Difference between revisions of "FairShares Commons"

Revision as of 05:23, 23 April 2020

Introduction to Part 1: Einstein and Picasso

The idea of a FairShares Commons Company emerged from the work of Graham Boyd and Jack Reardon, and the consultancy company Evolutesix. Evolutesix was an early adopter of the FairShares Model (in 2016), and through 2018/19 built a network of organisational and personal coaches who further developed Graham Boyd's concept of a 'free company' (i.e. free from the subjugation that occurs in a capital market where a company is seen as property to be bought and sold).

These pages were created - initially - by Prof Rory Ridley-Duff, whilst reading source material for the book 'The Roads to New Co-operativism' and have been integrated into the FairShares Wiki by members of the FairShares Association (2020 - 2023).

Preface

This sets out why the authors between there has never been a better time for a generative economy (p. xii). Described as a 'how-to' manual, it tracks their changed thinking from 2015 - 2020, particularly the realisation that the climate crisis on its own will not catalyse the transformative action at a fundamental level needed to make business an 'intrinsic force for good'. After a section about Graham's upbringing in South Africa (and working in across Europe and Asia), Graham funnels in on the loss of Arctic ice, and the need to understanding 'the anchors holding the [capitalist] system stable it is dysfunctionality' (p. xv). In place of this dysfunction, Graham describes elements of the FairShares Commons - the subject of the book - and the process of building a network of people interested in developing the ideas, and arriving at the Rethinking Economics conference at Greenwich University.

Jack's upbringing starts with memories of his grandfather's view of improving environmental management. Tracking both depression and joy (much as Graham did), we arrive at turning defeat 'inside out' and achieving success. Jack's mindset became set after a rejection of a paper pointing out flaws in neoclassical economics, particularly in relation to the allocation of resources in a market economy. He created a new journal - the International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education - which set him on a path towards ideas that now manifest in his work on FairShares Commons Companies (p. xvii). He redirected his efforts to 'a different valley on a completely different track'. Jack arrived (and spoke at) the Rethinking Economics conference attended by Graham.

Bringing their stories together, they found themselves sharing their ideas over a meal and enjoyed the 'generative conflict' that (eventually) produced the book, 'breaking free of the old paradigms'. Readers are asked to regard the book as a 'circle' - starting and finishing anywhere. They assume a global crisis, and that the crisis needs addressing, that the readers are people who are passionate about having greater impact. There is a positive attitude to business, as the institution with the power to resolve global challenges (more than any other social institution). Profit is used in a wider sense, 'not just financial profit' (p. xx). Investors are seen as allies in the project to address climate change.

Part 1 - Chapter 1 - Reasons for Hope

Chapter 1 opens with questions about grief and anxiety about climate change, and swiftly moves to an argument that the 'shift' coming will be the biggest for 75,000 years. Once again, we are invited to believe that business can be both for the environment and for-profit (in the broader sense than money). To make the shift, we have to change 'who you are, how you think, and how you make meaning' (p. 5). 'Doing differently at this scale requires us to become someone different'.

The argument that 'shift happens' gains momentum and traction. Picasso and Einstein enter as 'key players in the transformation of art and physics' (through pluralism and the use of multiple perspectives). Acting differently required understanding differently, after an 'inner shift' in identity and meaning-making. The perspective that 'the world you are experiencing today [is] inherently unpredictable and emergent' prevents capture of what is evolving by looking at the past and present, because the future is 'filled with inherent, irreducible uncertainty' (p. 6).

Adaptive capacity enters the lexicon of the book - the capacity to navigate contradiction and ambiguity. The authors signal they will use quantum physics and relativity to ask different questions and find better answers. A subjective epistemology is adopted:

p. 7 "All ... meanings are true, at least for you in your reality when you make meaning"

but there is recognition that subjective meaning may not related to the world as it is (an objective ontology). The mix of subjective meaning making and objective reality is expressed as follows (p. 7)

"the reality you experience is shaped by your meaning making, out of the raw material that is actually present"

Describing the release of Nelson Mandela, the argument is made that hope can replace fear in periods of great uncertainty and changes lens and ways of thinking can bring hope.

