chaordic Commons describing a their process for creating synergic organizations. I recommend using their process with ORTEGRITY for maximum leverage. Ortegrity provides a lot of direction for this phase of the Charodic Design process. See also: 1) Purpose 2) Principles 3) Participants

The Chaordic Design Process

Organizational Concept

Definition: An Organizational Concept answers the question “How are Participants in the organizational system related?” It specifies the legal nature of the organization, depicts potential functional relationships among Participants, and describes governance processes, including the initial decision-making bodies.

Organizational Concept - In Context: When all relevant and affected parties have been identified, design team members creatively search for and develop a general Organizational Concept for the organization.

In the light of Purpose and Principles, they seek innovative organizational structures and relationships that can be trusted to be just, equitable and effective with respect to all Participants, in relation to all Practices in which they may engage. They usually discover that no existing form of organization can provide that level of trustworthiness and that something new must be conceived.

In one sense, an Organizational Concept is the chaordic equivalent of the organization chart, though it tends to resemble the neurons of the brain or the complex patterns of an ecosystem rather than a traditional hierarchy. It also includes the key guidelines for interaction among Participants and for the emergence of new elements in the system.

When the Organizational Concept phase is completed, the design team has several useful products. They include a description of the organization as a totality, in its systemic context; initial preferences concerning the legal structure of the organization; a set of diverse visual images of potential organizational structures, decisions concerning basic organizational elements and their relationships, and a sketch of the way that governance bodies will initially be composed.

Prior decisions about Purpose, Principles and Participants will inform development of a powerful Organizational Concept. Work done in this phase will directly translate into key sections of the Constitution.

Processes and Approaches

Developing an Organizational Concept typically requires a great deal of creativity, dialogue and experimentation. It is as much about unlearning our conventional ideas about organization as it is about creating new ones.

The fundamental questions being explored are:

• If anything imaginable were possible, what would be the nature of an ideal organization to fulfill the Purpose in accord with the Principles?
  
  
• How do we create an organization that is trusted by all Participants to make decisions about the innumerable critical issues that exist and will emerge in this organization, industry or community?
  
  
• What is the most appropriate legal form for the organization? For profit or nonprofit? Stock or non-stock? 501c3 or 501c6? Some combination of these – or something else entirely? What are the strengths and weaknesses of various options? (This subject will inevitably be revisited in the Constitution phase of the process.)

When working with a single organization, we sometimes find it useful – and invariably revealing – to have participants begin work on Organizational Concept by drawing their current organizational structure. In most cases, different individuals will produce very different pictures of the organization. Exploring these differences, and probing the relationships depicted, will illuminate many of the issues that participants seek to resolve in reconceiving the organization.

In an inter-organizational initiative, we typically engage in a similar inquiry. In this case, the focus is not on the structure of a single organization but on the relationships in an industry, field or community. Having design team members diagram the dynamics of the system can provide important information about current challenges, highlight key Participants, and illuminate the fundamental social function that they are seeking to fulfill through their efforts. It can also help them begin to imagine innovative systems of interaction more appropriate to emerging realities.

The point of these explorations of organizational structure and system dynamics is not to reinforce what already exists but to begin seeing through and beyond it to more potent organizational possibilities. Consider for a moment four ways of looking at things: as they were, as they are, as they might become, and as they ought to be. The heart of the work on Organizational Concept revolves around this fourth perspective. It begins when team members start to envision new principle-based systems and structures that redefine relationships among Participants in flexible yet coherent ways. They should be encouraged to put aside perceived constraints and obstacles, including their preconceptions of what the law may or may not allow.

For the effort to be most successful, intensive, sustained and creative thought must be given to specific topics. Some of the more important are:

Nature of ownership

• Who will own the organization and its assets?
  
  
• Will it be owned equitably? How will equity be ensured at the outset and as the organization grows?
  
  
• Can ownership be “unbundled” from other forms of participation in the system?

Ownership means different things in chaordic organizations. It tends not to include rights normally associated with conventional stock ownership, such as proportional control of the governance structure, rights to liquidate commonly held assets, or perpetual royalties based on the share of externally invested capital (traditional equity).

Ownership is more likely to involve rights of participation, and access to or use of common properties. It might imply the right to create new products or services. Owners (or owner-members) may also have the right to create new parts of the organization in accord with the Principles.

Value flows and power

• Who provides what kinds of value, both monetary and nonmonetary, in the organization, industry or field? How do values flow within the system?
  
  
• What are the current constraints on an equitable flow of value(s) within the organization or industry? How could relationships among the Participants be reconceived to create a system that produces more value for all?
  
  
• What types of power operate in the system? How are they correlated to value flows?
  
  
• What other interests or powers need to be integrated and balanced? It can be useful to think specifically about such issues as separation of powers, distribution of power, sufficiency of power, and how powers are reserved by or for different Participants.

Structure and self-organization

• What are the most elemental “units” of organization? (Borrowing from the complexity sciences, we often use the term “fractal” to refer an organizational component of chaordic organizations, especially the elemental units. Fractals will be embedded within or connected to the system, and they embody the same fundamental rights and obligations (Purpose and Principles) among their members as the organization of which they are part. Each fractal has the full authority of the whole in undertaking its operations and has the right to pursue any activity congruent with the Purpose and Principles.) What will these entities be called, and what minimum degree of diversity must they have to reflect Purpose and Principles? Will they be compromised of individuals, institutions or both? What will their obligations be?
  
  
• What is a clear and complete way to describe the different kinds of participants among which power needs to be balanced? Will some have different rights and obligations?
  
  
• Will the initial organizational units or levels be geographically defined? Defined by function, interest or subject matter? Some combination of these? Should rights or duties vary depending on whether they are geographically based, functionally based or based on interests?
  
  
• May these units join one another, and what will be consequences, if any, of doing so? How does the organization scale – that is, how can larger entities self-organize as functions or governance encompass larger domains? How do entities at different levels form, grow, change, and combine?

Governance

A central challenge of the Organizational Concept phase involves imagining the collection of bodies and methods through which participants will set policies for themselves, commit to joint action, or resolve issues. Chaordic organizations will have multiple centers of governance, none of which could be described as dominant. Important questions abound:

• Who will participate in governance of the organization? What are the respective rights and responsibilities of participants in the organization, whether individuals, institutions, self-organizing entities, governing councils or others?
  
  
• Does the organization have sufficient powers to make, implement and enforce decisions involving the needs of the system? These powers should rest in a board (or council) small enough to work efficiently, yet large enough to represent all relevant and affected parties.
  
  
• Is the governance body responsible for stewardship of the whole appropriately representative of all Participants? What is the optimal size and composition of that body, if it is to balance all relevant and affected parties?
  
  
• How will members of the board be determined (a) at minimum composition, (b) as the board grows and (c) at maximum composition? How are seats on governing councils filled – by appointment, election or some other method?
  
  
• What will be the powers and responsibilities of the board, and what voting or other requirements will apply to the board’s exercise of its powers and responsibilities? What express limitations should be placed on powers of the board and reserved to participants?
  
  
• Should the organization’s members, owners or participants have the ability to amend any parts of the concept that become part of the Constitution without board approval? If so, what parts and by what degree of agreement?

(Knowing the kinds of issues that must be addressed in the Constitution will guide detailed consideration of certain aspects of Organizational Concept.)

As design team members work through these and related questions, they are searching for a way to conceive initial conditions for the organization so that it grows and evolves in ways consistent with its Principles – without dictating how that development is to occur, and allowing organizational structure to be emergent.

A frequently recurring challenge during the Organizational Concept phase is the tendency of design team members to attempt to envision and provide for every issue and permutation that may arise as the organization evolves. This is a futile exercise, for in a truly self-organizing, self-governing organization the possibilities are infinite. It is important for members of the design team to recognize that the Organizational Concept is not a set of “rules” tailored to imagined scenarios, but rather creation of an initial governance structure and set of rights of responsibilities that will be trusted by participants to be responsive to a multitude of unforeseeable events in accordance with the Purpose and Principles.

We use visualization tools extensively during the Organizational Concept phase of the chaordic design process. Drawing materials, three-dimensional modeling tools, and other creativity aids can help participants conceive innovative organizational relationships and envision the organization’s potential evolution.

The figures starting on page 10 illustrate a few of the images that we have used in organizational design initiatives.

Process Notes

The first three phases of the chaordic design process form the foundation for creating an innovative Organizational Concept. Work on Concept requires constant checking against Principles and careful consideration of Participants, in particular. Both are often refined during this phase of the process.

Preliminary thinking about Practices may also be helpful, especially if it illuminates the need for a Concept flexible and adaptive enough to encompass a wide range of potential activities. In general, developing an Organizational Concept involves continually:

• Refining a new vision of the relationships among Participants
• Identifying and letting go of conventional assumptions about organizations
• “Unbundling” concepts of ownership, participation and value
• Deepening the inquiry into the organization’s essential social function
• Seeking higher level solutions to the creative tensions that will inevitable arise

Exploring different organizational forms of organizational structure – hub structures, cooperatives, business webs, syndication networks, the open source movement and others – can be useful. Participants will typically discern features they seek in an Organizational Concept and limitations they aim to avoid.

As part of unbundling process, some groups find it useful to differentiate reasons that Participants might join together and then begin to imagine different ways those activities could be undertaken and related. We sometimes distinguish:

• Councils – Where people come together to make decisions that are potentially binding on them all. Conventional corporations make decisions through boards of directors and hierarchical power structures, but many other approaches might be possible and appropriate.
  
  
• Commons – Where people come together to share a resource that is either naturally occurring or brought into being through human effort. Are there ways to own common properties that are fair and that avoid negative incentives?
  
  
• Enterprises – Where people come together to complete tasks or divide labor efficiently and effectively. What form do enterprises take when principles of self-organization are faithfully applied?
  
  
• Communities – Where people come together, because that’s what people do, for identity, meaning, nurturing and companionship.

These notions are not mutually exclusive. Options abound for how these different forms of activity can be pursued in complementary ways. Communities may have one or more councils, one or more commons, and one or more enterprises. Commons are may have one or more councils, several enterprises, and one or more communities. Councils may involve one or more communities, enterprises or commons. Enterprises are almost certain to include all three. We encourage design team members to explore what an organization starts to look like if Participants have the freedom to organize themselves in the most productive ways they can find.

Every organization is unique – and an Organizational Concept most fully empowering its Participants to realize Purpose in accord with Principles will also be unique. At the same time, certain perspectives will tend to characterize the structure and functioning of chaordic organizations. The organization will be:

• Inclusive. The organization will be open to all who subscribe to its Purpose and Principles in conducting the organization’s activities.
  
