The Vision Pioneers Blog

by Staffan Göranson

Under the war cry «Greed is Good», Ayn Rand argued that egoism is a blessing for humankind, and that laissez-faire capitalism is the highest form of morality. Many have adhered to this tantalizing ideology, not only influential economists like Alan Greenspan, but also a large number of ordinary people. Seduced by the vision of more of everything for themselves, many have been closely tracking their pension funds, overborrowing their securities, speculating on financial markets hoping it will make their fortune.

In one of Sweden’s most well-known companies, which I happen to know quite well - a corporation well reputed for its long traditions, reliability, serious products and long-term goals - a new CEO was hired not very long ago. This CEO kept repeating that the three most important objectives for the company were: 1) short-term profits, 2) short-term profits, and 3) short-term profits. Before long, this mantra was eating into all of those core values which had gained this corporation its excellent reputation in the first place.

My father recently passed away at the age of 89. His own father had died in the Spanish flu epidemic of 1920, while my father was still in his mother’s womb. As a young widow with two boys to take care of, my grand-mother struggled to provide for her sons. My father left school at the age of 13 to take on a job in a factory. His first weekly pay was $1.50. He kept 10 cents for himself and offered his mother the rest. The strong sense of satisfaction that he felt as he gave the pay to his mother stayed in his memory throughout his life. Later, once he had established a factory of his own, he found the same kind of inner satisfaction when he saw how products he had designed and developed fulfilled the need of a client.

Throughout my business career, I have come to know many businessmen who have succeeded in building their fortunes. Despite the momentary kicks of excitement of seeing one’s bank account grow, they remain restless souls, unable to find contentment. Greed is greed, even when it is dressed up in philosophical and moral clothing. Its selfishness blinds us to the meaningful, yet simple dimension that is to be found when we contribute to fulfilling the true needs of ourselves and others. Even though little was left in the end of what my father had built during his long entrepreneurial career, the contentment of fulfilling others’ needs remained intact. He left me a rich legacy, not in money but in wisdom.

by Miriam Garvi

The past century has seen the rise of large organizational structures. For years now we have let ourselves be impressed by the resources and market dominance of mammoth organizations, be they Monsanto, the UN, or even the Red Cross.

Multinationals, global corporations and various institutions are swallowing huge amounts of resources, but what are they giving in return? Many of us invest most of our working lives in anonymous structures which have become powerful instruments in building a great distance between the real centers of decision-making and the realities of those who are living their consequences - including clients, employees and society.

People suffocating in this alienating process are unable to see the meaning of what they are doing, and are left at the mercy of the re-organizing whims of those in power looking to earn the approval of financial markets.

This greatest inefficiency of our time is slowly but surely snuffing out the joy of working and every little flame of creative potential within us.

Making structures even more rigid with the help of supra-national regulation is not the answer for our times. Nor does size give the strength that enables the astonishing. Creative and purposeful contribution can only be stimulated when people are free to see the meaning of it all.

Time has come for a new era:
Smallness in size, greatness in meaning.

by Miriam Garvi

I am one of those who have been following Barack Obama’s rise to power with interest. Especially, I am intrigued by how a simple electoral message consisting of one single word seems to be touching the right cord with so many people out there:

CHANGE

Thanks to the political and rhetorical strategy that has brought Obama to power, change is becoming synonymous with progress, i.e. with the belief that things will inevitably be better if only they are different.

But where is this change taking us?

It is quite evident that changes are occurring both on national and global levels. Climate change, terrorism, a financial system in collapse, massive unemployment on the way are all reports of threats to our existence. And amidst such perceived anxiety, a desperate call for strong leadership emerges.

This year’s G20 summit has been quick to respond, displaying an unprecedented spirit of global cooperation, coordination and collaboration, as the U.S. joins ranks with the EU, and even Russia calls for strong leadership on the global level. As emphasized by Obama at the press conference following the summit, “We all have responsibilities to work together.” And these days such responsibilities are summarized in a global deal to boost world growth, a tantalizing vision that should take us away from the insecurities of a «boom and bust economy» towards globally sustainable economic growth.

