Governance Systems
Practices of the future in the aspect of management systems are practices of creating fair and humane systems, which help people to be creators of their life and be responsible for a common home. Management systems of the future are oriented to build healthy societies and healthy social institutions based on a social contract shared by all. These systems also serve as the basis for solving global problems that require collective efforts of all humankind.
Global Challenges
The system of the world we live in is more complex than we can imagine. The contemporary anthropocentric worldview considers humans as the paragon of animals and the masters of matter. However, there are things that remain mysterious to us: the structure of the universe and natural cycles, the reasons for animal migration, and even the reasons for the need for sleep. The laws of genuine living systems are closed to our understanding at all levels.
We do not know how everything works and we cannot manage global processes because, to do so, the complexity of management systems must be commensurate with the complexity of the system itself. In one's desire to subdue the world, one simplifies the structure of the environment, limiting it to the framework which is clearest to them. This generates a mechanistic understanding of life – the assumption that it is possible to decompose any of the natural or social processes without losing its essence; such an approach creates a number of errors in system comprehension. Those errors in turn lead to many negative consequences, such as the exploitation of nature without the goal of restoring it, the exploitation of a person by another, and the administration's reliance upon violence. These negative consequences result from the false belief that, were these actions not taken, then the system would fail.
Step-by-step, society begins to realize the assumption that the claim, "Man is the king of beasts," does not justify taking from nature. Doing so will lead to negative consequences, which is a part of the global living system. It is impossible to increase the growth rate indefinitely; that would lead to regular crises and overheating of the economy. The search for a new paradigm of perception of management systems and for new grounds for the evaluation of management systems now serves as a point of reassembly for society. For the sake of finding solutions regarding the consequences of underestimating the current complexity of the systems, a new perspective on the complexity of the world and the place of human beings in it is required
We do not know how everything works and we cannot manage global processes because, to do so, the complexity of management systems must be commensurate with the complexity of the system itself. In one's desire to subdue the world, one simplifies the structure of the environment, limiting it to the framework which is clearest to them. This generates a mechanistic understanding of life – the assumption that it is possible to decompose any of the natural or social processes without losing its essence; such an approach creates a number of errors in system comprehension. Those errors in turn lead to many negative consequences, such as the exploitation of nature without the goal of restoring it, the exploitation of a person by another, and the administration's reliance upon violence. These negative consequences result from the false belief that, were these actions not taken, then the system would fail.
Step-by-step, society begins to realize the assumption that the claim, "Man is the king of beasts," does not justify taking from nature. Doing so will lead to negative consequences, which is a part of the global living system. It is impossible to increase the growth rate indefinitely; that would lead to regular crises and overheating of the economy. The search for a new paradigm of perception of management systems and for new grounds for the evaluation of management systems now serves as a point of reassembly for society. For the sake of finding solutions regarding the consequences of underestimating the current complexity of the systems, a new perspective on the complexity of the world and the place of human beings in it is required
Violence is a phenomenon which permeates relationships between people at different levels – from interpersonal to interstate levels – throughout history. Compared to previous historical periods, there is now less violence in the world. Humanity has moved away from the ubiquitous military solution to conflicts towards the transfer of the monopoly on violence to the national states (their police and army) and inter- or supranational organizations. Violence and the threat of violence in relations between people at different levels are no longer perceived as an acceptable administrative method. It has now become clear that such an administration leads to an escalation of conflicts and does not eliminate their causes.
The current way of doing business is also often based on power and pressure, a closed, rigid, managerial position. Employees do not see the sense in their work and are not involved in the company's business. Relationships within the staff members generate chronic stress and exhaust the employees.
The threat of war, terrorism, and violence from the state or organized criminal groups prevents countries from developing and prohibits populations from feeling safe; a potential new world war may even lead to the annihilation of the larger part of humanity. Is it really possible to reach a global agreement? How can a management system be organized without violence and exploitation, be it interpersonally between two people or within corporations between employers and their employees, or internationally between countries? These issues become increasingly more relevant and require new practices for the future.
The current way of doing business is also often based on power and pressure, a closed, rigid, managerial position. Employees do not see the sense in their work and are not involved in the company's business. Relationships within the staff members generate chronic stress and exhaust the employees.
The threat of war, terrorism, and violence from the state or organized criminal groups prevents countries from developing and prohibits populations from feeling safe; a potential new world war may even lead to the annihilation of the larger part of humanity. Is it really possible to reach a global agreement? How can a management system be organized without violence and exploitation, be it interpersonally between two people or within corporations between employers and their employees, or internationally between countries? These issues become increasingly more relevant and require new practices for the future.
The development of technologies and the implementation of artificial intelligence also stimulated the crisis of management. Restrictions imposed by the government due to the declared public danger are supplemented by surveillance capitalism, i.e.,constant surveillance on people, recording their digital footprints. Via their actions, person turns into data. In other words, they become a "text" that consequently can be used to manage and influence them. Corporations and governments get access to a huge amount of data, which is used to manipulate the behavior of citizens and to increase sales.