  
• Multi-centric and distributive. There will be no single center of power – they will be everywhere. The smallest or most peripheral parts of the organization will retain the most power.
  
  
• Self-organizing and self-evolving. The organization will grow through self-organization rather than through a centralized command-and-control process. Every aspect of the organization will be subject to change as the whole evolves.
  
  
• Participant-owned and participant-governed. Participants will govern themselves and the parts of the network in which they participate. Any central board or council will be responsible only for those few decisions that concern the whole of the system.
  
  
• Diverse and adaptive. In a chaordic organization, there will be very few constraints on innovation and experimentation. Rich collaboration can occur and competing strategies can be pursued simultaneously. Good ideas will be able to spread rapidly, while bad ideas are likely to be choked off before they do much damage.
  
  
• Strongly cohesive, with an unshakable focus on common purpose and core principles. The overarching Purpose and core Principles of a chaordic organization are the basis for its enabling structures, which will allow Participants to pursue tremendously diverse Practices in a context of evolving agreement about issues that are fundamental to the whole.

Every choice concerning Organizational Concept will involve trade-offs. Recognizing this and being conscious of the choices that are being made – and their implications – will improve the likelihood that the organization will engender genuinely new possibilities.

Participants’ trust in the organization will derive in large part from their confidence that organizational structure embodies the Principles that have been articulated. This involves carefully harmonizing the creative tensions among each and every part, and between different levels, within the organization. It is this balancing of creative tensions that ensures a chaordic organization’s integrity and fosters its distinctive, dynamic balancing of self-organization and organizational coherence.

A danger during this phase of the chaordic design process is to leap to the first Organizational Concept that emerges. Groups rarely get a Concept “just right” on their first pass. To one extent or another, it is likely still to embody certain habitual ways of thinking about organization.

Even the Concept that is eventually developed will evolve over time. The Constitution must allow a way for changes in the Organizational Concept – membership classes and categories, or the size and composition of governance bodies, for example – to be modified by participants.

Finally, we encourage design team participants – during work on Organizational Concept – not to worry how they’re going to explain it. That’s a task they can tackle later!

What You Need For Work on Organizational Concept

• An ability to think abstractly
  
  
• Creative imagination concerning new organizational forms
  
  
• A willingness to examine unconscious assumptions and a capacity for “unlearning”
  
  
• The courage to embody fundamental values and beliefs – as expressed in Principles – in binding organizational structures
  
  
• Tolerance for ambiguity and uncertainty
  

© 2001, Chaordic Commons, All rights reserved

This the third in our series from Chaordic Commons describing a their process for creating synergic organizations. I recommend using their process with ORTEGRITY for maximum leverage.
Also see: 1) Purpose 2) Principles

The Chaordic Design Process

Participants

Definition: Participants encompass the range of individuals and institutions likely to see the Purpose and Principles as their own, and empowered to create the organization and guide its evolution.

Participants – In Context: With clarity about Purpose and Principles, the next step is to identify all relevant and affected parties – the Participants whose needs, interests and perspectives must be considered in conceiving (or reconceiving) the organization.

As design team members pursue their work, their perceptions of who constitutes a stakeholder will typically expand. They now have an opportunity to ensure that all concerned individuals and groups are considered when a new Organizational Concept is sought.

Work on Participants typically results in a list of the types (or classes) of individuals or institutions presently or potentially participating in the organization or community. These classes may be further divided into sub-classes, or categories, if necessary to distinguish key groups whose interests and perspectives should be represented in the organization.

Understanding the diversity of individuals and institutions who might participate in the organization is essential for development of an appropriate Organizational Concept. Classes and categories of participation are also listed in the Constitution and enable the specification of distinct rights and responsibilities if necessary or desirable, such as participation on decision-making bodies, voting rights, record keeping and other functions.

Work on Participants provides an opportunity to review the Principles by asking, “Do these Principles represent the values of these parties?” Exploration of all relevant and affected parties is also likely to stimulate creative thinking about Practices that the organization might pursue – especially activities that are not possible now because of constraints on participation.

Processes and Approaches

The fundamental question being explored in this phase of the process is: Given the Purpose, who are all of the relevant and affected parties?

Those initiating the chaordic design process will have considered this question at the outset of the initiative. They will have made an effort to involve a diverse group in the design process, ideally representing key types of participants from the usually larger universe of all relevant and affected parties.

At this point, members of the design team take a more disciplined and systematic look at the question. Work on Purpose and Principles will likely have broadened the group’s sense of who constitutes a relevant and affected party.

We will typically undertake identification and analysis of Participants as follows:

• Identify the individuals, institutions and interest groups already involved in the organization, industry or field. This sounds straightforward, but it can evoke breakthroughs as participants relax their conceptions about relevant parties based on current relationships within existing structures of organization.
  
  
• Expand the vision of potential Participants by identifying those who may contribute to, be served by or benefit from the new organization in some way.
  
  
• Imagine different ways of conceiving and describing all relevant and affected parties. Groups will usually consider differentiating on the basis of institutional affiliation, function, sector, interests represented and other bases.
  
  
• Develop an initial conception of Participants based on the group’s sense of which approach most meaningfully distinguishes relevant and affected parties with respect to how they will contribute to realizing the Purpose – and with respect to what interests need to be balanced to develop an organization trusted by all Participants.

This phase of the chaordic design process, like the prior development of Principles, first involves creating an expansive set of possibilities and then constraining it as necessary.

Process Notes

After development of Principles, the nature of the work involved in the chaordic design process begins to change. More detailed analytical attention is paid to the specific organization or industry. Members of the design team will benefit from having a clear understanding of why a schema for Participants is being developed.

• Classes and categories of participation provide a “doorway” into the organization for potential participants. Using categories that are recognizable to participants allows them to self-identify their category of participation and eases entry into an organization that will be different from anything they have experienced.
  
  
• Distinguishing different classes and categories also allows assignment of different rights and responsibilities for each, if necessary or desirable.
  
  
• Classes and categories serve in designing balanced governance councils and, if necessary, in articulating guidelines for the formation of sub-units of the organization.

The challenge for members of the design team who are trying to think creatively about Participants again involves breaking out of pre-existing mindsets and expanding their conceptions about who constitute the “relevant and affected parties” for the organization, field or community of concern.

At some point, members of the design team usually recognize that the range of relevant and affected parties, and thus of potential participants, is much broader than originally contemplated. The task at that point is to begin “closing the circle” to identify potential participants essential to realizing the Purpose in accord with the Principles. The particular approach chosen for categorizing Participants will reflect the team’s sense of what interests most need to be balanced when designing governance relationships during the next phase of the process.

Members of the design team should be prepared to modify their initial conception of Participants as they work on developing an Organizational Concept. For example, the way they initially thought most appropriate for categorizing Participants may need revision as they think about how best to comprise a balanced and representative governance council for the whole.

The insights that occur in this work can be refreshing, even exhilarating, as participants perceive new connections and become more inclusive in their definitions of community. The work can also be challenging, even frightening, as participants consider the allowing what some project participants have called the “devil in their midst”.

What You Need For Work on Participants

• Members on the design team who know the “players” in the industry, field or community well – both as it has been, as it is now, and as it might evolve.
  
  
• An understanding of the key dimensions of the industry, organization or community that need to be integrated or balanced more effectively.
  
  
• A capacity for creative analytical thinking, to enable development of several different schemas for characterizing the same group of Participants.
  
  
• A strategic mindset. Think about who constitutes a “critical mass” to launch the new organization – or who is needed in support of an innovative organizational design.

Illustrative Approaches to Conceiving Participants
(By Function and Importance)

Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance

Principal Categories

Commercial Fishing
Aquaculture
Processors and Distributors
Consumer
Commercial Recreational
Recreational
Maritime Industry

Related Categories

Marine Support and Supply
Conservation and Environmental
Research and Education
Government
Community Service

Community Alliances for Interdependent AgriCulture

Principal Groups

Grower
Minority Grower
Processor/Distributor
Labor
Consumer

Support Groups

Government
Research/Education
Supplier
Farm Organization

Related Groups

Environmental
Community Service
Social/Economic Justice
Health and Wellness

---

Illustrative Approaches to Conceiving Participants
(By Sector and Domain)

GeoData Alliance

Sectors	Domains
Alliances	Community Multi-Community Network
Academic/Research	Academic Research
For Profit	Natural Resources/Environment Utilities/Telecommunications/Transportation Real Estate/ Financial GIS Vendors/Suppliers/Consultants Manufacturing/Wholesale/Retail Social/Human Services Other For Profit
General Interest	Individuals / Citizen Groups Library Media
Government	Tribal Municipal County State Federal Regional/Multi-Jurisdictional Quasi-Governmental/Special Districts
Nonprofit	Professional/Trade/Labor Association Advocacy/Community/Public Interest/Other
Affiliate (Non-Voting)

© 2001, Chaordic Commons, All rights reserved

This the second our series from Chaordic Commons describing a their process for creating synergic organizations. I recommend using their process with ORTEGRITY for maximum leverage.
Also see: 1) Purpose.

The Chaordic Design Process

Principles

Definition: Principles are clear, commonly understood statements of how the Participants will conduct themselves. Individually and collectively, they are the parameters against which all subsequent decisions, organizational structures and practices will be judged.

Principles – In Context: Once the Purpose has been clearly stated, the next step in the chaordic design process is to define, with the same clarity, conviction and common understanding, the Principles by which those involved will be guided in pursuit of that Purpose.

If the Purpose defines a field for the organization’s pursuit, Principles guide organizational behavior and individual practice and foster success in that field. They serve as the “organizational DNA” that supports continuous learning, innovation and emergence.

Principles typically have high ethical and moral content. Developing them requires engaging the whole person, not just the intellect. The best will be descriptive, not prescriptive, so that there will be many different ways that Participants in the organization can embody or practice the Principles.

Taken as a whole, together with the Purpose, the Principles constitute the body of belief that will bind the community together and against which all decisions and acts will be judged. They must always be considered as a set, rather than taken in isolation. Each Principle will illuminate the others. The creative tension among them is a characteristic feature of chaordic organization.

This phase of the process will result in a set of 10-15 clear, unambiguous statements of Principle applicable to all activities within the organization or community. These Principles, along with the Purpose, will be written into the Constitution for the organization. They serve as binding agreements for all Participants in conducting the organization’s activities, and directors (or trustees) of the organization will have a fiduciary responsibility to serve them.