There is nothing new about the human mechanism that turns towards strong leadership in order to dampen anxiety. Our responsibilities, to paraphrase Obama, are not to abdicate our own freedom of action, placing our salvation in the hands of those people behind the scenes pulling the strings of influence on the global arena. Our responsibilities are not to buy into an enticing vision of a New World Order, putting all our trust in the panaceas offered by our world leaders without considering what costs will have to be paid in the process. This has been done before, and the result was oppression, genocide, and world war.

What good is change, if it comes at the cost of freedom? We cannot sell out our freedom to a change agency as it promises to take us out of the crisis, only to realize the price of it once there is no turning back.

As change agents, the opportunity is ours to bring about the kind of change that leads to meaningful prosperity. It is time to recognize that greed as a motor for prosperity has faltered. No longer can prosperity be narrowly defined as economic wealth. I have seen leprous people in Africa much happier than people in the West. Meaning, not dollars and cents, is the currency that motivates people to change the world for the better.

by Miriam Garvi

Today’s recession is bringing back the rhetoric of greed to the forefront, both among politicians and journalists, as a way of condemning practices now deemed excessive by the electorate, whilst keeping such practices at a comfortable distance from those who have long been in the position to influence the way we view the world and our own role within it.

It has long been held that greed, or self-interest as philosophers and economists endorsing this position would prefer to call it, is the supreme driving force behind enterprising, growth and development, and as such, the very motor of society.

But for those less fortunate who are now paying the price for enacted self-interest, as they find themselves laid off from businesses where top executives are cashing in additional bonuses, or left with mortgage loans that they have no means to service, this economic as well as moral rationale of a self-focused society is a far cry from the reality they are living.

Yet in the spirit of Ayn Rand, defenders of this rationale would argue that we owe nothing to the weak, who have only to opt to overcome their weakness by way of reason.

It is interesting how quickly societal thinking turns elitist when we who are doing the thinking are part of the fortunate few. The idea of «natural selection» and of the survival of the fittest is flattering indeed as long as we are the ones surviving. And if the purpose of it all is to be the last man standing, having beaten all contestants in the short-term, profit-making chicken race, then success is becoming rather void of meaning.

It is high time we wake up and see things as they really are, not as the dominant rhetoric, or the dominant logic, would want us to believe things to be. Let us be greedy, greedy for meaning! Let us engage in that which can bear fruit to the benefit of ourselves and others. Let us make a profit, but not a fortune. And let us reinvest for the benefit of mankind.

by Miriam Garvi

This week-end saw the completion of the 2009 World Economic Forum in Davos. Since the forum launched its «Davos Question» last year, asking people to name one thing that would make the world a better place, future prospects have plunged into darkness. With jobs, homes, savings and pensions being threatened, who is thinking of making the world a better place?

The world’s elite of financiers, politicians and business people, anxious to restore confidence in a global financial and economic system, are calling for swift and decisive action. According to Tony Blair and others at the WEF, it seems that what we need is an enterprise system that is free but less greedy. So much for the professed virtue of selfishness.

Not so very long ago, a voice in the wilderness was calling for the kind of leadership that paired outlook and foresight with a concern for the well-being of coming generations. The voice was that of Georges Doriot, Harvard professor and father of venture capital; his vision that of an «Institute of Man»:

I have thought that we should have an Institute of Man.

This would be a group of outstanding individuals who could evaluate the progress which Man has made.

In light of this progress and the background of this progress this group could give some attention to the problems facing man today.

From these people the country and its leaders could seek advice.

But so far, no one has liked my idea and perhaps our leaders would not listen to such scholars even if the Institute existed.

Doriot’s idea was not about change, nor about remedying a system running wild. He was talking about the kind of constant visionary outlook that will view the world in terms of purposes, needs and implications, a goalistic dialogue not bound by any political or economic agenda.

Today, so many resources are poured into taming the monster we created. Let those with passion and integrity rise and show the good that can be done amidst the darkness.

by Miriam Garvi

This week I am writing from the red sands of the Sahel.