Emergent strategies are those the focus on maximising the generation of desired outcomes (even if they cannot be seen, predicted or realised in the present situation). (p. 8).

Theory U

Scharmer's Theory U is introduced ('let go of what you know, poke at things, see what happens, and then learn'). In social science, this would be an Action Research (Learning by Doing) strategy. By engaging in (what academics call) reflexivity, chip away are presumptions and get past distortions of 'what actually is' (there's that objective ontology surfacing again).

Emergent strategies, based on Theory U, create prosperous futures through innovations and developing adaptive capacity (not skills and competencies). Back-to-basics is rejected as a strategy, viewed as 'blind faith' not 'grounded hope'. (p. 9).

Successful emergent strategies neither abandon or emulate the past - but it requires giving up hope that you can identify pathways through a single lens/view of reality. Instead, you use multiple lenses to view reality (cognitive/economic pluralism, I guess). It requires integrating different disciplines, working with contradictory beliefs to create generative dialogues (90% listening to stories, and 10% examining 'facts').

Picasso and Einstein

The shifts brought about by Picasso and Einstein can be contrasted with the art of Giotto and the physics of Newton. Both represented reality from a single perspective (geometry in the case of Giotto, and classical mechanics in the case of Newton). The Enlightenment stemmed from the co-evolution of artistic and scientific realities based on Euclid's geometry, and this world view came to dominate all aspects of life.

Picasso and Braque ended this with the revolution of Cubism. They viewed reality as much more than you can see (presenting objects from many sides in the same piece of art), and challenging the idea that any single perspective is privileged (p. 11).

As for Einstein, he wrestled with the anomalies of Newtonian physics in relation to very large/fast objects and extremely small objects. Einstein observed that two moving people do not see, record or understand the same 'objective' event in the same way. Moreover, whilst he could observe the impact of gravity (the fact of its existence), he could not understand why gravity occurred. He created theory that explains how large objects distort the space in which smaller objects exist, and thereby change their behaviour. All behaviour is 'relative' to other objects also in the environment. Extending this to social systems, the authors set out that human behaviour is also relative to other behaviours that exist within a person's domain of existence. A person can not exist and observe in isolation: the 'actuality' of something can never be objective or neutral because its character is shaped by the presence of other things in its ecosystem. In short, the observer affects the observed.

• "Newton simply assumed that an independent observer could measure objectively, without any distrortion or influencing what was observed. Einstein relaised that this fundamental assumption was not valid, that this assumption was why classical theory gave useless, and sometimes even harmful predictions in certain areas."

In place of either/or logic, complementarity can be the starting point for a discipline. Mobile phones, the author's claim, depend on the reality of relativity and quantum physics. In foregrounding the subjectivity of experience, the authors still reject solipsism (the all reality is a project of the mind). In keeping with Relativity, each object affects other objects and therefore the act of observing gives form to the matter observed - it shapes a person's observed reality (through the effects it has on other objects), but reality itself is not a projection of the mind.

The relevance in the context of a book on organisations and organisating is that 'the more detailed precision you have in defining and executing your strategy, the less you can recognise emergent possibilties' (p. 16).

The authors introduce 'pivoting' - learning new ways to be rapidly through improvisation. Pivoting means not waiting until you have a perfect analysis of data, and acting on imperfect, incomplete data. Resilience and antifragility are distinguished. To be resilient is to survive unchanged in the fact o attack, whilst anti-fragility is the capacity to transform, to become more able to thrive because of an attack. The FairShares Commons, combined with adaptive behaviour, is a strategy for antifragility.

Adaptive Capacity

Adaptive Capacity begins with accepting the ambiguity and uncertainty of life, and also that a thing has properties that arise out of its context and relationship with other things, and the paths they have travelled. The same is true of people. (Ubuntu philosophy: "I am because we are" - inter-connectedness is at the heart of what it is to be human).

"Your identity and your path through life is created by each step you take".