The Principles are crucial for subsequent work on Organizational Concept, as they provide clear guidelines against which potential approaches to organizational structure and governance can be tested.

Processes and Approaches

In developing a set of core Principles, participants will often find it useful to distinguish principles of organization from principles of practice. For example, the fundamental Principles of the Terra Civitas Chaordic Commons include five principles of organization and five principles of practice.

Principles of organization have to do with the group’s basic beliefs about participation, self-organization, decentralization, decision-making and related issues. The five principles of organization for Terra Civitas have been articulated, in slightly different words, by virtually every organization and group that has worked with The Chaordic Alliance.

Principles of practice concern the group’s beliefs about leadership, conflict resolution, organizational culture, social or ecological responsibility, and specific issues of particular concern to their organization or community. The third, fourth and fifth principles of practice for Terra Civitas are also common to many groups, which then add others that are unique to their circumstances.

We have used the following approaches to help groups identify potential Principles:

• Examine the Principles of other organizations. Increasingly, groups find starting with the Terra Civitas Principles a good way to begin their own creative process. Occasionally they also find it helpful – especially when trying to write a Principle about a specific issue – to see how other groups have approached the same issue.
  
  
• Explore basic beliefs about fundamental organizational issues such as power, fairness and equity, decision-making, diversity, participation, leadership and accountability. Dissatisfaction with the way these issues are addressed (or not addressed) in existing organizations often attract participants to chaordic approaches.
  
  
• Reflect on what Principles are needed to clarify aspects of the Purpose. For example, the statement of Purpose for Terra Civitas includes the phrase “more equitable sharing of power and wealth”. The first principle of practice then states, “Work to ensure that all people, by right of birth, have Ö an equitable share of wealth and resources”. The fourth principle of organization states, “Vest authority, perform functions, and use resources in the smallest or most local part that includes all relevant and affected parties.” Both of these Principles amplify the Purpose statement. This exercise helps participants understand the integral relationship between Purpose and Principles. In the prior work on Purpose participants will often have begun identifying Principles essential to its realization.
  
  
• Identify critical issues in the organization, field or community. Fishermen, environmentalists and others working to create the Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance were concerned with the use of technologies that damaged the marine ecosystem. Governmental and private sector participants forming the GeoData Alliance knew that data privacy and public access to geospatial data were critical issues in their field. People participating in the United Religions Initiative recognized that proselytizing within the organization would doom it. Consequently all of these groups developed Principles speaking to these issues. When this exercise is first undertaken, participants will often create a long list of critical issues. As they proceed to draft potential Principles, they see that some are more fundamental than others – or that one is a subset of another – and end up with a smaller set.
  
  
• Identify principles of organizational behavior and individual practice required in order for Participants to achieve the Purpose. When narrowing the set of Principles down to a manageable number, it is sometimes possible to imagine the system spinning out of control, or concentrating power or activity too narrowly, thus limiting how much can ultimately be achieved. This may indicate that a key Principle is missing – perhaps something implicit in one that was discarded.

To the extent time allows, invite participants to expand the set of potential Principles. The process can stand an explosion of possible Principles if participants understand that the aim is ultimately to develop a small set.

As participants begin to understand what a Principle is – and what it isn’t – they can begin to reduce the list to a set of necessary and sufficient Principles. Make a disciplined effort to distill a smaller set of powerful core Principles. There are always additional principles that could be added, but this should be resisted if they are not essential.

Writing Principles involves the same careful attention to language and to meaning that writing a statement of Purpose does. Again, carefully probe the meanings, connotations and assumptions associated with each word and phrase. Invite participants to state a given Principle in different ways to see if deeper or richer meanings can be articulated.

(The principles of organization for Terra Civitas have been carefully honed through years of work with a wide range of organizations. We encourage participants to approach them critically and develop their own formulation, but increasingly groups find them useful.)

Process Notes

Several challenges can arise during the work on Principles. As with Purpose, a group’s first attempt to articulate Principles may result in platitudes. Potential statements of Principle may be vague or overly complex. Organizational goal statements may be confused with Principles.

Such initial efforts are essential but incomplete. Every effort should be made to help the group clarify its basic beliefs and develop clear, specific statements that can serve as unambiguous guidelines for decision-making and practice.

Principles of Transition

In some cases, participants may need or want to develop a special set of principles for the transition from one type of organizational system or structure to another. This is more likely to happen when working with existing institutions that already have well-defined or ill-defined relationships, or within a single organization that will be adopting a new structure or governance system.

During the transition from the pre-existing Bank of America licensing structure to the formation of Visa, for example, Dee Hock and his colleagues were consciously guided by several principles concerning the position of banks then involved in the system:

• Duplicate levels of management should not be created but that for greater efficiency and economy, the new organization should combine all existing structures.
  
  
• Every bank heavily and directly involved should be entitled to voting membership.
  
  
• Assessments should not exceed the present royalties.
  
  
• No bank should be financially damaged or otherwise left in a lesser position, as a result of the reorganization.
  
  
• The plan must offer enough advantages to gain voluntary acceptance from a majority of the licensees.
  
  
• All existing contractual obligations must be honored for any bank that might decide not to accept the plan.
  
  
• The unique position of the Bank of America in the system must be recognized, properly compensated, and its ability to provide sustaining assistance during any transitional period should be utilized.

The search for core Principles can be challenging in other ways as well. Sometimes participants will observe that a given Principle will be difficult to implement because of perceived “current realities” in a particular organization, industry or field. Acknowledge the potential legitimacy of such observations but do not let them interfere with articulating Principles that carry real conviction. Encourage participants to relax their concerns with current practice, legal frameworks or political correctness and to explore their basic personal values and beliefs about the issue under discussion. The Principles that participants develop will reveal how bold they are willing to be in committing themselves and their organization to what they really believe.

Sometimes the key to success is often listening carefully for what participants are trying to say but have not quite yet articulated. Sometimes the key is noticing that two seemingly different Principles can be combined in a single statement, or that overly complex statements in fact represent two distinct Principles.

True Principles are descriptive, not prescriptive. They identify what is to be done but not how it is to be accomplished. In fact, there are likely to be many different ways of observing the Principles. Over time, a rich ecology of practice should develop within the organization, with proven practices proliferating while still allowing ample room for innovation and experimentation.

How many Principles are enough – and when do you have too many? We sometimes use a rule of thumb that says, “Create only as many Principles as you can easily keep in mind”. Participants will continually be working with the entire set, so the total number should be manageable.

Finally, always remember that the Principles constitute an indivisible set. The creative tension among apparently contradictory Principles supports a living dynamic of inquiry and innovative practice.

What You Need For Work on Principles

• Clarity about fundamental beliefs and values. Principles are, with Purpose, the touchstone for the organization and those who participate in it.
  
  
• Knowledge about critical issues in the organization, industry or field.
  
  
• A willingness to take a stand. Principles are what Participants refuse to violate in pursuit of the Purpose.
  
  
• Rigor in articulating clear and meaningful statements. Effective Principles are not platitudes. Take care to articulate them carefully enough that they can serve as a basis for interpretation, for inference, for practical guidance and, when necessary, for assessment and judgment.
  
  
• A capacity for transforming conflict. Participants often discover that they have very different values and beliefs concerning some of the central issues of concern. Working through these differences toward higher common ground enables Participants to create a truly unique context for pursuit of the Purpose.

Terra Civitas Chaordic Commons

In pursuit of the Purpose, each and every part of the Chaordic Commons will abide by the following Principles in conducting Chaordic Commons activities:

Principles of Practice

1. Work to ensure that all people, by right of birth, have adequate necessities of life, including clean air, water, food and shelter; an equitable share of wealth and resources; and opportunity to develop their full physical, mental and spiritual potential.

2. Work to ensure that human capacities, technologies and organizations sustain and support, not systemically alter, degrade or destroy, the Earth, its diversity of life or life support systems.

3. Work to ensure interdependent health and diversity of individuals, communities, institutions, cultures and other life forms.

4. Resolve conflict creatively and cooperatively without physical, economic, psychological, social, or ecological violence.

5. Freely and fully exchange information relevant to the Purpose and Principles unless doing so violates confidentiality or materially diminishes competitive position.

Principles of Organization

1. Be open to participation by any Individual or Institution subscribing to the Purpose and Principles in conducting activities of the Terra Civitas Charter Commons.

2. Have the right to self-organize at any time, on any scale, in any form, for any activity consistent with the Purpose and Principles.

3. Conduct deliberations and make decisions by bodies and methods that reasonably represent all relevant and affected parties and are dominated by none.

4. Vest authority, perform functions, and use resources in the smallest or most local part that includes all relevant and affected parties.

5. Enduce not compel behavior, to the maximum degree possible.

Selected Principles From Other
Chaordic Organizational Initiatives

Organizations involved in a chaordic design process typically develop both principles of organization and principles of practice. The principles of organization are commonly modeled on those of Terra Civitas and the Chaordic Commons. In addition, each organization develops additional principles unique to its constituency or concerns. The following are examples of the latter. Reflect on them to sharpen your own judgment of what makes a principle more or less effective and compelling.

GeoData Alliance (2000)

• Deliberations and decisions of the GeoData Alliance shall use knowledge and information derived from scientific method, practical experience and intuition.
  
  
• Geographic information has inherent value and the creators of that value should be equitably compensated.
  
  
• Public inspection of data used for governance is a fundamental right and access to these data should be provided.
  
  
• Each and every part of the GeoData Alliance shall protect the privacy and confidentiality of personal information and sensitive geographic information.

Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance (1999)

• Encourage marine uses and practices that ensure the long-term productivity and diversity of the Marine System.
  
  
• Accept responsibility for the stewardship of the Marine System to ensure that succeeding generations will have an equal or better opportunity to benefit from its resources.
  
  
• Recognize that the Marine System is a public resource and that access to this resource is a privilege, not a right.
  
  
• Encourage practices, behaviors, and uses of technology that are consistent with the Purpose and Principles and control practices, behaviors, and uses of technology that are inconsistent with the Purpose and Principles.

United Religions Initiative (1999)

• We respect the sacred wisdom of each religion, spiritual expression and indigenous tradition.
  
  
• We respect the differences among religions, spiritual expressions and indigenous traditions.
  
  
• We have the responsibility to develop financial and other resources to meet the needs of our part, and to share financial and other resources to help meet the needs of other parts.
  
  
• Members of the URI shall not be coerced to participate in any ritual or be proselytized.

Community Alliances for Interdependent AgriCulture (1999)

• Conceive of, evaluate and implement wholly new forms of ownership, financial systems and measurements that do not attempt to monetize all values or lead to gross maldistribution of wealth and power or degradation of people.
  
