Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/
http://www.theguardian.com/
That may be the ultimate tragedy of capitalism in our time, that it has achieved its dominance without regard to a social compact, without being connected to any other metric for human progress.
We understand profit. In my country we measure things by profit. We listen to the Wall Street analysts. They tell us what we're supposed to do every quarter. The quarterly report is God. Turn to face God. Turn to face Mecca, you know. Did you make your number? Did you not make your number? Do you want your bonus? Do you not want your bonus?
And that notion that capital is the metric, that profit is the metric by which we're going to measure the health of our society is one of the fundamental mistakes of the last 30 years. I would date it in my country to about 1980 exactly, and it has triumphed.
the great irony of it is that the only thing that actually works is not ideological, it is impure, has elements of both arguments and never actually achieves any kind of partisan or philosophical perfection.
It's pragmatic, it includes the best aspects of socialistic thought and of free-market capitalism and it works because we don't let it work entirely. And that's a hard idea to think – that there isn't one single silver bullet that gets us out of the mess we've dug for ourselves.
Their eyes glaze. You know they don't want to hear it. It's too much. Too much to contemplate the idea that the whole country might be actually connected.
So how does it get better? In 1932, it got better because they dealt the cards again and there was a communal logic that said nobody's going to get left behind.
So I don't know what we do if we can't actually control the representative government that we claim will manifest the popular will. Even if we all start having the same sentiments that I'm arguing for now, I'm not sure we can effect them any more in the same way that we could at the rise of the Great Depression
or maybe we can do better... because of our connectedness.. and our new means to connect.
a quiet revolution.. starfish style....
 dave trott (@davetrott)12/8/13 5:44 AM (great line) "Twelve years after his death, he's still more alive than half the people I know" - Victoria Coren on Nigella's first husband  pammoran (@pammoran)12/8/13 7:30 AM listening to YT @johnmaeda "creative ppl actually love mistakes.. we learn from those ... creatives are ok with ambiguity" #leadership  Zainab Salbi (@ZainabSalbi)12/6/13 5:16 AM The best way to honor @NelsonMandela is to embody his values in our daily behavior: courage, speaking truth, forgiveness, love & joy.  Lolly Daskal (@LollyDaskal)12/8/13 7:32 AM RT @AjmaniK The kind of Unity that bridges gaps, adds life. We can agree on more than we think we can. A3. #SpiritChat  COINT (@COINTme)12/8/13 7:33 AM The meaning of life is to find your gift. The purpose of life is to give it away. - Pablo Picasso #sharingeconomy pic.twitter.com/oTUpKxCFS3 Lolly Daskal (@LollyDaskal)12/8/13 7:37 AM spiritual seekers understand unity means finding our heart.#Spiritchat
Yet, in The End of Competitive Advantage, Columbia professor Rita Gunther McGrathargues that sustainable competitive advantage is no longer viable or even desirable. She points out that, “it allows for inertia and power to build up along the lines of an existing business model,” which will soon be defunct. Business models no longer last.
Instead, she suggests that firms pursue transient competitive advantage, knowing full well that any advantage will be short lived. The evidence would seem to bear this out.Innosight reports that every two weeks a company is replaced on the S&P 500 and the average lifespan has fallen from over 60 years to less than 20.
transient is great - alive/ness. yeah.
competitive - not what i crave, can't imagine it's what an awake soul craves, why must their be competition..? who's deciding that's a non-negotiable element?
advantage - again - not a term i'd use for betterness, for a society/community seeking unity/equity
so 1 out of 3. we get off on 1 out of 3 way too often, no? we get lost in shiny too much, in assumption. maybe in our weariness?.. in our hurriedness?, 1 out of 3 sounds great..?
the speeding up ness.. is to slow us down. slow enough that we start thinking/questioning/living... no?
2. From The Knowledge Economy to The Information Economy
The data was just as accurate, but nearly instantaneous. The machine had no medical training, yet was able to outperform the work of thousands of specialists by identifying specific patterns in information.
indeed.. but again.. speed is for us to slow down..
the dance matters even more now..
info can kill us .. if we keep playing catch up with it..
we re not doing our part of the dance..
3. From The Scale Economy to The Semantic Economy
So it is no longer clear that scale advantages outweigh the strategic rigidity that comes with large enterprises. Big firms are learning that they need to network their organizations in order to stay competitive with an onslaught of nimble startups.
again... we see a glimmer.. and weight it down/compromise it.. by not stepping out of our current assumptions/pluralistic ignorance...
sorry, but yeah.. 2 out of 3.. is bad..
bad enough to keep us stuck/suffocating on our non-thinking ness
4. From Industries to Missions
So rather than thinking in terms of traditional industries, we need to think in terms of adjacencies. Amazon developed its supercomputing capacity running its online stores, then began offering access to other businesses. Google learned to excel at pattern recognition through its search business before it applied that capability to driverless cars.
In the past, I’ve referred to this activity as questing (as one would do in a role playing game). Rita Gunther McGrath describes it as competing in “arenas” rather than industries. Whatever you want to call it, industries no longer serve as viable strategic units. Competition—and opportunity for that matter—can come from anywhere.
...rather than thinking in terms of traditional industries, we need to think in terms of adjacencies.
well... only if adjacency is referring to an arm.. leg..
connected adjacency... should/could have no competition.. only advantage is.. we become us..
no?
5. From Strategic Planning to Bayesian Strategy and the New Learning Organization
Today, extensive strategic planning has become untenable. By the time you gather information, check your numbers, analyze the situation, make the plan, revise the plan and build a consensus, the facts on the ground have already rendered the plan useless. Success is becoming more a matter of time and place than of vision or insight.
So it’s crucial that we move from strategic planning to Bayesian strategy, where we’re not trying to “get it right” as much as we are striving to become less wrong over time. This will entail creating new learning organizations that are able to manage complexitythrough combining human driven ambitions with automated market intelligence.
alive ness
chaordic nes
that dance...
Most of all, strategy is becoming less about assets and capabilities and more about connections and access. It’s not so important anymore what you have—or even what you know—but how you can forge networks of purpose which can adapt in real time.
....how you can forge networks of purpose which can adapt in real time
just described a healthy human body... no..?
Kiev: Man playing piano to riot police (via @imgur) http://t.co/ZQyH9Ej8yI
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/
Design Thinking in Schools: An Emerging Movement Building Creative Confidence in our Youthhttp://t.co/ZdPdtnXDos
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/
spot on.. if only..
if only we weren't drowning and/or blind to the seeping in ness of agendas.
we could have changed so much by now.. if we could trust whimsy. no?
most design thinking is within an agenda.. unfortunately.
could we not be bold enough to break free from that..
let's.
we can't not.
|
Greg Satell (
