Posts
Traditional 'economics' is 'too narrow' in scope and also 'out-of-date'. It has also 'failed' hard-working people and is now effectively 'dead'.
But attempts to improve it, change it or widen it, will always be resisted. Dr W Edwards Deming, a creative outsider and a real 'leader', uncovered the "System of Profound Knowledge" and referred to the need for a "New Economics" (nearly 20 years ago) ... but, when terms are so out of date new words/definitions are needed, and for that reason, and for those interested, I am continuing his work ... using the definitions below:
* Leanomics = People taking responsibility for adding value and continuously improving the situation for others (e.g. customers, communities, overall environment), based upon fundamental values such as trust, honor, responsibility and respect.
* Ignoromics = People are either effectively ignorant of the situation (e.g. the overall environment) or not prepared to take responsibility to make sure it changes for the better.
* Poweromics = People using position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed.
It is worth noting virtually everything fundamentally centres around 'people' and the 'values' they uphold. It is also worth noting that Ignoromics is what allows Poweromics to flourish, and in my view this summarises the current (and widened) definition of 'economics' that prevails today.
Why not take a look at what 'leaders' everywhere are doing (e.g. your boss, company, service provider, government, politicians, media ...) and look at how many people understand this and/or prepared to do something about it ... I think you'll find its small ... albeit steadily growing (helped by the internet, and recent activities of banks/MP's etc).
IMHO the battle of the future is really one of values, and given the above definitions, can be simply summarised as ...
Leanomics v Poweromics & Ignoromics
For those interested I hope this is helpful ... and I would certainly recommend the work of Dr. W. Edwards Deming as a good starting point for looking into this further ... people are still amazed (and learning) how profound his insight actually was ... my book expands on his work too (you can click on here if want to take a look at it too ...)
Posted on Stephanomics blog, "the same, only different", along with the additional comments below.
––––––––––––––––––––
Comment 53 (leanomist)
In a global economy only those capable of offering (and exporting) things other nations want will survive in the long run. This country lost this concept some years ago and/or wrongly believed financial services were the answer!
'Leanomics', a much wider and far more holistic form of 'economics', looks at community factors too ... such as individual well-being and community contentment, as well as the sustainability of enterprise and the environment. For example, one simple Leanomics test, called the "BUTS" test, can create a great deal of insight by looking at debt alongside the capability of the community to pay it back.
B=Borrowing
U=Untapped talent
T=Trade deficit
S=Stress
Trade deficits, untapped talent and stress all negatively impact on a nations ability/capability to pay back debt, and what do these look like at the moment ? I'll give you a clue - terrible!
We have got into huge debt, sold the family silver, demoralised people, stressed people out, created a broken society, overburdened our children (and our children's children), and still have the 1940's baby-boom to come (with a poorly funded pension system).
Nothing has changed, it's just becoming increasingly clearer (and/or harder to hide!) ... I think Mr Tweedy (comment 1) has summed up the situation very well ... just to re-iterate ...
" ... If Germany, China and Japan invested their surpluses in their own economies, and they successfully uncoupled from the US and the UK, it would leave the US and the UK high and dry.
Without foreign investors to buy gilts and treasuries, our governments would struggle to afford their spending plans, and we would struggle to afford our imports.
Britain and the USA would need to find exports to sell to China, Germany and Japan. But just what would Britain sell? I can't think of anything, seeing as exports of bank loans, insurance and defence manufactures were Britain's only trade surplus during the years preceding the economic crisis. North Sea oil is not what it once was.
The search continues for Britain's magic exports" ...
... and as I also raised in one of Robert Peston' previous blogs ...
" ... so tell us the robust plan to pay back all the extra debt we're taking on and at the same time create 21st century products and services that ...
1. People around the world want and are willing to pay for
2. Will create millions of jobs in the UK, and
3. Will systematically reduce our trade deficits and national borrowing ... *
Next question ... how are we nurturing and accelerating creativity/innovation to develop these new products and services?
Next question ... how are we adopting 21st Century leadership and management to enable both the above?
I've been in meetings with Ministers and the CBI - and guess what ... when difficult questions like these are asked they are all 'weighed, measured and found wanting' ..."
But are you really surprised ? ... We can't trust them with their 'expenses' ... never mind the 'economy' !
David Clift, a Future 500 Leader, and Poweromics* blogger
* Poweromics = People using position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed.
–––––––––––––––––
Comment 91 (leanomist)
Traditional 'economics' is 'too narrow' in scope and also 'out-of-date'. It has also 'failed' hard-working people and is now effectively 'dead'.
But attempts to improve it, change it or widen it, will always be resisted. Dr W Edwards Deming, a creative outsider and a real 'leader', uncovered the "System of Profound Knowledge" and referred to the need for a "New Economics" (nearly 20 years ago) ... but, when terms are so out of date new words/definitions are needed, and for that reason, and for those interested, I am continuing his work ... using the definitions below:
* Leanomics = People taking responsibility for adding value and continuously improving the situation for others (e.g. customers, communities, overall environment), based upon fundamental values such as trust, honor, responsibility and respect.
* Ignoromics = People are either effectively ignorant of the situation (e.g. the overall environment) or not prepared to take responsibility to make sure it changes for the better.
* Poweromics = People using position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed.
It is worth noting virtually everything fundamentally centres around 'people' and the 'values' they uphold. It is also worth noting that Ignoromics is what allows Poweromics to flourish, and in my view this summarises the current (and widened) definition of 'economics' that prevails today.
Why not take a look at what 'leaders' everywhere are doing (e.g. your boss, company, service provider, government, politicians, media ...) and look at how many people understand this and/or prepared to do something about it ... I think you'll find its small ... albeit steadily growing (helped by the internet, and recent activities of banks/MP's etc).
IMHO the battle of the future is really one of values, and given the above definitions, can be simply summarised as ...
Leanomics v Poweromics & Ignoromics
For those interested I hope this is helpful ... and I would certainly recommend the work of Dr. W. Edwards Deming as a good starting point for looking into this further ... people are still amazed (and learning) how profound his insight actually was ...
David Clift, a Future 500 leader
–––––––––––––––––
Comment 128 (leanomist)
Moral bankruptcy has led to ... financial bankruptcy ... which will lead to more moral bankruptcy etc etc ... unless/until something significantly different happens to change it ...
It's not hard to the see this cycle at work, and how it will continue to work ... until hard-working people say enough is enough ... which IMHO they eventually will ...
And questions that then arise include ... how long before they do? ... what will they do? ... and will they be able to sufficiently reverse things once they do?
... IMHO we are in uncharted waters, as history provides some clues but we have not seen how a 'revolution' truly takes place in the 'information age' (powered by the internet) in which we now live ...
There is no doubt that the internet will eventually transform everything ... whether those in positions of 'power' like it or not ... the blog http://poweromics.blogspot.com is just one of many blogs helping to turn information into knowledge, and sharing it with others ... and there are many more besides ...
The time for change is coming ... and I believe it's not very far away ...
David Clift, a Future 500 Leader
–––––––––––––––––