  
• Understand, evaluate and account for the true and complete cost of everything removed from and returned to the Earth and the biosphere.
  
  
• Understand, evaluate and account for intangible things such as learning, intellectual capital, life experiences, community, beliefs and principles.
  
  
• Ensure that substances produced in human society are not systematically increased in the biosphere.

Society for Organizational Learning (1997)

• Drive to Learn – All human beings are born with innate, lifelong desire and ability to learn, which should be enhanced by all organizations.
  
  
• Learning is Social – People learn best from and with one another, and participation in learning communities is vital to their effectiveness, well-being and happiness in any work setting.
  
  
• Learning Communities – The capacities and accomplishments of organizations are inseparable from and dependent on the capacities of the learning communities that they foster.
  
  
• Core Learning Capabilities – Organizations must develop individual and collective capabilities to understand complex, interdependent issues; engage in reflective, generative conversation; and nurture personal and shared aspirations.
  
  
• Cross-Organizational Collaboration – Learning communities that connect multiple organizations can significantly enhance the capacity for profound individual and organizational change.

© 2001, Chaordic Commons, All rights reserved

 

Dee Hock is the author The Birth of the Chaordic Age. An organization has grown up in support of his ideas called the Chaordic Commons. They have developed a new tool for building synergic community–The Chaordic Design Process. Today’s article, in their own words, is the first in a series describing that process. This process coupled with ORTEGRITY should be very powerful.

Conceiving Terra Civitas

Humanity today faces overwhelming challenge and unprecedented opportunity. Advances in technology are reshaping society, dissolving boundaries and fostering new patterns of communication, competition and cooperation among people around the world.

Every organization must adapt to an increasingly complex, knowledge-intensive, relationship-based world. Those willing to take risks lead change rather than resist it.

Every field of human activity – from health care, education and religion to economics, commerce and governance – is busy reinventing itself, to provide a new foundation for the future. Innovation and creativity are required, not optional.

What once was unimaginable – what we could only dream – may now be possible, if we can evolve organizations and institutions as dynamic and diverse as the emerging world of the 21st century. Organizations that are equitable, inclusive, flexible and resilient, based on our highest aspirations for ourselves, our children and all future generations.

In many different fields and diverse communities, people are working toward that end. Those involved in such efforts seek greater connection. The time is now right for individuals and institutions, around the world, to form and bring to life a more cohesive global network dedicated to transforming and strengthening our organizations and institutions, guided by our most deeply held democratic, ethical and spiritual values.

We call that network Terra Civitas, which loosely translates as “citizens of the Earth”. We envision Terra Civitas as an expanding cluster of self-organizing, participant-governed entities, called Commons, designed to be both independent and interrelated.

Together, the Terra Civitas Commons will comprise a multi-faceted web of collaborative learning, innovation and action. Individually, they will be fully self-governing, free to pursue their distinctive purpose in any way consistent with the shared purpose and principles.

Terra Civitas comes into being with creation of the Chaordic Commons, a 501c3 nonprofit organization which supersedes The Chaordic Alliance. The Chaordic Commons is open to all who subscribe to its purpose and principles in conducting the organization’s activities. Those who join are called Owning Members.

You are invited to help form the Chaordic Commons and breathe life into Terra Civitas. Its success will depend on the participation and support of a wide range of visionary, caring and committed individuals and organizations from every country, field and sector. Join us and help shape a continually evolving network of individuals and organizations dedicated to cultivating wisdom and transforming our organizations and institutions!

The Chaordic Design Process

Definition

The Purpose is a simple statement of the common pursuit of a community. More than just a conventional mission statement, it identifies that which gives meaning to participants’ lives and binds them together.

Purpose – In Context

The first step in the chaordic design process is to define, with absolute clarity and deep conviction, the Purpose of the community.

An effective statement of Purpose will be a clear, commonly understood statement of that which identifies and binds the community together as worthy of pursuit. To be effective, it must reach beyond instrumental goals and speak of that which has utmost significance both for the individuals involved and for the community.

The first step will usually result in a single, powerful sentence. It will express deeply held personal aspirations and provide a powerful focus for collective intent and enterprise. Participants will say about the Purpose, “If we could achieve that, my life would have meaning.”

Work on Purpose is the foundation for everything that follows. The Purpose and the Principles constitute the fundamental body of belief on which the organization is based.

Processes and Approaches

Honest conversation is the key to arriving at a compelling statement of Purpose. Such dialogue is based in mutual respect and involves both a willingness to state one’s own thoughts and feelings clearly and a capacity for listening carefully to the views of others.

Work on Purpose asks participants first to explore, perhaps in ways that go unusually deep, what is most personally meaningful to them. From these deeply personal statements of caring, concern and aspiration can emerge a sense of what participants have in common – a shared concern or aspiration that is significant for the organization, community or field as a whole.

We have used the following approaches to illuminating deep Purpose, among others:

• Begin with a simple question: Why are you here? Urge participants to speak openly about the questions, concerns, hopes or curiosity that drew them to be part of the organization design process, or part of the organization undertaking the process. Initially, try not to guide participants’ responses; they might answer from a personal perspective or from an organizational, professional or vocational perspective. Both are important.
  
  
• Probe participants’ response using the “five whys”. When individuals respond to the question “Why are you here?”, gently probe their response by again asking “Why?” When this is repeated a few times, individuals will often begin to articulate the deeper, more fundamental dimensions of their commitment, dreams or concern.
  
  
• Explore participants’ vision of a desirable future. Ask individuals to talk about what kind of world they want their children and grandchildren to inherit. Have them describe the role that their organization, field or industry might play in helping bring that world into being. Alternatively, they might talk about their vision for their own organization and how it evolves to more fully address the deeper issues they care about.
  
  
• Invite participants to tell personal stories that reveal something essential about why they are involved in the organization, industry or field. These stories often express truths about the organization’s potential Purpose that would otherwise be difficult to articulate.
  
  
• Discuss current and emerging issues and opportunities in the organization, industry or field. (Sometimes it also helps to consider the evolution of a particular organization, field or industry.) By identifying critical needs, particularly those that are emerging or inadequately addressed, participants will begin to articulate different potential dimensions of a Purpose statement as well as potential Practices.

The processes described above, and others, will provide ample material for developing a statement of Purpose. As the work continues, we try both to sharpen the inquiry and to move toward articulation of a statement that captures the essence of what participants have said.

Specific steps toward articulating a powerful Purpose statement include:

• Develop draft statements based on what participants have said. The best statements will come from participants themselves. Sometimes a single initial statement will be forthcoming, sometimes two or three will be proposed by different people. We have even had everyone in a group draft a purpose statement and then read them aloud for comparison and contrast. Eventually you will want to identify one to work with, recognizing that it is likely to change radically in the process of review and refinement.
  
  
• Aim to clarify the social function served by the organization. Often what is trying to be achieved is not something new, but rather some basic human activity that has been organized into many different patterns over hundreds or thousands of years. For example, Visa didn’t change the need for money; rather, it reconceived money as more than paper, coin and drafts into an electronic medium for worldwide exchange of monetary value. Similarly, institutions for conflict resolution have been with us since pre-history, but globalization has outstripped their ability to succeed at local and global levels simultaneously. Along the same line, the United Religions Initiative seeks a new way to work on issues of violence, though the underlying need will persist as long as there is a human race. Whether the challenge is to manage a commons or produce and distribute healthy food, the purposes of all of the groups with whom we have worked are focused on an important and abiding social function.
  
  
• Work toward shared meaning. Carefully probe the meanings associated with every word and phrase. Participants will invariably be making different assumptions about a given statement, have different connotations for the same word, place varying importance on a particular issue or opportunity. Honor these differences, but make them explicit to the extent possible and work toward a field of understanding and vision that encompasses them all. A rich exploration of language and its meaning is at the core of Purpose.
  
  
• Seek a succinct expression of common concern and shared aspiration. There is often a tendency, initially, to craft a long statement that encompasses many individual statements of purpose. Take the time to discern what is most fundamental, especially when there are two or three potential purposes that seem to compete with one another.

Work on Purpose involves continually exploring the relationship between what is deeply personal and what is collectively meaningful. This is a lifelong inquiry that will continue well beyond the chaordic design process. Conclude this phase when participants have created a statement that everyone agrees is “good enough” for now.

Test a draft Purpose statement by asking: Can you easily imagine all potential participants identifying with this Purpose as their own?

As the process unfolds, participants will return continuously to the statement of Purpose and refine it in the light of their emerging understanding of issues and opportunities.

Process Notes

Teams that undertake the chaordic design process are usually diverse, with participants coming from very different parts of the organization or community. The individuals involved may not know each other well. Creating a sense of community, developing trust among participants, and fostering shared meaning are crucial if the enterprise is to succeed. Without shared meaning and cohesiveness, subsequent work is fraught with difficulty.

Participants may assume that they know each other well. However, it’s likely that sustained conversation about Purpose will help them discover assumptions and preconceptions that have clouded deeper understanding and the discovery of real shared Purpose – as well as things they simply haven’t known about one another.

Strong feelings, deep emotion and conflict are evoked as participants explore the ideals, aims and assumptions that underlie their work – as well as their perception of others. Common experiences during work on Purpose include insight, exhilaration, excitement and catharsis – but also discomfort, frustration, impatience and a pervasive sense of being unsettled. In fact, if people don’t become frustrated at some point, they may not have stretched themselves far enough. Welcoming such experiences can provide an opening to unexpected insight, mutual understanding and common ground.

Educator Parker Palmer talks about the “great questions” that serve as the focus for communities of truth. Such “great questions” are not capable of being exhausted. The Purpose a group seeks is a statement like this – a “great question” that can live at the heart of an organization. As such, it will be open to endless inquiry and exploration through practice as the community and its needs, opportunities, technologies, capacities and knowledge evolve. Over time participants will come, in their living relationship to the Purpose, more and more fully to experience and understand its richness, depth and meaning.

The Purpose is not a marketing slogan, or a tag line for the organization, or a preamble that provides more detailed information on the context and rationale for the enterprise. In working on a statement of Purpose, participants will often recognize the need for these and may even produce them, but this work should be kept separate from the work on Purpose.

Don’t rush through the work on Purpose. The Purpose statement needs to be clear and robust enough to support the next steps. Eventually it will be a statement that lives at the heart of the organization, so take the time to develop a field of shared meaning and to “go deep” individually and collectively.