Coming to this part of Africa is like traveling to distant times where life was about sustenance and survival, with no advanced technology to govern our existence. It brings out what I take for granted in everyday life, reminding me again of the framed existence of my Western mind.

In order to conceive of anything that is truly new, we need the courage to go beyond our realities framed by technology, culture and experience and move up to a level where there is freedom to ask a simple question: if nothing existed, how then would we want things to be?

Vision pioneering is about starting from the invisible where there is freedom to envision the qualities we are looking for. It is with such clarity that we can use our knowledge and potential to achieve something that will bring about meaningful prosperity.

by Miriam Garvi

Of all the research interviews I have done, one particular conversation still stands out in my mind. A serial entrepreneur, founder of a VC company and keynote speaker at many a growth event described himself as an «enlightened despot» whose leadership style was based on a fondness for what he called «doers» - meaning people who would execute strategy. Needless to add that in his world there were clear boundaries between «thinkers» and «doers», between the elite who could read the strategic game and lay out the next move and those who were to implement decisions and report back on their effect.

In other words, any real thinking should only be done by those behind the scenes?

As I was tracing the origins of the venture capital phenomenon, I became aware of how easily something is labeled «the solution», endorsed by those institutions which will give it credibility, and of the strong impact that such labeling will have on business and policies (see chapter 7 in my dissertation).

It is interesting to note how little attention is given to understanding a problem and the real causes of observed symptoms in favour of cure-all remedies. The promotion of microcredits, laureated with a Nobel peace price, illustrates this trend in a different setting.

Are cure-alls becoming the new religion? As long as someone is conveniently labeling the solution no one is asking us to think for ourselves. We are urged to buy into «inconvenient truths» and endorse whatever is promoted as the next panacea for growth, world poverty or for saving the planet.

But if we choose to put our faith in ideas and technologies that are placed on a pedestal, we will inevitably be deceived. Because real solutions demand that we go beyond the symptoms and ask ourselves why a particular choice is important and what goals are fulfilled in the process.

There is no easy way out for true progress.

by Miriam Garvi

For some time now there has been much talk about a knowledge economy where the intellectual and creative capabilities of human beings are a key resource.

When people are our main resource, then communication really becomes our main problem. So much time and energy is wasted on miscommunication and pseudo-conflicts simply because of a basic misconception that other people tend to think the same way I do and that their minds work like mine. And so it is tempting to breed a culture where everybody takes care of their own business just for the sake of avoiding all the non-constructive friction.

Leaving an era of industrialism behind has far-reaching implications for our ways-of-thinking, notably in terms of leadership and management. It challenges us to find effective ways of interacting so as to bring out the gold in the people around us.

It is time to bring an individual perspective to our ways of leadership and management. Only by viewing human beings not as aggregates but as individuals can we start thinking progressively about how to put in place organic structures that will allow people to flourish.

by Miriam Garvi

This week’s news have been dominated by the less flattering aspects of ethanol production and combustion.

Since the mass diffusion of the car, radical ideas on how to address everyday needs of transportation and mobility are rare to come by - despite undesirables such as traffic congestion and pollution. As ‘inconvenient truths’ fuel anti-global warming trends, biofuels are being promoted as the sound alternative for any citizen adhering to social responsibility.

But how can ethanol production be a sustainable solution when it is so inefficient that more energy has to be put into the process than what comes out of it? Or when agricultural land is reclaimed for biofuel production thus threatening to make large parts of the world’s poorer, rural population dependent on the World Food Program?

Is this the best we can do? Economic interests aside, when fear drives innovation we are walking backwards into the future. We find ourselves embracing solutions which are not sustainable in the wider perspective. And which upon careful scrutiny may reveal themselves to do as much harm as good - depending on whose interests and needs are in focus.

Vision pioneering is about taking radical steps towards improved fulfillment, driven by a vision of the purposeful rather than avoidance strategies. There can be no progressive thinking unless we shift focus from the products and technologies that we know to those invisible qualities we want to enjoy.