valuetrue maths of sustainable systems

problem : it is likely that none of the world's laregst organsaitions use sustainaility maths:

if they did we would have an urgent sustainability goals challenge

we define sustainability in terms of inter-generational exponentials not 90- days metrics nor 90 seconds politiocal soundbites

there are several levels of experiential learning needed to colect all the details of sustainability maths: they are not compled but you need to agree each level to fully map

level 0

for some people it is obvious that if an organsiation is only governed to take as much from everyone every quarter then that is not a sustanable

maths -if obvious go to level 1

for other people we need to agree some langauge- what is a small common library on systems as expoentially mulitying both opportunitoes and threast - eg ackoff -also

do you agree that a valuable organsitions "web" connections or exchnages between multiple sources such as owners and customers and societies:

as soon as we have connections between 3 or more sources which strenghten or weaken each component source we have a system with one or mjultiple traingularisations to track- and while a system is alive these are basic charcteristics agreed among mathematicians of systems:

the overall system will be spiralling through time - either postively growing the whole

or negatively ie towards collapse (eventially death of a system)

the metric for spirals is expoential

another principles of systems is that while you may wish to govern them at one level it is wise to assume that they may have more micro exchnages inside to integrate to deliver the model you are looking at (as indeed there may be more macro levels)

networks are systems of systems in which each coordinate is holin -itself a system with up down exponentials

its also helpful if people ate aware lof einstgein's mlost basic finding - whenever man;s science says there is nothing more to innovate- what is meant is at the level of system dysnkics being hypotheised as measurable- if you go another nano level down you have a whole new workd of innovatio - which makes the old order wrong to wholly rfely on (eg newton mechanics verss einsteins)

macroeconomist are "diastrously wrong" for humanity's longest goals when it comes to valuing human sustainability which cannot be true without mapping bottom up the way natore values evokution -ib factg adam smoth economics was franed by hypotheses which westren macroeconomist once mass media dawned tore up- in the plriocess they oblietrested trust-flows from being included in their work

here is a scary thing - artificial intelligence most important part is permittong billions tome ore analytical capability than te himan brfain bot so far the marceconomist has used tech to make models that have exluded more accuratelhyu externalised all the key valuation dyanmics adma and other entrep[reneurial alumni eg jb say who literally coined word entreprenmeur and james wilson who foudned tghe economist (and keynes) held as foundations of economics as worthy of humans- the last chapter of keynes general ystem is very interesting - it explain on the one hand how whomever is the economist that lawyers most use rules the world- for that freason economist will become the greatest risks to the future sustaoinability of youth unless they tgale a hippocratic oath that ned poverty is the expoentila metric they are valuing

level 1 when we audit a system what we should

want to know is not a number but where is it heading on

an expoentrla up eg syrong growth or an expoenetial down eg mulplying risks of sollapse

there is one very important things to rfemember about arithemetic:

multiply is the operand you use when sources ineteract growth- whereas addition is an operand when things are separate

so is it obvious that for auditiong a system of living connectiosn we need to use ,ultplication not addition

as a simple example we know of 100 of compamies who were told their profits could go up at some additional risk to society which if it occurred was cause a fine but less than the proits- in an additve model you do that especially as in amrica there are lawyers who chase a board if they dont do that

however our model looks at trust as being multiplcative so while trust may have gone up if all teh shareholder sees is the profits the distrust of society that can see the increased risk goes down- if you reduce trust to zero however much your profit weet up a multipoluer of zeros is zero- one of the five biggest global auditors around 2000 called andersen was zeroised by the peopels because its ausdit serillay caused organsiations to pass riks or lies onto society

level 2 this is roughly speaking what audirots and people who govern a system need to want information on - are we trasvelling up a rising exponetial or down a colapsing one- which of our diferent sources trust-flows are rising or declining- what is the winw-in or win-lose between different relationshiop connections- what has caised chnage since the last time we looked at this audit

thanks for the very interesting time in vienna

i have a hectic conference schedule the next 4 days and may not be able to do any chunky work on intangibles value to this weekend

however i wanted to start you questioning one issue

you have said some world class companies inside india may be considering going global (ot at least impacting europe)