At the same time, again, recognize when a draft statement is “good enough for now”. Participants will come back to the work on Purpose over and over as they become more comfortable with one another, and gain greater insight into their own aspirations as well as the needs and opportunities in the organization or field.

What You Need For Work on Purpose

• A group of diverse individuals representing the full range of relevant and affected parties.
  
  
• Willingness by participants to talk honestly about that which matters most to them, both personally and professionally.
  
  
• A capacity to listen openly, suspending judgment in order to understand different perspectives.
  
  
• Respect for diversity, together with a capacity to discover shared meaning.
  
  

• Comfort with expressing and acknowledging deep feeling.
  
  

Statements of Purpose From Selected
Chaordic Organizational Initiatives

The following statements were developed by participants in some of the organizational initiatives aided by The Chaordic Commons. Use them to reflect on what contributes to an effective statement of Purpose and on your own fundamental commitments or concerns.

Appleseed Foundation

To effect and enable constructive systemic change leading to a more just, equitable and sustainable society.

Community Alliances of Interdependent AgriCulture

To enable people to create food and farming systems that improve and sustain ecological, economic and social health through systemic, community-based, self-organizing governance.

GeoData Alliance

To foster trusted, inclusive processes to enable the creation, equitable, effective flow and beneficial use of geographic information.

Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance

To restore and enhance an enduring Northwest Atlantic Marine System supporting a healthy diversity and abundance of marine life and human uses through a self-organizing and self-governing organization.

Society for Organizational Learning

To discover, integrate, and implement theories and practices for the interdependent development of people and their institutions.

United Religions Initiative

To promote enduring, daily interfaith cooperation, end religiously-motivated violence and create cultures of peace, justice and healing for the Earth and all living beings.

© 2001, Chaordic Commons, All rights reserved

Have you heard of an organization called We, The World? Dr. Jane Goodall writes:

“I support and endorse the mission of We, The World to make sure that individuals and organizations who share a commitment to sustainability can network effectively to achieve their goals. We, The World is an intriguing idea that merits strong and serious consideration and we look forward to further exploration and development of its approach.”

A Way to Unite ALL our Efforts

Internationally coordinated efforts to expand global markets and military operations have little regard for the resulting catastrophic increase in poverty, violence, species destruction, and damage to our environment. This constitutes an ethical and spiritual crisis transcending national boundaries. We, The World is committed to a global strategy that can galvanize people around the world to awareness and action.

We, The World seeks to build an unprecedented critical mass of individuals, organizations and coalitions whose efforts to create a caring world will be highly visible and accessible, especially in the societies that control the most resources. We will begin by globally linking and fostering collaboration between groups and individuals involved with human rights, ecology and animal concerns, peace and nonviolence, creating ethical economic systems, creating cultures of caring, self-sustaining green communities, personal and societal transformation, and many others whose work concerns the interests of literally billions of people and other life on our planet.

We, The World intends to create something the world has not seen before – a large scale, ethics-driven movement that broadcasts the following message: A significant portion of humanity is becoming actively engaged in building a world in which every life matters.

This message is designed to halt and reverse the “common sense” that increasingly dominates our planet: look out for yourself no matter what the consequences for other people, animals or our environment.

We need a broad-based movement to cultivate a new sense of concern about each individual’s importance and connection to the world’s social, economic and environmental systems – and therefore to the major problems humanity is facing.

Many people in the wealthiest countries are unaware of the suffering that is caused by common, everyday activities. In the United States, few people realize that buying a single hamburger pays for the clearing of up to an estimated 55 square feet of rainforest to raise cattle – thereby killing the plants, animals, and sometimes the humans that lived there.

Real change requires sustained, massive support that increasingly resonates with the public and which politicians and corporate CEOs can no longer ignore. We have seen only mixed results with movements working solely on issues such as the environment, human rights and disarmament. To succeed we must integrate our efforts.

Strategy

Until now, important social change efforts have only sporadically been covered by the mainstream media. We, The World is designed to maintain a significant and continuing presence in the major media (as well as independent media), especially in countries with the most economic influence.

Through a continuing series of well-publicized international gatherings and other inspiring programs, we seek to engage the public in many existing visionary initiatives. We, The World will provide a means for their efforts to be mutually supportive and emerge as a recognizable global movement to create a caring world!

Values & Guiding Principles

The Personal And Global Spheres Of Life Are Completely Interdependent. Each individual’s actions impact the world’s social, economic and environmental systems, which in turn affect each of us. The quality of life (or well-being of each person and each form of life is essential to the well-being of all of us.

The Means Are The Ends We seek to reflect our goals and vision in all our actions. Ethics is our bottom line.

Nonviolence from personal to international relations, consistent nonviolence will establish and maintain the trust necessary for a peaceful world.

In Working To Heal The Planet, We Heal Ourselves. When we heal ourselves, society benefits. Other core principles:

Concern For the Entire Web of Life

Holistic Approaches to Problem Solving and Prevention

Idealism

Compassion

Collaboration Not Competition

Going Beyond Blame to Recognize Our Collective Responsibility

No Effort Is Too Small To Be Recognized For Its Importance

We strive to integrate these into our lives as much as possible.

More

This is the fifth in this week’s series of essays on conflict: 1)Conflict: The Norm of Current Civilization  2)Programmed for Conflict  3)When Lose/Win becomes Lose/Lose and 4)Leap Forward or Perish

Remember CONFLICT is the struggle to avoid loss — the struggle to avoid being hurt. In a society that is dominated by conflict. The focus of government is to prevent its citizens from being hurt. This results in the creation of numerous laws that attempt to prohibit hurting by creating expensive punishments for those hurting others. By expensive I mean not just to the criminal, but also to the community seeking to be safe from the criminal.

Beyond a Nation of Laws 

Barry Carter

A couple hundred years ago at the beginning of the Industrial Age someone uttered the famous words, “We are a nation of laws not men (people).” Though this is what we’ve been for the past two hundred years, when we think of what this really says it is, it is pretty ridiculous and insulting. It says several things:

1. We are a nation of bureaucracy and red tape (above being human) since laws are micro rules, regulations and policies intended to limited individuals freedom and make it difficult to do certain things.
    
2. People are not humans but parts of a machine and it is not important to be human but that the machine works. The statement is rooted in Newtonian worldview where the important thing is the running of the machine. The fact is that we are a nation and a planet of people and other life forms.

All civilizations must have a system of social order. Industrial society uses government. In specific representative government. The primary tool used to provide this order is laws. The primary function of our representatives, in addition to levying taxes, is passing laws. These laws are then supported by a judicial system and the potential violent force of police and militaries. We see how ineffective our laws are in an Information Age, when they run counter to our lose/win norms, with out of control violence, crime, riots, corruption, white collar crime, terrorism and overloaded prisons.

“When mores are strong enough laws are not needed and when mores are not strong enough laws are irrelevant.“

–Stephen Covey

Today our mores are lose/win and until this changes anything goes! The fact is that our norm in society is lose/win and adversarial competition. We artificially attempt to separate some lose/win activity from other lose/win activity with laws. In an Information Age where people are empowered more and more daily, with expanded social freedoms, it simply does not work. Lose/win is lose/win and a norm is a norm. Man-made micro rules and laws that make one form of lose/win legal and another illegal, are meaningless. This is why progress seems hopeless in our present paradigm.

We have violent professional football players in public services commercials telling our youth not to play the game of lose/win violence on the streets. We cannot teach con-artists, crooks or criminals that what they do is wrong when all of society and civilization operates off of lose/win. Con-games, scams, public work, organized crime, company salaries, war, Olympic games, the death penalty, terrorism, lotteries, robbery, talent contests, murder, beauty contests, rape and career promotions all fall into the same category of lose/win. It is duplicitous to say that one form is wrong and the other is right. As long as civilization works based upon one person losing in order for another to win, then any lose/win goes. Human beings will never effectively be micro-managed into abiding by an artificial line dividing one lose/win behavior from another.

Decentralized Wealth Creation and Mass Privatization operate based upon a win-win norm where artificial micro laws, rules and regulation are not needed. Social order is achieved through overlapping, interconnected and interdependent Mass Privatization communities with an overall shared vision. These communities all have one thing in common. They are all working to help others by meeting their needs. Decentralized Wealth Creation will shift us from a nation of laws to a nation and world of win-win mores. 

Copyright 2000 by Barry Carter

---

Also see: No Knives, No Guns, No Killing!

---

 About Barry Carter.  

Infinite Wealth is available at the author’s website, and can be purchased in bookstores everywhere including Amazon and Barnes & Nobel. There is also an abbreviated free online version, which has been reposed at Future Positive:

See: 1) The Rise of a Win Win Civilization  2)  A Personal Journey of Discovery 3) Why Corporations Don’t Work 4) The Emancipation of Capitalism  5) Mass Privatization: Organizing in the Information Age  6) Decentralized Wealth Creation  7) The Infinite Wealth Potential of Liberated Humans The Mandate for Win-Win Wealth Creation  9) Breakpoint: Why You Must Act Now  10) SYNOCRACY: True Democracy Through Synergy 11) THE SHIFT: Awaking to a Win-Win World  12) The Synthesis of a Win-Win World and 13)Vision for a Synergic Transition.

Reason Wilken’s Review of Infinite Wealth

Advanced Papers of Barry Carter

This is the fourth in this week’s series of essays on conflict: 1)Conflict: The Norm of Current Civilization  2)Programmed for Conflict and When Lose/Win becomes Lose/Lose.

Remember CONFLICT is the struggle to avoid loss — the struggle to avoid being hurt.

Leap Forward or Perish

Barry Carter

In addition to having been conditioned for a lose/win environment we have also evolved from it. Lose/win is our reality. As we look at the animal world and all of nature we see lose/win. One animal must die in order for another to live. Eat or be eaten is the rule. Within groups of animals there is a control hierarchy and pecking order, just like society and companies. Lion prides continuously battle for territory with other lion prides and hyena packs. This battling occurs with what appears to be the same fierce hatred as that which we’ve witnessed between racial, religious and ethic groups. This is the reality from whence we evolved. Though advanced society is separate from this activity, our paradigm and social institutions still reflect this reality. Lose/win then is our evolved reality from millions of years of evolution. With lose/win being our reality, how is it possible to change this reality?

Break Points and Paradoxes

Evolution puts forth the concept of adapt or die. It clearly shows that species must adapt to new and changing environments or cease to exist. Win-win cannot be done half way. It’s “win-win or no deal.” This then is our challenge. We must adapt for a new win-win environment or face extinction, or at best a giant leap backwards and maybe another chance in another thousand years. As radical as it sounds, it appears as though humanity must have some type of evolutionary leap forward. Humanity must have a break with the lose/win reality of the past, in order to continue moving ahead.