The authors introduce Otto Laske's map of maps (Constructive Developmental Framework) and reference it against Kegan's stages of adult development. Adaptive capacity helps to guard against bias and distortion, but there are no 'final' reality that is complete. It is always distorted by the process of becoming. Adaptive capacity enables a person to graduate from linear to meta-thinking (transformational and dialectical in character). Nevertheless there are limits imposed by our DNA and early life-stage experiences. (p. 20).

A characteristic can be both a strength and weakness depending on context (p. 21-22).

Adaptive Organisations

The authors introduce adaptive capacity (anti-fragility) in relation to the United Nations' 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs) and climate emergency. The characteristics of adaptive organisations are described as:

• seeing clearly what is happening
• seeing clearly the difference between what is important and what is irrelevant
• attaching appropriate meaning to what is happening
• acting appropriately

For more, see Chapters 12 to 16.

Adaptive individuals and organisations is insufficient - a third element (incorporation as a FairShares Commons) is vital for a circular economy of trust.

Society and the Economy

The authors introduce the idea of 'The Economy of the Free' (a regenerative economy). The authors take an instrumental view of economy - as something created by people in society to assist with provisioning members of society. Accepting Polanyi's perspective, the economy is never independent of society.

(Some passages use the language of 'higher' and 'lower' developmental stage, indicating hierarchies of concepts and development pathways).

The authors talk of 'Stage 4' development - up to this point, the stages of development have not yet been set out. Nevertheless, it becomes clear that Stage 3 is one in which self-identity and expertise are so intertwined that an attack on disciplinary thinking feel like a personal attack. At level 3, inter-disciplinary warfare is the norm. Using Steve Keen's comments on Economics, the authors argue for discarding 'expertise' that is 'past its sell-by date'. This leads into arguments regarding 'what comes next?'

Advancing early ideas for a regenerative economy, the authors taken the Ubuntu injunction that "I am because you are" as an argument for the inclusion of multiple stakeholders directly in the governance of enterprises, and for sharing wealth generated.

This brings us back to the meaning of 'free'. Free businesses cannot embrace a property mentality (otherwise they will be bought and sold as slaves). Based on Einstein's relativity, they declare an intention to sketching a 'general theory of economics'.

Drawing on the positive experiences of transforming South Africa into an all-stakeholder economy, hope is offered that 'us and them' can be replaced by an integrated 'us' through active listening and empathy. 'Viable transition' (p. 27) requires listening to 'almost everyone', and a combination of:

• recognising the current paradigm is failing
• ambition to do better
• questioning of the current paradigm
• intimate knowledge of past and present
• willingness to listen to and experiment with opposing views (non-judgemental)
• Willingness to adopt multiple lenses

Part 1: Chapter 2 - Stories, lenses and maps

The chapter begins with a discussion of whether it is possible to ask the wrong questions? In retrospect, the authors answer 'yes' realising that the questions asked set thinking on a particular track and it may be some time before it is realised that another (better) question would have been preferable at the start.

Generative questions (echoes of critical appreciative inquiry here) are desirable as they prompt more questions (and answers). By way of an example, the authors cite Ernest Rutherford who prevented himself from seeing that an electron has no place by asking 'where is the electron?' Applied to business, 'wrong' questions might be 'how can we better regulate business?' or 'how can we fix the banks?' A question that takes its audience away from understanding the origins of a situation will be less good that one that can reveal them?

The issue is 'frame of reference' (every question has one). If the frame of reference has validity [validity is not explained], answers may be useful. But if not valid, all questions arising from it won't connect back to reality in helpful ways. The frame of reference behind and giving rise to questions is important - and a goal of the book is using 28 thoughts form to undercover your own frames of reference.

The questions we ask are created by the lens we use. This always limits the knowledge we create, and what we can know.

Lenses

All lenses distort and clarify at the same time - they need to be chosen carefully by the wearer to reveal, rather than blur, what is being looked at. Where 'standard lenses' are used, it is not possible to see trends that drive disruption and change. The authors (in a straightforward way) speak in favour of action learning and against 'transmitting the current canonical thinking in each discipline'. Moreover, when we remember, we remember the last time we remembered, so the past is constantly changed (in our minds). Our minds reshape earlier versions of our memories.