Without proper education, people can hardly resist the formative action of algorithms, which influences their behavior through their activity on the Internet. With the development of technology, a new inequality is brewing between those who can create meanings and algorithms versus those who can only consume them. Moreover, communities can also be subjected to manipulation and lose the ability to grow in their own way. What is the minimal collective that can ensure its autonomy? Groups that are unable to organize themselves fall out of the decision-making process. How should a community be organized so that it can determine the direction of its development independently? And how can its relations with the state, corporations, and other collective subjects be arranged? New practices in the field of management systems are necessary to answer these questions.
Without proper education, people can hardly resist the formative action of algorithms, which influences their behavior through their activity on the Internet. With the development of technology, a new inequality is brewing between those who can create meanings and algorithms versus those who can only consume them. Moreover, communities can also be subjected to manipulation and lose the ability to grow in their own way. What is the minimal collective that can ensure its autonomy? Groups that are unable to organize themselves fall out of the decision-making process. How should a community be organized so that it can determine the direction of its development independently? And how can its relations with the state, corporations, and other collective subjects be arranged? New practices in the field of management systems are necessary to answer these questions.
Existing Practices of the Future
1. Available Knowledge Practices
Access to education, to the Internet, to scientific research results, and qualitative information defines opportunities for people and communities to realize their potential. Each nation establishes its own borders and rules of how to create and access knowledge. At the same time, there are some external restrictions: licenses, copyrights, patents, and other intellectual safeguards. Restrictions imposed by the concept of copyrights designed to protect creators sometimes can hinder the development of collective intelligence and even increase inequality. Available knowledge practices make instrumental decisions on how to overcome the boundaries of authorship, how to work on projects together, forming collective intelligence and collective solutions of social problems.
1.1 Peer2Peer
An approach that helps people, organizations, and governments to create a common space of meanings through open manufacturing, knowledge sharing, and creating a sustainable interconnection among people.
2. Corporate Management Practices
Society invented many organizational legal forms of collaborative activity throughout history, from family enterprises to huge transnational corporations. Each subsequent form sought to overcome the shortcomings of the previous one, to reduce negative influences, and to increase efficiency. The current way of doing business often creates unfair, inharmonious, and toxic business systems. This means we need new practices of organizing activities, which allow people to self-actualize, maintain their mental and physical health, to create a supportive space for creative teams, and to combine a responsible attitude toward the consequences for the world with the internal performance.
2.1 Teal organizations
An organizational paradigm that advocates giving employees autonomy, recognizing the integrity of a person, and adapting in accordance with the organization's mission as the organization evolves.
2.2 Holacracy
A corporate management system in which the authority and responsibility for decision-making are distributed among self-organizing teams. Such management contributes to the meaningful, innovative, and transparent activities to achieve the objectives.
2.3 Leadership from the future (Theory U)
A philosophical basis of a leadership mindset for solving the urgent global problems, supported by the methodology for creating the ecosystem of changes.
1. Available Knowledge Practices
Access to education, to the Internet, to scientific research results, and qualitative information define opportunities for people and communities to realize their potential. Each nation establishes its own borders and rules of how to create and access knowledge. At the same time, there are some external restrictions: licenses, copyrights, patents, and other intellectual safeguards. Restrictions imposed by the concept of copyrights designed to protect creators sometimes can hinder the development of collective intelligence and even increase inequality. Available knowledge practices make instrumental decisions on how to overcome the boundaries of authorship, how to work on projects together, forming collective intelligence and collective solutions of social problems.
An approach that helps people, organizations, and governments to create a common space of meanings through open manufacturing, knowledge sharing, and creating a sustainable interconnection among people.
Learn more
Learn more
2. Corporate Management Practices
Society invented many organizational legal forms of collaborative activity throughout history, from family enterprises to huge transnational corporations. Each subsequent form sought to overcome the shortcomings of the previous one, to reduce negative influences, and to increase efficiency. The current way of doing business often creates unfair, inharmonious, and toxic business systems. This means we need new practices of organizing activities, which allow people to self-actualize, maintain their mental and physical health, to create a supportive space for creative teams, and to combine a responsible attitude toward the consequences for the world with the internal performance.
An organizational paradigm that advocates giving employees autonomy, recognizing the integrity of a person, and adapting in accordance with the organization's mission as the organization evolves.
Learn more
Learn more
A corporate management system in which the authority and responsibility for decision-making are distributed among self-organizing teams. Such management contributes to meaningful, innovative, and transparent activities to achieve the objectives.
Learn more
Learn more
A philosophical basis of a leadership mindset for solving the urgent global problems, supported by the methodology for creating the ecosystem of changes.
Learn more
Learn more