The latest theories about evolution put forth the concept that evolution works in leaps and bounds, not in slow, steady change. It is not such a radical thought that as the universe evolves into consciousness and intelligence, at different points in this evolution there must be radical breaks with the past–breakpoints where the old rules are simply not applicable anymore. When a being cannot make a break with the past as the environment dictates, it ceases to exist. We appear to be at one of these breakpoints in our evolution. It appears that we either are on the verge of a mass spiritual awakening, driven by needs at the top of the hierarchy, or we are on the verge of mass annihilation as shown in Infinite Wealth.

Point of Decision and Our Dilemma

Today, as we are poised on the verge of an Information Age, the environment we face is one driven by freedom of the individual customer. What is a customer driven movement which works based upon partnering, trust and win-win, other than the golden rule, “Do unto other as you would like to have them do unto you.” Since wealth creation, business and work is all about meeting human needs, it ties directly into the golden rule. As everyone becomes a customer, supplier and partner and we shift to win-win and abundance, the golden rule must be the new rule.

Our paradox, however, is as follows:

The individual and individual customer is being empowered by the knowledge power through information technology, of an Information Age.

In order to exceed continually rising individual customer’s expectations, there must be the tremendous individual freedom and intelligence of free humans to trade their work, ideas, creations and knowledge freely with no restrictions.

In order to handle the level of individual freedom required, humanity needs higher levels of emotional and spiritual intelligence.

In order to attain the higher levels of emotional and spiritual intelligence we must see the win-win, abundant, infinite wealth reality before us. People are not likely to give up lose/win behavior and reality if they think it will cause them to lose; doing so is not practical.

It, however, seems impossible to see the win-win in front of us, when lose/win is reflected virtually everywhere throughout the world, regardless of where we look.

The Solution

In order to see the win-win before us we must take a leap forward out of the lose/win reality from where we evolved. We must “see things differently.” We must have a miracle “a shift in our perceptions; a metanoia ” a shift of mind. It is possible because our expectations create reality. This can happen in many ways. Mass privatization can help us see the win-win reality because of the directness and practical reality of the win-win structure.

Copyright 2000 by Barry Carter

---

About Barry Carter.  

Infinite Wealth is available at the author’s website, and can be purchased in bookstores everywhere including Amazon and Barnes & Nobel. There is also an abbreviated free online version, which has been reposed at Future Positive:

See: 1) The Rise of a Win Win Civilization  2)  A Personal Journey of Discovery 3) Why Corporations Don’t Work 4) The Emancipation of Capitalism  5) Mass Privatization: Organizing in the Information Age  6) Decentralized Wealth Creation  7) The Infinite Wealth Potential of Liberated Humans The Mandate for Win-Win Wealth Creation  9) Breakpoint: Why You Must Act Now  10) SYNOCRACY: True Democracy Through Synergy 11) THE SHIFT: Awaking to a Win-Win World  12) The Synthesis of a Win-Win World and 13)Vision for a Synergic Transition.

Reason Wilken’s Review of Infinite Wealth

Advanced Papers of Barry Carter

This is a followup to this week’s essays Conflict: The Norm of Current Civilization and Programmed for Conflict.

Remember CONFLICT is the struggle to avoid loss — the struggle to avoid being hurt. Here humans must fight and flee to stay alive, and they do. Always ready at a moments notice to go tooth and nail to avoid losing — to avoid death. Losers/winners is the harshest of games. Winning is always at the cost of another’s life. The loser tends to resist with all of his might occasionally prevailing by killing or wounding his attacker. So both parties can lose, turning the game — losers/winners into losers/losers. If we analyze adversary relationships, we discover that individuals are less after the relationship. (1+1)<2. In the adversarial world where the loser forfeits his life (1+1)=1. Or in the end game of losers/losers, both adversaries may die in battle, then (1+1)=0.

When Lose/Win becomes Lose/Lose

Barry Carter

If we go into an Information Age and develop no more emotional intelligence and spiritual awareness than we have today, then we’ll simply destroy ourselves out of the fear derived from our lose/win paradigm. Today we are like a group of five year olds who are having our Play Dough replaced with plastic explosives. We are in fact a civilization of children with enormous potential to destroy or create.

False neural associations are why we can see the irrationality behind someone else’s actions when they cannot see it. Others can see our irrational behavior and we cannot see it. To the person performing the irrational behavior, it is perfectly rational. His or her brain is simply calculating from its false neural associations and therefore the action appears logical.

The person viewing the irrational behavior does not have the same false neural associations. He is able to see the irrational behavior clearly. It is not uncommon to hear someone in this position ask, “Why in the world would he behave this way?” Paradigms tell us that there are different realities depending upon one’s perspective. Our false neural associations create paradigms and our different realities.

As we watch a gang member on news programs and listen to their rationality, we easily see where it is warped. We also see the gang member’s logic. We can see from his conviction that there is clear logic and reasonableness from his paradigm. We can see this in the Mid-East conflict. We saw it with Hitler, as well as slavery, South Africa, and the holocaust of the Indians.

Though there are many extreme cases, the vast majority of our problems stem from our small daily conflicts and mis-perceptions. This is because all people have false neural associations. They effect us, and hold us back in many ways. Though they helped us survive in a lose/win era, today they have become destructive, self-destructive and self-defeating. Our false neural associations are, therefore, today threatening society with death by a thousand cuts.

Most of us today are routed for lose/win because this has been humanity’s experience and conditioning for tens of thousands of years. More immediately, however, we as individuals were raised in a lose/win society. Lose/win is the clouded window from which most of us see. However, there is a growing number for which this is shifting to lose/lose, as our overflowing prisons reflect.

In a society of lose/win, somebody has to lose. Some people and groups lose all of the time. The people who continue to lose develop “loser” neural associations and pass these on to their children. This has posed little threat to civilization in the past, however, it does now.

“Knowledge is power.” As the saying goes, a little knowledge is dangerous. As we are at the infancy of a Knowledge Era, we today have just enough knowledge to be dangerous. Humanity has evolved to a point where we can no longer get away with what we could when we were younger and less mature. Marianne Williamson, in one of her lectures, makes the point that when we, as individuals, were younger we could get away with a lot of things that age and maturity no longer allows. One could abuse one’s body or stay out all night drinking and get up and go to work the next day. However, with maturity one has less ability to do this. It is time for humanity to grow up, we have no choice.

What we are witnessing is the metamorphosis of wealth creation from lose/win to either win-win or lose/lose. We can no longer maintain the lose/win human relations norm of our entire human history. As we press the accelerator to propel our lose/win civilization, it is disintegrating before our eyes. We must provide it with more power in order to continue driving our complex civilization, however the more we accelerate the lose/win system, the more hell we create for ourselves in crime, violence, war, terrorism, welfare and so on.

As long as wealth creation and spiritual awareness remain misaligned we likely will not be able to break our lose/win norm. As long as our wealth creation reality is one where I must win at your expense we are trapped in a lose/win reality. Lose/win wealth creation has in fact created our present worldview and without a change to a win-win wealth creation worldview we are likely doomed.

We must shift to the win-win paradigm based upon collaboration in aligned structures. We’ve already tried helping other people to win in unaligned lose/win structures and the result has been welfare and massive failure. The last resort is to do what most of us presently are doing–ignore the trends and attempt to stick with the lose/win competitive paradigm. This will lead directly to lose/lose as losing individuals are empowered in a knowledge era.

Copyright 2000 by Barry Carter

---

About Barry Carter.  

Infinite Wealth is available at the author’s website, and can be purchased in bookstores everywhere including Amazon and Barnes & Nobel.

There is also an abbreviated free online version, which has been reposed at Future Positive: 1) The Rise of a Win Win Civilization  2)  A Personal Journey of Discovery 3) Why Corporations Don’t Work 4) The Emancipation of Capitalism  5) Mass Privatization: Organizing in the Information Age  6) Decentralized Wealth Creation  7) The Infinite Wealth Potential of Liberated Humans The Mandate for Win-Win Wealth Creation  9) Breakpoint: Why You Must Act Now  10) SYNOCRACY: True Democracy Through Synergy 11) THE SHIFT: Awaking to a Win-Win World  12) The Synthesis of a Win-Win World and 13)Vision for a Synergic Transition.

Reason Wilken’s Review of Infinite Wealth

Advanced Papers by Barry Carter

This is a followup to yesterday’s essay Conflict: The Norm of Current Civilization. Remember our definition of CONFLICT as the struggle to avoid loss — the struggle to avoid being hurt.

Programmed for Conflict

Barry Carter

The primary problem with wealth creation systems of the Win/Lose Era is that they have limited the levels of emotional and spiritual intelligence in people. This is because wealth creation in this era has been fear based. The desire to control others comes directly from fear and mistrust.

For our present level of maturity if the consequence of losing did not exist, the drive to win would not be so important. When humans were in the hunter gather era and the rule was “Eat or Be Eaten,” losing could mean death or pain. If losing had meant no discomfort then winning would not have been so important. The fear of losing, at least in the Win/Lose Era, makes winning extremely important. It forces us reactively and defensively to look for ways not to lose first as opposed to looking for ways to proactively win. This rule still holds true in our Industrial Age based civilization.

Fear, therefore, is the primary motivator in the win/lose era. This fear-based paradigm is deeply ingrained within human’s today. Our normal view of human nature is that of humans being competitive, selfish, judgmental, greedy, sinful, lazy and violent. Our thinking is that humans must be restrained against their natural tendencies through rules, regulations, discipline, punishment and must be managed, regulated and led by strong men. Our paradigm of human nature is, however, merely a reflection of our finite wealth creation, win/lose paradigm based upon fear.

Our wealth creation paradigm is a scarcity paradigm. Win/lose activity, fear and competitiveness drove wealth creation. Our fear based insecurities drove people to compete. These insecurities, however, breed low emotional intelligence and spiritual awareness. They breed victims. A finite wealth era in fact is fueled by mass victimization.

Our scarcity and mass victimization paradigm actually worked to created wealth in the win/lose era with such institutions as serfdom and representative public work. Today as we near breakpoint, victimization limits and subtracts from wealth creation. Books such as A Nation of Victims, Culture of Complaint, or Content of our Character show just how pervasive victimization is. Many believe that we only recently became a society of victims. What has happened, however, is that victimization has recently become dysfunctional. Rather than contributing to the growth of society, it today has begun to subtract from it.