The distorting/clarifying effects of lenses are multiplied when we seek to communicate with others (who use different lenses to 'see' what we are communicating to them). However, shifting from either/or to 'and' questions can encourage the integration of apparent opposites into a higher level whole. Machines v Complex Adaptive Systems (you make what you see).

In adopting quantum physics, scientists abandoned 'the simplistic notion that particles, waves, and the forces between them were in any sense independent building blocks of reality' (p. 34).

Quantum mechanisms switch the primary and secondary status of 'particles' and 'interactions'. In classical physical, particles were primary. But in quantum mechanics, interactions are primary because they 'pull particles into existence' (p. 34). Applying this argument to organisations, the interactions between people (not just the people themselves) become primary. The nature of interactions between people bring those people into existence (it shapes their experience of 'being'). Viewing interactions as having more power to shape people, that people shaping interactions, is the first step to bringing about a new reality.

(This reminds me of Circle Partnership - they created hospitals without signs so that visitors would have to ask a person where to go, generating interactions deliberately and helping patients form relationships with staff).

An interesting table is presented suggesting 'particles' and 'interactions' in business (Investors - Votes/Dialogue; Staff / Dialogue, positional power, strikes, law etc.). Meeting (and meeting planning/protocols) shape the possible interactions, and the more creative the interactions, the more creative the meeting). Interactions structured through hierarchies of power between staff affect both the interactions and the people themselves in terms of identities they feel they can adopt. Complementary pairs (recursively) shape each other's existence.

Maps

Using the analogy of the map of the London Underground system, the authors make the point that maps that reveal what is important and hide what is unimportant help you to get to the place you wish to go (p. 35). More accurate maps that hide or obscure what is relevant may be less helpful. In this way, maps supplement 'lenses' in help you see things in particular ways.

Seen as 'too radical' when first issued, the example of the underground map succeeded because of its practical utility and it became a global standard. Maps that are useful in periods of emergence are different to those in period of predictability because they should different pathways and aspects of the situation, but in the way that allow different to use the map to chart a course.

The first challenge in charting a new path is to see what maps and lenses are in use, and it compares to other maps and lenses in order to acquire multiple perspectives and better understand how to help 'to grasp what is happening' (p.37).

The trust of the argument here is the 'mine and refine this conflict' (the conflicts that arise out of comes to terms with multiple perspectives).

Meaning Making Stories

The authors introduce 'deep stories' that help you give meaning to the world about you. Most 'deep stories' are hidden, but we still use them to give meaning to our experience. Unlike the stories in most novels, "meaning-making stories are hidden templates you use to create the reality you experience, by giving meaning to the small part of actuality you are aware of." (p. 41).

Meaning-making stories can vary from pure fiction to grounded in actuality. The authors make the case for finding approaches to re-ground yourself in actuality, and adjusting the meaning-making stories accordingly. To do this, it is not enough just to think - you have to "deliberately create experiences for yourself that trigger your stories to rewrite themselves" (p.42).

Reality

The objective ontology and subjective reality of the authors is capture beautifully in the statement that "You never experience what is, only your inner story about what is." (p. 42). To support this point, the fact that we do not register what our eye sees for about 15% of the time we are looking is used to problematise how we see. The brain give us a "hypothesis image" and our eyes adjust it based on noticing difference between actuality and our 'inner image', and this is also about half a second behind when things occurs in actuality.

The limits of subjectivity are set out because we "do not have the freedom to experience any reality" (p. 43). Even in dreams, you can "only dream based on the possibilities that your brain is equipped for". Inner reality is a product of our entire history of inner reality experiences. The section concludes with two mutually exclusive world views:

External: "that everything has intrinsic meaning, created by a divine plan or cosmic inevitability" Nihilism: "nothing that is or happens has any intrinsic meaning, all meaning is created"

The authors see these as a 'complementary pair'.

Your chimp, human and computer systems

The authors describe the limbic brain as our 'chimp' system. Our capacity for rationale (sense-making thought) is terms our 'human' system, and both create a library of stories and behaviours in our 'computer' system. The chimp and human systems interact (retrieve and replace) stories in our computer library, sometimes comparing them before deciding which to use. Building a better, bigger library is an important task so we can prepare today for what we expect to happen tomorrow (such as the climate crisis we knew about in the 1980s).

