Hello
I was wondering if anyone would have some time to give me some feedback.
Part of me is a mathematician who has spent 2 years sketching a map which
connects the human relationships in organisations that I believe should be
valued but which are not currently measured by numbers (which are a
disconnecting represenational model). The map can be seen at
http://www.valuetrue.com , a co-content managing community that will fully
open soon.
I have a few deep expertises. For example, I have researched why the
misleading word intangibles really means the human processes of a company
which need to be most intimately connected and developed as feedback loops
with promises made to stakeholders and value relationships they demand.
Having researched stakeholders over 20 years and 30 countries, I know they
-and we as human beings - value emotional and social things as well as
money. I don't believe this knowledge is dynamically structured by many
companies today, not can it be until we open source a simple mapping
standard. One which is openly drawn so as to surface assumptions and
connect human features before precise-looking numbers bury and separate
them.
What I don't know is how to describe all this in system's and learning
organisational vocabulary without straying from the common language , or
sounding over-pompous. That's why we're launching a communal approach to
re-editing commentaries on the map. So sharing this early text with you
today is like sending you the worst ever description that will be seen of
the map. For that I must apologise, but if it has enough LO compatibility
to interest you and to consider helping our community improve
organisational measurability of human relationship systems, please do help
us edit and connect.
We wish to rehearse our map with any association, standards group etc who
wishes to comment or play it. We have a stretching communal mission : to
downsize quarterly numbers auditing and related services by 50% so that
people who believe in human relationship measurability can have an equal
say in corporate governance, and the behaviours and learning which produce
value. Should you wish, please pass this mail on to interested parties.
sincerely
chris macrae, wcbn007@easynet.co.uk London tel 0208 540 5304
www.valuetrue.com community mapping human relationship measurement standards
www.normanmacrae.com Bright Economics Futures
COMMUNAL CALLING (Open Source Property Right Asserted by valuetrue.com
community)
This stakeholder map is the first complete blueprint of how the
connectivity of an organisation's system of human relationships produces
value in an age where:
· value productivity is largely intangible,
· networking transparency and integrity will be dynamically evaluated by
all your stakeholders
· market connectivity has paradoxes of scope such as global and local,
and co-directed competences
· the economics of how you organise can change very rapidly and needs to
be openly and consistently rehearsed in a way that measurably learns about
mixing hard monetary value with soft human resources such as time,
emotional energies and social trust
Moreover, changes in your company's future value depend on who reads the
simplest integrated map to SWOT the environment where partners,
competitors and social movements may all direct their own relationship
systems in ways designed to co-produce or destroy your relationship
capital.
The map has been mathematically designed as an universal standard enabling
everyone to make a common and fast start in a suitable direction. However
the journey soon prompts very detailed situational checklists to be
assembled. Many of these should be benchmarked with peer companies and
individuals. They will ultimately require that you re-examine every
numerical measurement made in your company for its unique system context.
Measurements which a profession assures you to be perfect in its
contextual assumptions often turn out to have vicious effects on the
sustainability and integrity of the value productivity of the whole
organisation mapped as a living system of human relationships.
As one example, consider the complexity list of 20 common system and
leadership faultlines that the map surfaces. You can trace where everyone
of these faultlines is most likely to start on the map and where vicious
relationship breakdowns will spread.
Companies who attend to this map will find that they will minimise shocks
of what will happen next to the value placed on our company. Analysts can
use this map to appraise which leadership teams transparently care about
the responsibility for future value performance and which do not.
Governments and other representatives of regional communities can map a
company's activities contributions to social responsibility. Both monetary
and social integrities are featured in the map's valuation model, because
in an intangibles world each drives the other.
The map sets every professional the challenge to connect the flow of their
knowhow with other professionals. It requires every co-worker to behave in
ways that value each other. The hardest leadership challenge involves the
first time a company simplifies its relationship dynamics by opening the
map out for its whole organisation to work with.
Relationship Complexity:
Top 20 System & Leadership faultlines which mapless companies fail to see
1 Intangibles are valued separately not for their connectivity
2 Professionals fight for control of intangible & its budget instead of
teamworking
3 Excessive Micro measures (eg brand awareness) of an intangible
de-systemise its dynamics
4 Intangibles depending most on horizontal structures tend not to be
identified at all or mis-structured & mis-stewarded
5 Individual people are time and rewarded for separate transactions not
teamworking or system good
6 The boards major decisions (eg M&A) and mega-consulted in strategies
tend to be done without intangibles diligence
7 Few if any people see all the promises and value demands the company is
making across stakeholders. They may understand how their behaviour
impacts one stakeholder transaction but not its knock-on effects on all
stakeholder relationships
8 Negative win-lose emotional energies charge the system for many of above
reasons plus inability of business model to appraise relationship
conflicts
9 Under-recognition of how intangibles live in the people means that
employees are incentivised to leave the company ; intangible service
knowhow leaks away
10 The connectivity of stakeholder relationships (eg risk of reputational
destruction) is not given constant attention, and in some companies is not
part of the performance system
11 Listening to and learning from stakeholders is given less weight than
communicating at them
12 Monetary value transactions are often audited to exclude human
relationship values such as time, learning access, emotional energy,
social trust
13 Most companies have a very immature process of valuing stakeholder
conflicts. Dynamic priorities and responsibilities are systematically
malfunctioning.
14 A byproduct of not doing conflict analysis modelling is that false
economics spirals particularly where the human costs or competitions have
changed over time from greatest efficiency to greatest inefficiency
15 Left unattended powerful stakeholders escalate their short-term demands
and the company reacts to these blind of the loyalty damage being done to
other stakeholders
16 Even the most conscientiously caring implementation of a system of
human relationships will continuously degrade unless everyone has
responsibility and feedback relevant to its stewardship. The relationship
quality gap today is far greater than tangible quality gaps which started
to be rectified when industry-wide performance standards were communally
benchmarked from the late 1980s.
17 Change leadership programs usually fail to be grounded in a combination
of constituents whose early commitments will need to spiral positively to
move all stakeholders forwards from old values to new
18 The lack of system's information inputs and flow into the leadership's
team's diary and lack of a common map to understand its meaning causes
fracture lines all over the general issues above as well as unique ones
connected to the company's leadership SWOT. You wouldn't get in an people
whose engineering blueprint had so many critical spots yet somehow its ok
to totally ignore risk detection of human relationship systems.
19 Lack of a model for understanding what will happen next to the
relationship dynamics within a company puts a company at even greater risk
in interacting with its environment. Partners, competitors, social and
environmental movements all have their human relationship dynamics too.
Failure to prevent crashing into any of these can destabilise your
company's valuation overnight; in some cases irrecoverably.
20 Any system leader in your environment who has a better map than you is
liable to put you at extreme competitive disadvantage whenever they
choose. Note in particular how this happens every time a company loses out
in a transparency war with an activist movement.
--"chris macrae" <wcbn007@easynet.co.uk>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.