A society filled with victims simply does work very well today. Perhaps it never did for most people. Nonetheless society was able to advance significantly in the past and progress from mass victimization. Today the old paradigm of wealth creation based upon mass victimization is too weak to support a civilization at our level of advancement. This paradigm presently falls short of fulfilling human needs and thus builds deficits.

Programmed for Win/Lose

We, in essence, have been programmed for a win/lose reality. Our brain is made of billions of neurons which communicate with each other as we learn things. When we experience something, we create a physical connection between neurons called neural connections. These connections form neural networks. Whatever environment we spend our time in forms our neural network. It becomes our reality. It forms the window or paradigm from which we see the world.

I recently read about a study of kittens in The Dynamics of high Self-Esteem by Marvin Fremerman. One group spent a year (starting at birth) in a white room with only vertical lines. A second group grew up in a room with only horizontal lines. A third group grew up in a plain white room. All of the kittens were then put into a normal room. The kittens from the horizontal line room kept bumping into vertical objects such as chair legs. The kittens from the vertical line room kept bumping into horizontal objects. The kittens from the plain white room bumped into horizontal and vertical objects. They had difficulty perceiving what was not in the paradigm because they had not developed the necessary neural connections.

Our environment has been one of win/lose and scarcity–the fear of defeat and the drive to win. Scrapping over-limited resources has been the norm. Win/lose is filled with loss, pain and the fear of losing. A single painful event can produce what has been called a false neural association, distress pattern or habit pattern. It later produces behavior consistent with this original neural network, when this group of neurons is called on by the individual. Many times this behavior is destructive to the individual or others, but the individual usually cannot perceive the irrationality. If we spend time in a bad, warped, painful, destructive or win/lose environment, our neural connections get mapped this way, just like the kittens. We then see all of life through this extremely clouded and distorted window, based upon fear. We all, to varying degrees, have been programmed to see through a win/lose fear based window. This is our victim window and in many cases it limits our self-awareness and blinds us from seeing the roles we play in creating our own problems.

Today we are addicted to the win/lose and victimization paradigm. It is a key element of wealth creation in the finite wealth era. As we look back at history, a key to winning and prospering has been seeing from one’s own limited paradigm. It has been the key to surviving and thriving in the win/lose era. Our scarcity based competitive civilization is driven by the inability to see from other’s perspectives–to disconnect, to objectify, to blame and judge. If one empathizes with one’s opponent too much one may lose. This could mean loss of a job, it could mean poverty or even death in the Win/Lose Era.

When a lion kills its prey it does not think of or care that this is another living, feeling being. The lion objectifies the animal. To see it as a living, feeling being could cause the lion to hesitate and starve. In a Win/Lose Era, in order to survive one had to see primarily from one’s own perspective and ignore other’s perspectives. One had to be able to objectify, shut off feeling and not empathize very much with the opponent. In the win/lose paradigm it is, therefore, more important to get one’s own point across than to listen and attempt to hear another’s perspective.

Today, when one gang member kills another or someone rapes or murders someone, the perpetrator must objectify the victim. In war, business competition and sports, we take the same win/lose objectification approach. We must be desensitized to the other’s feelings in order to perform the heinous act. We see only from our perspective. We’re the good guy and they’re the bad guy, or a mere object.

Our society is obsessed with the good guy/bad guy division as our movies, television programs and children’s cartoons reflect. Exactly the same process operates within our win/lose companies. A product line fails to meet the production and quality rates and the Process Engineer finds one hundred valid reasons why it is Production’s fault. Production likewise finds a hundred valid reasons why it is Process Engineering’s fault. They both are correct, but the problems persist.

There is a continuing search for who is the bad guy and good guy by all parties. There is continuous judgment. There is always the absolute belief by the individual that “I am the good guy.” There is always the victimization cry of “Look what he did to me.” Both parties can only see from their own perspective. Both parties clearly and correctly see the other person’s flaws but not their own. With our limited emotional intelligence, we therefore require bureaucrats to judge the situation.

The good guy/bad guy syndrome is so pervasive that it is not uncommon for two opposing sports teams to pray to the same god to allow them to defeat one another. In fact, all of our society is based upon win/lose judgment from companies, to religion, to schools, to the judicial system and more. “My way is the only way.” “If you don’t believe in my religion you’re going to hell.” Many people even believe in a God who will judge them in death. Ours is a judgmental worldview.

Entire nations of people have been able to see other nations or races through a paradigm that viewed the other people as mere objects, bad, evil or worthy of a harsh wrath. Americans saw and still see the conquering of North America as a good thing done by brave men. This comes from our ability to see only from our perspective. They, “the Indians,” were the bad guys and we “white Americans” were the good guys. We saw the mass genocide of Native Americans as a good thing, with a holocaust of over 9.6 million out of 10 million Native Americans killed or murdered, as we stole their land.

Even today we still glorify the people who committed this genocide as heroes. We live in denial regarding this holocaust and the feelings of the people on the other side. This ability for denial is rooted in our evolved ability to only see events from our limited perspective. It is rooted in our neural connections. Ask 100 Americans what percent of the Indians were eliminated in the conquering of North America and likely none will say 96% or 9.6 out of 10 million. This is because we live in denial and this denial allows us to cope with the things we must do to survive in a win/lose finite wealth worldview.

If the Native Americans had won the war and repelled the invasion from Europe, those like Geronimo would likely be seen in the same light as a George Washington. Those like Columbus would likely be in a classification alongside Hitler. If Hitler had won the war, he likely would be seen as the hero who set us on our present path. We today would be evolving into an Information Age and away from all totalitarian organizations. We would likely credit him with setting us on this path. There would be denial of the six million Jews which were killed. This is true today with many of his followers as they live in denial.

The fear paradigms created in the Win/Lose Era are passed from parent to child as we socialize children to survive in the Win/Lose Era. They are passed from generation to generation through learned behavior. Though much of the parental and social conditioning is unintentional it is still passed on. We spank and yell at our kids, we drive them to compete, we toughen them to survive a tough world.

Our ability to see only our reality served us well in the win/lose paradigm of the past, where we needed to deny the pain of others in order to live. The clouded window of only seeing from one’s own paradigm must be replaced in order for us to survive the transition we face.

Win/Lose Wealth Created from Fear and Victimization

The ability to focus only from one’s own perspective is driven by fear. It is driven by the fear of losing what one has. This even includes the aggressor. The lion fears losing her own life if she is unable to make the kill. The aggressor can even feel victimized because the prey will not submit. When I was sixteen I used to deer hunt with my father and a group of about thirty hunters. We hunted Southern style with a pack of dogs, CB radios, four wheel drive trucks and, of course, alcohol for courage. We’d turn the dogs loose on a country road. They’d go in and flush out the deer. No matter which way the deer ran we’d hear the dogs barking, communicate this to each over CB radios, drive to that section of the road and form a line along the road. We’d then shoot the deer as he crossed–execution style.

We had everything in our favor, plus the fact that none of us were going to go hungry if we didn’t make a kill. Even with everything in our favor our behavior was driven by fear. One day I witnessed an event that took me many years to figure out. A deer had been wounded. As the deer thrashed around, struggling to get up, it sat head upright and alert but immobilized. The fellow who had wounded him was absolutely enraged. He stomped around, screaming, yelling and cussing, “____damn, mother____ing, son of a bitch.” The rage went on for a while before he pumped two more rounds of buckshot into the deer’s neck from about two feet away. I could not figure out why he was so angry. Was the deer supposed to beat his head against a tree and kill himself? Why was the hunter feeling so helpless, angry and weak? Why was he acting from insecurity and anger?

I believe that the hunter had been socialized with the necessary dysfunctions, insecurities and low emotional intelligence to survive a win/lose era. It is nothing knew that powerlessness produces rage. I believe that the hunter’s rage came from a sense of powerlessness to make the kill. Even though the hunter was the one doing the victimizing, he felt so weak as to bring out this rage. The powerlessness of the mass victimization era was a requirement of survival. It provided the drive for humans to perform the many brutal and horrible win/lose acts needed to survive. Our denial and inability to see or feel from the other party’s perspective then allows us live with it. Even today, as we daily kill millions of animals for food the denial trait allows us to ignore the pain of these living and feeling beings.

Perhaps we needed this feeling of weakness, fear and insecurity in order to drive us to survive in a Win/Lose Era. Though the hunter was not in fear of starving, as he may have been prior to the Agricultural Age, the same insecurities were needed for survival in a win/lose Industrial Age. The fear of losing is a prime motivator in a Win/Lose Era.

Children, through varying degrees of abuses or conditioning from dysfunctional families and societies, are provided with the necessary dysfunctions and insecurities to survive in an immature win/lose world. As we do what is necessary to survive in a win/lose worldview we drive our children to insanity in order to live in an insane world. Today we see these as dysfunctions because they are beginning to no longer work in society.

Those like John Bradshaw in Creating Love and his PBS specials on the family and Leo Buscalgia and many, many others are documenting these dysfunctions. We were taught to judge, blame and not to listen to others, because we were judged, blamed and not listened to. We pass these win/lose survival traits down from generation to generation. The result now is a world on the verge of a win-win paradigm shift, which is still entrenched in win/lose habit patterns.

We see this phenomenon with adults who were abused as children. It is quite regular for these people to abuse their children. The third generation then grows up to abuse the next generation. The habit pattern is passed from generation to generation. It wasn’t very long ago that a man could beat and abuse his wife and children as desired. The PBS special Violence : An American Tradition stated that it was legal for a man to beat his wife as long as he used a stick no larger than his thumb. I guess this was the rule of thumb!! Beatings were the social norm and the legal system did not interfere. The brutality of the finite wealth era made us tough in order to survive in a brutal world. As boys we are taught to be tough. We are taught to shut off our feelings and emotions. “Be a big boy, don’t cry. What are you a sissy?”

The ultimate win/lose activity is war. We socialize young men with the necessary insecurities and dysfunctions to survive this ultimate win/lose reality. We send boys to boot camp for basic training. These boys, for several weeks, are intentionally verbally and mentally abused. This abuse desensitizes, toughens and deadens the recruits. It lowers their emotional intelligence and spiritual awareness and forces them to see from the most limited and narrow of perspectives. It provides them with the necessary dysfunctions to objectify their enemy. The last thing one wants to do is to empathize with one’s enemy. We intentionally induce distress patterns or false neural associations. We intentionally build a strong win/lose paradigm. War amplifies our distress patterns greatly.

