The Dumbest Idea in the World
Maximising shareholder value that is, according to Steve Denning writing for Forbes about a book from Roger Martin, Dean of Rotman School of Management.
What he didn’t respond to was my point that a challenge to maximising shareholder value had come 15 years earlier in 1996 and shared online free to use.
“At first glance, it might seem redundant to emphasize people as the central focus of economics. After all, isn’t the purpose of economics, as well as business, people? Aren’t people automatically the central focus of business and economic activities? Yes and no.
People certainly gain and benefit, but the rub is: which people? More than a billion children, women, and men on this planet suffer from hunger. It is a travesty that this is the case, a blight upon us all as a global social group. Perhaps an even greater travesty is that it does not have to be this way; the problems of human suffering on such a massive scale are not unsolvable. If a few businesses were conducted only slightly differently, much of the misery and suffering as we now know it could be eliminated. This is where the concept of a “people-centered” economics system comes in.”
You don’t believe me? Try the web archives for www.p-ced.com
It reasoned that with some modification to the governing articles, a business may operate entirely for social benefit if that’s the will of those who create it.
It was written as a contribution to Bill Clinton’s re-election campaign following an invitation to serve and delivered to the White House by hand on 16th September 1996.
From there came the opportunity to source an economic development program in Russia. Known as the Tomsk Regional Initiative, it led to the creation of several thousand microenterprises.
Introducing the model to the UK and the social enterprise community in 2004, founder Terry Hallman was interviewed about his impact in Russia and a follow on project in Crimea. He said:
“At first, the idea seemed heresy — but not for long, simply because it made sense and it didn’t step on the toes of any existing enterprises that were in business to enrich relatively few people. None of them were asked to change anything, but it left open the possibility of more forward-thinking people to step in and do business differently. Even now, I am astonished that the idea struck such a deep and sympathetic chord in so many people so quickly — especially in our top business schools, where one might have thought that they were all in it for the money, for personal wealth, with little regard to social benefit or the poorest of the poor.”
By the end of that year, he was on the ground in Ukraine as a revolution was beginning. He would soon be calling out economic hit men, warning of the risk of violent unrest.
The ‘Death Camps, For Children’ series not only exposed the plight of economic orphans and their mistreatment, it sketched out a plan for transitioning all orphans to family homes through social investment.
Hallman followed up with a formal strategy paper delivered to government channels in February 2007 and published online in August, soon after the 60th anniversary of George Marshall’s speech at Harvard. This was a ‘Marshall Plan’ for Ukraine.
“This is a long-term permanently sustainable program, the basis for “people-centered” economic development. Core focus is always on people and their needs, with neediest people having first priority — as contrasted with the eternal chase for financial profit and numbers where people, social benefit, and human well-being are often and routinely overlooked or ignored altogether. This is in keeping with the fundamental objectives of Marshall Plan: policy aimed at hunger, poverty, desperation and chaos. This is a bottom-up approach, starting with Ukraine’s poorest and most desperate citizens, rather than a “top-down” approach that might not ever benefit them. They cannot wait, particularly children. Impedance by anyone or any group of people constitutes precisely what the original Marshall Plan was dedicated to opposing. Those who suffer most, and those in greatest need, must be helped first — not secondarily, along the way or by the way.”
“It does not have to be this way” he argued in the 1996 paper, describing how the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a minority meant that others suffer.
Today the same thing is being said by Oxfam, B Corporations , Conscious Capitalists and even Michael Porter of Harvard. It doesn’t have to be this way.
Terry Hallman died in poverty on 18th August 2011, unable to afford heathcare as one of some 50 million Americans without health insurance.
Writng from the trenches 10 yeas ago he described how Americans were under seige, and the need for ‘A New Revolution’
