Goal of a corporation

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/09/26/is-the-goal-of-a-corporation-to-make-money/

James Convey requested that this article by Steve Denning be linked into my blog. I've copied and pasted the article here because it's worth while to think about. The link to the article in Forbes is listed above.

Steve Denning:
In the outpouring of comments on the two articles on the Ten Most Hated Jobs and The Ten Happiest Jobs was a continuing theme about the goal of a corporation. For many people, it seems as though the idea that the goal of corporation is to make money is one of the immutable truths of the universe. For instance, one reader wrote:

The top 10 hated jobs are about making money. The ultimate goal of any corporation is to make money. Money is generally made at the expense of some other corporation or in business speak: “taking someone else’s share” or “creating a need or want” in the market.

For the most part companies of today falsify what is “needed” or “wanted” in the market…(otherwise known as people). There is nothing ‘human’ about satisfying a ‘need’ that forces you to spend tons of dollars on wrinkle cream that really doesn’t work anyway. I believe that that is not helping anyone…in fact…it is lying to people to take away their money. There is no real connection when you start lying and make ‘money’ your God to pursue. But here is the problem: in a disillusioned world if you want to have a comfortable living…you also have to be disillusioned…

It is well known that direct contact with other human beings where you can see your contribution create the change…is the most self-actualizing!

In a corporation, you will always be dispensable…because it is about money….not helping people. [sohik]

The truth is that the ultimate goal of a corporation isn’t necessarily to make money. True, this is the goal of traditional management, and of many organizations in the Fortune 500. But it’s a choice made by those organizations, not a necessary fact.
A growing number of companies have chosen a different goal. They see their bottom line as something radically different. Delighting their customers through continuous innovation has become their bottom line. Making money is the result, not the goal, of their activities. The interesting thing is that when they operate this way, they make a lot more money than companies that focus directly on making money.
You can see this when you compare the ten-year share price of companies that are practicing radical management such as Apple [AAPL], Amazon [AMZN] and Salesforce [CRM] or Intuit [INTU], with companies still practicing traditional management, such Wal-Mart [WMT], Cisco [CSCO] OR GE [GE],



Another interesting thing about this different way of managing is that when everyone in the organization is focused on delighting the customer, this creates a great deal more job satisfaction for competent employees than work that is centered on making money for the shareholders. That’s because the jobs become fundamentally about helping other people. This is not selling anti-wrinkle cream that doesn’t work anyway, but really making people’s lives better.
Organizations operating in this way find that engaged employees are indispensable to achieving their goals. As a result, the practice of traditional management of treating employees as dispensable becomes counter-productive.
My correspondent is right in thinking that we make our own reality. But so too, do organizations. Some organizations are creating a reality that is better for the employees, the customers and the organization.
It is up to all of us whether we want to participate in co-creating this different world.
___________________


Steve Denning’s most recent book is: The Leader’s Guide to Radical Management (Jossey-Bass, 2010).

There is no such thing as free market capitalism

There is no such thing as a "free market", as the term is used by conservatives. Absolutely no such thing.

Here is why I say that the conservative media propaganda machine - such as Fox News and many radio shows, is really representing the very wealthy. The conservative media's mantra since the Ronald Reagan administration has been, "government bad, private industry good", and "let the free market be free" in countless variations. But that is a gigantic misdirection. They actually need government, because there is no such thing as a "free market". What big business does, is to influence the rules and regulations (tax loopholes and such) in their favor; and they do it with money. (Citizens United for example). But without government monetary and legal infrastructure, (the currency, laws, courts, enforcement, banking, setting interest rates, etc.) there is no free market.

The best analogy I can think of is the National Football League. Think of the game itself as "the market", and the entire set of rules that govern the behavior of the game as "the government".  The governing body that is the NFL determines the rules of the game:  the size of the field, the width of the goalposts, what you're allowed to do and not do. Everything that you might take for granted about the game of football is in fact highly regulated. Without the NFL (i.e., the government), you'd have no game; you'd only have chaos. There would be no standards. Every field could potentially be different. Every game could potentially be played using a different set of rules.

In our economy, big business influences the rules in their favor, so that - for a metaphorical example, the NY Giants football team influenced (i.e., paid for) legislation that would allow their offensive line  to commit the infraction of "holding", but the offensive line for the Eagles would not be allowed to do the same thing. 

So you see, big business still needs the rules, otherwise, they would not be able to do what they do. When they say, "get government out of the way", what they really mean is, "let us set the rules in our favor". And the more wealth becomes concentrated in the hands of a relatively few people, the more ability the wealthy have to control the rules. 

 Good quotes to remember: 

“GOP 2014 strategy -- Hire clowns, elephants, and a ringmaster and say "a media circus" has emerged and blame Democrats for lack of progress. Have pundits agree that "both sides are to blame" and hope the public will stay home on election day.”  Author unidentified.