i think you understand the most basic map of intangibles valuation starts with any trust makers or breakers already core to purpose with eg customers owners society (and the productivity side)

however you can add in dotted lines if you are testing a new promise as an amplifier to your core over next 7 years or exponential relevant time period

a) for example would it be global to top 1%

b) or global to the bottom 40%

c) or global to the rising middle class

while they can eventually choose several globals- all 3 of the above are very different

and there are few or no western companies doing b or c

if they had been eg ck prahalad (and indeed aravind and larry brilliant

it would have been helped as an alumni network that survived beyond his death - i can tell you he wasnt helped by western corporates or universities- i gtrached a lot of info flows

2025now- The Economist 1984 : 2025 = last year sustainability

if b was being done by a cluster of corporations we wouldnt have middle class losing hope all over europe and usa- we wouldnt have the old requiring youth to bail them out - and we wouldnt have youth stuck in classrooms, standard exams and debt

when it comes to unilever i contributed more data from unlever asia in 80s to mit database than anyone contributed around one company for about a decade i was hired to train unilevers south east asian market researchers at their annual learning retreat eg megamendung- i know the history of unilever better than poleman- so he would be interesting if any of your team reaches out to him but i dont see him as moving unilever into being valued on global b) or global c)

%22unilever learning centre%22 Megamendung%2C - Google Search

probably danone has tried more than any european corporate but it got caught up with yunus- in fact it was danone that wanted hec to be free to design a sustainability mba- it was their idea to use global social business as a benchmarking forum for corporates to join in - and it was yunus who ruined that for them just as he ruined the adam smith scholars journal- it is alsop danone who were in the middle of trying to launch a french microcreditsummit called convergences but it ended up no more morally real than microcreditsummit which was particularly sad as we needed france to join italy through greece to fund middle east and north africa

san francisco is too expensive a city for me to visit often - however my dad surveyed why doesnt every place enjoy a hub like silicon valley in 1982 Why not silicon valley for all 1982

Why not silicon valley for all 1982

chinathanks.com microeducate and microfranchise 3 billion jobs is a social network

so i have some tips on whom nikos should try to interview first including the schwab hub- you have perhaps heard that world economic from schwab connects

3 annual summits - the original geneva-davos one

a china one

and a un new york one

he also connects geneva through 3 other permanent hubs he call industrial revolution 4 one of which is in san francisco and over 300 global youth shapers hubs

the shapers hubs may designate youth reputation and a little resource but ar in effect much less than our intangibles city teams could hub if eg we get voenna new york japan and glasgow started through the types of first people we have named- network hubs are completely determined by first handful of people - after my family failure with the journal , the other big waste of our monet /time has been the impact hub which we supported from its london start in 1993- which now has over 80 hubs worldwide not one of which understand intangibles even though the hub founder promised that actioning that is why we were partnering impact hubs

so you can do an intangibles city hub map but start with the realty of these peoples sub-purposes to see if they match a purpose that city can be a map to in linking in world cultures- also how does one do that with eg kerala- if you know anyone i should linkin with prita who used to do learing at world bank but is now trying to develop her fathers "castle" as a retreat space please say

so when i asked you to start developing with nikos a skeleton of east west which might include the conflicting culture arrows as well as some way for india to map infrastructure any belt roads around it needs - we could then start plotting cities by whom we see as bring what leaders purposes- ultimately we need something like that to put in front of city mayors/governors if indeed that is where supercity models are going to be led matching your idea that india must lead in offering places - mark thornton calls this sdg economic zones - here again is his video at un

Funds challenge set by Head of UN general assembly june 2018

here is a video on part of the struggle with the global education summits so far having no voice versus the fame microcreditsummit - a process designed annually from 1997 round getting yunus nobel prize but actually aimed at making the clintons globally powerful through the 2000s educationiseconomy

best chris

educationiseconomy

http://www.economistuniversity.com http://jobenomics.com : 2016 is 45th year of bangladesh's village mothers rac...

Funds challenge set by Head of UN general assembly june 2018

www.economistbangla.com UN searches for what to do about humanity's greatest goals have next to no funding - wit...

ackoff systems mapping pattern hypotheses

Enter content here

Enter supporting content here