Cargo Cults

Using stories from WW2, the authors distinguish the rituals ('cargo cults') linked to hidden worldviews from the worldviews themselves (the drivers of the social actions that became ritualised). This also distinguishes 'real science' from 'scientism'. They argue that the 'underlying engine that makes science work, is using intuition to imagine how the world might work and what you might be able to say about it, then try as hard as you can to rip your ideas and everybody else's ideas to pieces' (p. 46).

Using this argument, the authors distinguish useless 'self-help' books (about business/economics) that ape the rituals, from the 'real science' of modelling changes to the world based on ideas tested against actuality about how the world can be. To encourage the latter, three suggestions are put forward:

1) Letting go of what you believe to be true (so you can entertain other ideas) 2) Disconnect your self-worth from your meaning-making stories (so be more reflexive) 3) Look for evidence that proves something false, not true.

(This appears to be an evolution of Popperian critical thinking, of the humble scientist searching for breakthrough theories that confound current understanding, then putting oneself further at risk by seeking to prove one-self wrong. The result is a body of theory that survives, and which might be more truthful than theories rejected). Distinguishing between the brutality of their battles over ideas, and the kindness of scientists to each other as people, the case is made for harnessing conflict.

Harnessing, not managing, conflict

Not unlike my own opening chapter in 'Emotion, Seduction and Intimacy', the authors charge us to harness, not seek to escape, conflict and apply this across six layers of hierarchy:

1) Inter-ecosystem

2) Inner-ecosystem

3) Inter-organisational

4) Inner-organisational

5) Inter-personal

6) Inner-personal

They set out their approach to harnessing conflict for each layer:

Inter-ecosystem: (everything else) Inner-ecosystem: The FairShares Commons at the ecosystem level (Part II and IV of the book) Inter-organisational: FairShares Commons incorporation for a wide range of entities, with possible exceptions for pure trusts and wholly-owned subsidiaries. Inner-organisational: Sociocracy, holacracy and other forms of dynamic organisation design and governance (Part IV) Inter-personal: Evolutesix's 'Adaptive Way' for teams (Part IV) Inner-personal: Evolutesix's Adaptive Way' for individuals (Part III)

Using statistics on the failure of start-ups (65%) because of their inability to harness conflict, the case is made for harnessing conflict (particularly inter-disciplinary, and inter-organisational). 'Managing' and 'Avoiding' conflict limits our ability to grow. The section closes with a challenge to 'escape Planck's Principle' whereby we fail to 'see the light' brought about by new scientific truths.

Boundaries

The authors argue that clarity regarding boundaries are important (from planets and biological cells). Boundaries are not solid (cells exchange with their environments). Our self-identity is one such boundary (Chapter 8). Social group boundaries is another, and the boundaries between social groups can be made stronger or weaker by the legal forms we use to incorporate them. Similarly, there are boundaries within and between disciplines (economics, engineering etc.).

Boundaries, whilst important, has a point where it holds back development if too rigid/impenetrable. Reframing boundaries to seek complimentary pairs enables more focus to be placed on the exchanges that take place (the dialogic relationship).

The FairShares Commons approaches boundaries in a more fluid way, breaking down boundaries between stakeholders whilst holding onto their sense of identity, and also making inter-organisational boundaries more permeable, whilst recognising their separate functions and identities too.

How did we get into this mess?

The authors take a generous view of human nature, and the 'collective competence' of well-meaning people to explain the current state of the world. They urge us to recognise work on not reproducing that which has failed, rather than blaming evil people.

Introduction to Part 2: Economy

Part 2, Chapter 3 - How do we know our economy?

The authors set out how we are embedded within, shaped by, and actively shaping, our economy. To understand the economy, we have to engage in 28 forms of thought (set out in Chapter 9) because it cannot be seen by examining its parts. To understand it, the inter-connectedness and relationships within it need to be grasped, and the stories that drive it need to be revealed. Economy is invented through stories and the authors track the stories that classical economist tell us to reproduce our understanding of our economies.