Replying to LO31096 --
In an organisational situation it seems to me trust has both a systemic
role that is as vital to keeping the whole organisation viable, as
cashflow but more than that its future permission to implement strategy
and make the most of its resources contextually for everyone impacted by
relationships with it
At the same time trust is a proxy for all the positive emotional
currencies that go on between groups of people (these become the locus
of value multiplication as we develop service , knowledge or networked
economies as something organisationally different in valuing learning
from just mass manufacturing lifeless products). If you trust people you
share knowledge , you dare express creative thoughts even ones that
point out conflicts in the system , you have buzz high energy, your
social relationships make the truest use of each other's time, you can
be confident that what the organisation is doing is sustaining value for
everyone, and so you become an ambassador for the organisation, its
learning, the truth of your identity and the organisation's context
(what it uniquely delivers to its world of stakeholders that no other
organisation can). You connect your skills with others openly, with
inspired purpose. You are mapping back the future and the direction the
organisation is leading is great by any standard anyone can set or
query.
Trust is moreover something that compounds over time and across networks
that global markets shape at every locality. It (or a proxy of it) is
the dynamic that connects all living system models. If the world was a
more hi-trust systemic reality, presumably we would invest more in
education than arms; more in connecting the needs of the desperate as
part of our worldwide development could be making the most of every
individual's time and talents on this earth rather than what would now
appear to be the least of well over 50% of our beings (as reflected by
slumping trust scores of every type of every organisation almost
everywhere around the world according to world economic forum data). If
we are to go beyond zero-sum economics we are going to need to develop
hi-trust systems to achieve this - and these will need to flow across
hybrids of corporations, national governments, media as well as
cause-pulling groups. This is not a new assertion, it has been declared
openly by system designers of organisations and human relationships for
a quarter of a century or more (see eg Drucker, Buckminster-Fuller of
future-history system storytellers including my father
http://www.normanmacrae.com/netfuture.html )
CRISIS (according the 10 people expert panel - including 8 americans
that 350 Londoners worked with for 3 days last month at
www.bethechange.org.uk) unlike that since the 1930s: today, we have
the mother of all system of system challenges where any organisation is
solely governed by the most untrustworthy mathematics it is possible to
design: namely how much can we take from the world each quarter? This
backward profit measure -when it monopolises all boardroom attention in
defining performance and their decisions in separating rather than
connecting ways - is the systemic opposite from how can we sustain
wealth multiplication for all with shareholders central to this because
they believe in the organisation's sustainable context. Unless we map
hi-trust governance measures above "how do we take form the world each
quarter" I personally believe all learning organisation modules are
confined to a system which cannot break out to reward the higher ideals
that the fifth discipline aims to direct the organisational quality of
human relationships towards.
The maths of trust-flow is simple but in contextually systemic ways the
opposite of counting up how much money you took the last quartered. Its
mappable, verifiable, open sourced- so what's stopping you from trying
it out on a context you can influence?
Chris Macrae , wcbn007@easynet.co.uk London & DC
Games and mapping communities of trust-flow www.valuetrue.com
-----Original Message-----
>So, it seems to me that trust entangles communication, integrity,
>capacity and intent.
>doug merchant
--"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.