|
You must be signed-in with your registered username and password to post a reply.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posts |
Sort:
|
|
michaelhopkins
FM Editor
Member Since:
06 Dec 2005
Posts:82
|
|
12 Dec 2005 3:11 PM |
1 have marked this post as Insightful
|
|
|
[BETA-PERIOD CAVEAT: The "findings" posted at launch are only representations of the kind of content that eventually will appear in this space. They're derived mostly from results and verbatims in the FM Trend Survey. When FutureMonitor is out of beta, they'll be the product of discussion and debate (and objective assessment)--the tests that ideas will be subjected to before being posted as conclusive.]
GROWING THREAT SOURCE
Problems not rooted in business
The argument, essentially, is this: sometimes the most important problems business faces don’t look like “business” problems at all. (True also, sometimes, of the most important opportunities.) Though not many network members articulated the idea directly in their FM Trend Survey responses, it often is apparent as subtext.
And in a few cases it was articulated directly. Such as here, in these verbatims from among the “name a critical trend” responses:
“Earth Bites Back—the delay in the feedback loop starts to really hit home, as sea level rises, global warming worsens, and resource shortages (especially in oil and metals as China continues to ramp up industrial production) place high demands on the political and business infrastructures.”
“Impact of world opinion of U.S. political, social and business practices on our ability to compete effectively. Impact of social trends in education practices, aging demographics, birth rates, poverty rates, etc. on our ability to compete. Rapid pace of change in world order -- not only in China and India, but in all areas of the world. The ability to solve a single health problem in Africa (malaria, for example) will change demographics radically and influence business. Business will find itself increasingly faced with problems that are not rooted in business per se. Ability to assess and address these problems is the new competitive edge, and is where most businesses have blind spots.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rudy3
Member Since:
16 Dec 2005
Posts:2
|
|
16 Dec 2005 6:57 PM |
0 have marked this post as Insightful
|
|
|
|
I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment. It's been very interesting to me to see how organizations dance around these challenges organizationally. The problems don't fit neatly into some department's purview, so while they're everybody's problem they end up being nobody's problem to solve. The rise of "corporate social responsibility" reports, either within or appended to annual reports, indicates that many organizations feel they need to say something about these challenges, but I haven't seen many organizations that have really internallized the necessary dramatic shifts in the way they need to operate if they really took these threats seriously. Something to work on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mickyates
Member Since:
18 Dec 2005
Posts:1
|
|
10 Mar 2006 6:28 AM |
0 have marked this post as Insightful
|
|
|
Also completely agree.
And then there are the linked externals ... for example, the continued (and historically recent) rise of paranoia about terrorism means that companies no longer have freedom to act (Dubai shipping anyone?) in their legitimate areas of concern / opportunity. Of course, fluffy political handling compounds things, but then that has also been true for a long time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
chrismeyer
Member Since:
20 Dec 2005
Posts:33
|
|
11 Mar 2006 4:52 AM |
0 have marked this post as Insightful
|
|
|
|
Is the Dubai outcome a milestone in U.S. isolationism (i.e. will we look back on it as the beginning of a closing of the US economy, with negative consequences for growth in the US and the world?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frymaster
Member Since:
23 Mar 2006
Posts:32
 |
|
06 Apr 2006 2:15 PM |
0 have marked this post as Insightful
|
|
|
- “Impact of world opinion
of U.S. political, social and business practices on our ability to
compete effectively. Impact of social trends in education practices,
aging demographics, birth rates, poverty rates, etc. on our ability to
compete."