When these boys come back from wars, like Vietnam, many try to repair this warped view of reality with support groups. Huge numbers of Vietnam veterans wander through society today unable to function because of the distress patterns induced. When we look at the bigger picture, becoming hard and calloused is not a good thing. It is very easy to be tough. A rock is tough. It has no feelings. It is also not alive. As we have adapted for the finite wealth creation era we are simply less conscious. We are less alive and self-aware of the effects of our actions. We see ourselves as victims even when our actions are in reality creating our problem.

Individuals are not willing to understand others because, from our win/lose paradigm, there seems to be little in it for the individual. In addition, individuals are too insecure because they have not, themselves, gotten enough understanding and empathy. Since being heard and understood is a human need, the result is a world of scarcity filled with people starved to be heard and understood, with everybody talking and few people listening.

The bottom line is that a finite wealth paradigm operated based upon win/lose competition, mass victimization and fear. The science of breakpoint shows that as one approaches breakpoint, inertia and mass increases and if the old system isn’t abandoned, one must eventually hit a brick wall–a violent breakpoint.

In order for humans to interconnect and tap the infinite wealth of an Information Age, we must have far higher levels of emotional intelligence and spiritual awareness than we’ve had to date. Our high levels of fear and obsession with win/lose make us like children who have not yet fully developed and therefore must be watched, supervised and regulated. And this is what controlled economies do for us. Fear keeps us from fully developing. The greed and selfishness of humanity, which many see as human nature, is simply the immaturity of humanity in our evolutionary trek. This immaturity has been maintained by our paradigm of finite wealth and scarcity.

If we go into an Information Age and develop no more emotional intelligence and spiritual awareness than we have today, then we’ll simply destroy ourselves out of the fear derived from our win/lose paradigm. Today we are like a group of five year olds who are having our Play Dough replaced with plastic explosives. We are in fact a civilization of children with enormous potential to destroy or create.

Copyright 2000 by Barry Carter

---

About Barry Carter.  

Infinite Wealth is available at the author’s website, and can be purchased in bookstores everywhere including Amazon and Barnes & Nobel.

There is also an abbreviated free online version, which has been reposed at Future Positive: 1) The Rise of a Win Win Civilization  2)  A Personal Journey of Discovery 3) Why Corporations Don’t Work 4) The Emancipation of Capitalism  5) Mass Privatization: Organizing in the Information Age  6) Decentralized Wealth Creation  7) The Infinite Wealth Potential of Liberated Humans The Mandate for Win-Win Wealth Creation  9) Breakpoint: Why You Must Act Now  10) SYNOCRACY: True Democracy Through Synergy 11) THE SHIFT: Awaking to a Win-Win World  12) The Synthesis of a Win-Win World and 13)Vision for a Synergic Transition.

Reason Wilken’s Review of Infinite Wealth

Advanced Papers by Barry Carter

The adversary world is a game of with losers and winners. This is a world of fighting and flighting — of pain and dying. To win in this game someone must lose. Winning is always at the cost of another. All humans living in the adversarial world are struggling to avoid losing — struggling to avoid being hurt.

CONFLICT —def—> The struggle to avoid loss — the struggle to avoid being hurt.

Here humans must fight and flee to stay alive, and they do. Always ready at a moments notice to go tooth and nail to avoid losing — to avoid death. Losers/winners is the harshest of games. Winning is always at the cost of another’s life. The loser tends to resist with all of his might occasionally prevailing by killing or wounding his attacker. So both parties can lose, turning the game — losers/winners into losers/losers. If we analyze adversary relationships, we discover that individuals are less after the relationship. (1+1)<2. In the adversarial world where the loser forfeits his life (1+1)=1. Or in the end game of losers/losers, both adversaries may die in battle, then (1+1)=0.

Conflict: The Norm of Current Civilization

Barry Carter

When we look at the underlying norms and thinking that employment and our entire Industrial Age systems rest upon, we find a win/lose norm. The controlled economy and other Industrial Age systems were not the start of win/lose norms and systems. Serfdom, slavery and monarchy of the Agricultural Age were also based upon win/lose norms and prior to this so to was tribal life and customs. Controlled economies are merely the latest in a series of perhaps progressively improving win/lose systems.

The inherent win/lose nature of slavery and serfdom is self-evident, however, how is a controlled economy inherently a win/lose system? Any economy that must be controlled to maintain order is one based upon fear not love. The former Soviet Union controlled its economy because it feared what free humans would do without control, likewise so do companies. Only systems and actions that come from a love paradigm can be win-win. Actions and systems from an authoritarian control or fear paradigm are inherently based upon win/lose and scarcity.

The heart of the controlled economy is its win/lose compensation system. Controlled economies operate based upon standardized compensation – salaries and wages. Regardless of the value one adds the controlled economy pays the same within a relatively narrow range. With standardized compensation the more you make the less the organization makes and vise-versa. I must lose in order for you to win and vise-versa.

The controlled economy is based upon adversarial human relationships. At a tangible level we see a win/lose system as CEO’s salaries explode while they layoff record numbers of people. Managers and the company makes more by holding down wages and salaries; the more the employee makes the less the company makes and vise-versa. The more vacation and benefits the employee gets the more it cost the company. There is also win/lose competition for limited positions. The primary job of most managers is to get more work out of people for less money. Unions who represent employees (a check and balance bureaucracy) have the job of getting more money and benefits for employee at the owner’s expense. Externally controlled economies compete with other controlled economies for survival, customers, growth, resources and prestige.

Most of the rest of society is geared towards socializing people to survive in this win/lose system. Wealth creation is at the center and all other institutions must evolve to match it because it is the system that produces the stuff (food, shelter, money, etc) that allows us to survive. It, therefore, takes top priority. With our scarcity paradigm of finite wealth and our win/lose wealth creation system virtually all of our social systems, as well as thinking, support this win/lose norm.

Win/lose is so pervasive in our civilization that we aren’t even aware that we live in a win/lose norm. We are like the fish who, when asked what it’s like to live in water, say, “What water?”

We’ve even made win/lose activity fun. Win/lose competitive sports, for example, are presently one of our most enjoyable activities and few things in society have as much popular support. Competition is so much a part of our civilization that it is invisible and thought of as the only way things can work. Even those diligently working to build the new win-win civilization dogmatically resist seeing competitive sports as win/lose activity. However, any human activity where one person loses in order for another to win must fall into the win/lose category. Competitive sports serve an important role in a fear based win/lose civilization. They socialize us with the driving motivation to win and to lose gracefully. Losing gracefully is as critical as winning, since a win/lose civilization cannot advance if the losers are poor losers and become destructive when losing.

All one has to do is watch the faces of both teams after an important competitive event, to understand what is being taught. The losing side, in pain and anguish, is taught to suck it up, swallow the pain of losing, lose with grace and come back and try harder next time. However, watching the jubilation of one team at the expense of the other team’s pain and anguish tells us that something is gravely wrong with this system. We see the same looks on the faces of two opposing groups at war as one is defeated and one wins or two opposing gangs. Likewise with a criminal and victim when a huge sum of money has been stolen.

What other lessons are taught with competitive sport; focus on ourselves regardless of the pain others are in, make others feel the way we do not want to feel, do it unto them before they do it unto us, get your needs met at other people’s expense, don’t care about the feelings of the other person. When we see gangs, criminal and thugs operating by these same rules, regarding others in society, for some reason we are appalled. We ask in surprise and denial, “Where did they learn such values?”

As children we start with cartoons that are biased toward a win/lose reality. There are good guys and bad guys seeking to win and to cause the other side to lose. The first thing a child does when watching a new cartoon is to figure out who the good guy and bad guy is. Without this reference the story has little meaning. In criminal justice both opposing sides are focused on winning for their side and causing the other side to lose. Only a small percentage of the effort is focused on the truth. In representative government, the politician’s top priority and primary focus is on winning the next election and causing the opposing politician to lose. How the politician votes is dependent upon whether it will help him win and his opponent lose in the next election. He or she is not primarily focused on doing the right thing for the situation.

We take all of the above and the rest of our win/lose civilization as absolute and the only way things can work. However, this is not the only way things can work, especially as we move into an Information Age. The win/lose controlled economy paradigm is but one paradigm. As knowledge decentralizes power to the individual in society win/lose human relations can no longer be sustained as the evidence all around us is beginning to show. There is simply too much power in the hands of individuals, in an Information Age, for a win/lose civilization to be practical. The losers in an Information Age are gaining the power to cause the winners to lose, with the result being lose/lose as we see with terrorism, gangs and hate groups.

The 911 operator answers the phone. There is a frantic lady barely understandable screaming. “They’re in my house.” The operator says, “Slow down, I can’t understand you, what’s the problem?”

Caller: “They’re killing my kids.”

Pop-pop goes a gun in the background.

Operator: “Who’s killing your kids? Gang members?”

Caller: “Please get someone over here.”

Again pop-pop.

Caller: “Oh no, oh no please don’t kill me, please, please don’t kill me–no, no please let me live.”

The caller begs for her life for thirty seconds before the gang members spare her, however, her three children ages ten, seven and five are dead; killed execution style shot in the back of the head. This is a true story and we see rising violence like this increasingly on the news and television daily, and it is only one symptom of our dying Industrial Age civilization.

What does the death of these three children and increasing violence and disorder have to do wealth creation and the Information Age transition? Everything! As our wealth creation system becomes more dysfunctional the social chaos will continue to increase. This is because all of our institutions are interconnected into one cohesive whole. When we analyze crime and violence by looking at it separately from everything else in society we see no connection. When we synthesize and look at how all of our social systems and norms fit we see that it is all interconnected. We must see the connections before we will solve our Industrial Age problems. The book Infinite Wealth is intended to help you see from the Information Age paradigm and help the connections crystallize before our eyes.

Copyright 2000 by Barry Carter

---

About Barry Carter.  

Infinite Wealth is available at the author’s website, and can be purchased in bookstores everywhere including Amazon and Barnes & Nobel.

There is also an abbreviated free online version, which has been reposed at Future Positive: 1) The Rise of a Win Win Civilization  2)  A Personal Journey of Discovery 3) Why Corporations Don’t Work 4) The Emancipation of Capitalism  5) Mass Privatization: Organizing in the Information Age  6) Decentralized Wealth Creation  7) The Infinite Wealth Potential of Liberated Humans The Mandate for Win-Win Wealth Creation  9) Breakpoint: Why You Must Act Now  10) SYNOCRACY: True Democracy Through Synergy 11) THE SHIFT: Awaking to a Win-Win World  12) The Synthesis of a Win-Win World and 13)Vision for a Synergic Transition.

Reason Wilken’s Review of Infinite Wealth

Advanced Papers by Barry Carter