“I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.”  - Susan B. Anthony

Economic Alternate Universe

This post was written by James Convey, a regular contributor to this blog. Thanks to James for allowing me to use his article as a primary post on my blog.    Lou
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Intent of capitalism defined:  opinion based upon Adam Smiths texts in the Wealth of nations.\\ circa 1778:

"...........Trade and marketing under the guise of Capitalism, is as a tool, more rightly designed for the benefit of the entirety of a society. However one must be always wary of the merchants enhanced abilities over the ordinary citizen, via their benefits toward the accumulation of greater wealth, to widen the market to their own designs, which may well stand against the good of the society's structure itself.........." 

   

July Posting for economics section; www.jamesconvey.com ............." An Alternate Economic Universe is unfolding"........( Let's get it right this time)

There is indeed an 'alternate universe' developing beyond the influence of the once mighty Anglo America capitalist system. The Global market has been stripped, or some say perhaps even raped, primarily by the Anglo/American capitalist model of trickle down, 'laissez faire' idiocy, which dominated all trade and manufacture in the present era.  

In trying to reset the timer, the new emerging economic Asian powers, together with Europe and other stronger economies, Turkey, Russia Brazil, etc, will demand and are already in the process, of setting the stages for a new, more rigidly monitored form of capitalism, to serve common unfolding 21st century economic realities! 

America in decline? If so, why?

In a forum on Facebook called, The Federalist Papers, a question was asked on a particular entry: "Yesterday, on this page, the question was asked if America is in decline or if America's best years are still ahead. The vast majority of you believe our country is in decline.

If so, how can we best turn things around? What, in your opinion are our biggest challenges and what's the solution?"   

One particular response of several that I found interesting was the following one from someone named Scott Gray. His response is immediately below, and mine follows.  I thought the discussion was worthwhile enough to post here.

From Scott Gray:   "America is in decline because the two party system and the spin machines which support and profit from the partisan divide, are driving the American people to further and further extremes, away from pragmatic principles of decision making and political behavior, in favor of ideologically driven extremes.

The system will only be fixed if the spin machines are shut down, political rhetoric is removed from the equation, and our elected leaders come back to find pragmatically derived solutions designed to serve the needs of the whole of the nation, instead of the few at the top or the masses at the bottom.

As long as the parties put their financing and their own interests above the American People as a whole, our system will continue grinding into a deeper and deeper rut.

The thinking which has brought us into this mess will not be the thinking which will pull us out of this mess."

 . . . . . .  (And my reply was:) 

"An Idea Is Like A Virus"

During the psychological thriller movie "Inception", the character Cobb (played by Leonardo DiCaprio) says "an idea is like a virus".  It is an interesting statement. It is of course within the context of the movie, which I thought was very good, although it took my wife and I two viewings before we think we we were able to follow it. If you've not seen it, here is a brief overview, from http://www.imdb.com/:  "Dom Cobb is a skilled thief, the absolute best in the dangerous art of extraction, stealing valuable secrets from deep within the subconscious during the dream state, when the mind is at its most vulnerable."

But beyond the movie, the statement has broad application, in particular, to politics and the war to win people's minds - i.e., votes; political persuasion. The battle of ideas is as old as mankind; it is related to the ego and one's ability and desire to get other people to believe your point of view. To some extent, isn't the whole concept of religion and proselytizing for a specific god, a battle for a person's mind?

Does lowering taxes on the rich really benefit anyone else?

 
The Bush Tax Cuts have been in effect for ten years.  Taxes on the highest of income groups have been lower in general over the past 30 years or so, compared to the previous 30.

By using the criteria I find useful, and I think that most people find useful: the employment/unemployment rates, kinds of jobs created and lost, income levels, inflation rates, cost of education, disparity of wealth distribution, general quality of life for the society as a whole; we can ask the question: what effect has the policies of lowering taxes on the rich over the past 2, 5, 10, 20, 40 years had on the U.S. economy? Have lower taxes on the rich done anything for anyone other than the rich?

Detailed info from the Financial Crisis Report.

I wasn't originally going to post about this topic next, but I just came across some information regarding the Financial Crisis that I think needs to be highlighted and shared with everyone.

The full recent report from the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, “Wall Street and the Financial Crisis: An Anatomy of a Financial Collapse”  is a 650-page indictment that reveals the myriad of ways Wall Street lies, cheats, steals and defrauds on a routine basis.

Financial Crisis Report

Unfortunately, it’s too technical to get widely read. So the following Cliff Notes version comes from Les Leopold.  His text follows:

"This study, broken into four case studies, forms a biblical tale of how toxic mortgages were born, nurtured and spread like the plague throughout the land, making money for the financial philistines every step of the way.