I truly hope that
respondent in not an American, because, as an American, I am struck by
the thought: forget world opinion and its impact on our ability to
compete. Howsabout the impact of the cited topics on America and
Americans? Which is not to discount world opinion, it counts. Just not
as my horror at watching my nation fall apart.When Ronald Reagan convinced this nation that "government is the problem," it was the death knell for the kind of thinking that stresses investment in infrastructure and proactive civil/civic planning. Am I a minority of one in this opinion?Progressive politics are sweeping Latin America, and Mexico is the next to go. (Mexican Governor and Presidential futures on Intrade Prediction Markets. Click 'Politics,' then 'Mexicac Elections.' Obrador is the Socialist Mayor of Mexico City.)Will the US ever accept the concept that investing in itself is a good thing? Corporate money aside, US politics is a wide open market with voter apathy at all time highs. Roughly 25% of the eligible voters put GWB in office both times. Any thoughts on third stream politics in America?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hogenson
Member Since:
11 May 2006
Posts:2
|
|
11 May 2006 8:59 PM |
0 have marked this post as Insightful
|
|
|
|
It is worth noting that the only serious government sponsored consideration of the policy implications of global warming was done in the Office of Net Assessment at the Pentagon. This is a very interesting organization run by Andrew Marshall, now in his 80s. That paper, which was unclassified and discussed in some of the business literature, is worth reading. What is most worrisome in the climate area, to my mind, is that we really do not understand enough about the feedback loops in the global climate system. This is the weakest element in most of the climate models, and so the scientists, contrary to their detractors, tend to be cautious or conservative in their estimations of feedback effects. That means that errors in the models are likely to under-estimate the longterm effects of warming. As the pentagon study outlined, one of the effects of serious global warming will likely be major population migrations. Consider that in the context of current US and European immigration controversies. I tend to suspect--without any formal expertise in the area--that we are already past some critical feedback points in the warming cycle. If that is the case the question that is next on the list is whether the feedback effects will be gradual but faster or--relatively speaking--abrupt and catastropic. Also, the migration issue may not only be south to north. I recently ran across a comment that with global warming the collapse of the gulf stream would freeze far northern Europe, thereby displacing the Skandanavian populations at the same time that the Southern regions go into extended drought. How is that for a collision?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EngFear
Member Since:
05 May 2006
Posts:12
|
|
12 May 2006 5:37 AM |
1 have marked this post as Insightful
|
|
|
OK, so what are the threats that businesses face:
- Competitors: Someone does what you do better.
- Customers: People stop wanting to pay for what you do.
- Legislation: Governments don't like what you do & shut you down.
- Everything else: which is what we seem to talking about here.
I think that after globalisation, sustainability is the biggest issue that businesses will face in the next 20 years. And most of them will deal with it very badly - because we've encouraged them to focus on quaterly revenue targets. I can see most CEOs hearing about globally warming and (even if they believe it) thinking: "The ice caps might melt in 30 years? I'll be a nice retirement condo in Florida by then. Screw that! The institutional shareholders are going bite me on the ass at the AGM next week."
Some of the work around Cradle-To-Cradle & Natural Capitalism is good here - but at the moment, CSR is still view as PR smoke 'n' mirrors by many. I sincerely hope that will change soon...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
peter_luttik55
Member Since:
18 May 2006
Posts:5
|
|
27 Jun 2006 9:08 AM |
0 have marked this post as Insightful
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
peter_luttik55
Member Since:
18 May 2006
Posts:5
|
|
27 Jun 2006 9:08 AM |
0 have marked this post as Insightful
|
|
|
From a systemic perspective this confirms that businesses are short term responses to the long term adjustment challenges of society. The short term/fast feedback focus of business makes it adaptive but also short sighted. Likely to be surprised by the long term changes it generates through its actions.
Key question is how we can improve societies ability to respond more effectively to changes. Some businesses have found it effective to invest in examining blind spots, using among others scenario's as a search method (changing perspective also changes your blind spots). Thinking problems through systemically is another way forward that has proven itself.
So if we know this why do so few businesses actually do it? Aren't some of these value opportunities typical "tragedies of the commons" that requires a cooperative respons? Then the question becomes how to structure the "commons" such that businesses can effectively support resolving the adjustment problem. Individual businesses cann´t do that. It requires collective action by businesses and their social partners. Improving the quality of that discussion may be most urgently needed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You must be signed-in with your registered username and password to post a reply.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Asimov Moment
|
|
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discovery, is not 'Eureka' (I found it!), but 'That's funny...' " - Isaac Asimov.
|
* Please enter an Asimov
|
|
|
Please Note: Asimov submissions will be reviewed by moderator before posting.
|
|
Seen
|
One man's spam is another man's art. I saw this article about a computer artist who took unwanted spam emails and created art based ...
|
|
|
|