A great example of this is described in a BBC article (pointed to by LinkedIn), ‘Man sued for keeping company Twitter followers‘ (27-dec-2011).

The story revolves around social-media figure Noah Kravitz. During his time at tech-news aggregator Phonedog, he accumulated some 17,000 ‘followers’ to his Twitter-account there (@Phonedog_Noah). When he left Phonedog, he changed his username, and the followers either moved with the account, or moved to the new account (dependent on whether he changed the name itself, or moved to a new account – the BBC article doesn’t say). Phonedog regarded the followers as ‘company-property’ – as a ‘customer-list’, to be precise – which Kravitz had taken with him, and were suing him to get it back as their ‘rightful possession’.

There are so many fundamental concept-errors in Phonedog’s actions here that it’s difficult to know where to start… Yet they’re also very common mistakes in the broader business context: hence it’s worth exploring this from an enterprise-architecture / business-architecture perspective.

What we’re actually dealing with here is a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of non-tangible assets, coupled with a fundamental misunderstanding about the inherent limitations of an economic model that relies on exchange of ‘rights’ of exclusive-possession over assets.

Let’s start by identifying four fundamentally different asset-dimensions:

• physical: a ‘thing’ – tangible, autonomous, exchangeable and alienable (“if I give it to you, I no longer have it”)
• virtual: information, ideas – non-tangible, semi-autonomous, exchangeable but non-alienable (“if I give it to you, I still have it”)
• relational: person-to-person connection – non-tangible, non-autonomous (exists between two entities), non-exchangeable and non-alienable
• aspirational: person-to-abstract connection – non-tangible, non-autonomous (exists from person to abstract), non-exchangeable and non-alienable

Assets may express multiple dimensions: for example, a printed book is both a physical-asset (the book itself) and a virtual-asset (the information or ideas in the book), and may also act as an anchor for aspirational-assets (people’s sense of connection to the book and/or to the ideas in the book). This linking of multiple asset-dimensions is often described as ‘bundling’.

The current economic-model relies on exchanges of ‘rights’ of ‘exclusive-possession’. It’s a concept that only makes sense with exchangeable and alienable assets – in other words, physical-assets. ‘Exclusive-possession’ does not and cannot make sense with any other asset-dimension. Yet since bundling of asset-types means that the rules for all asset-dimensions in the bundle will apply, the flawed assumptions of the economic model will seem to sort-of make sense as long as there’s some element of physicality in the bundle. But when that element of physicality is dropped? – well, that’s when things get, uh, interesting…

Hence the breakdown of the old media-industry business-models over the past few years. What they actually sell is information, but their old model were based on bundling – printed-books, physical disks, seats in cinemas – hence, with a bit of legal arm-twisting, it could be made to look like a physical ‘exclusive-possession’. But physical things are expensive, with all the concomitant costs and complications of managing them as physical assets: inventory, storage, shipping, building-maintenance, retail-stores and so on. Much cheaper to go all-digital. Which, however, then becomes an unbundled virtual-asset – which can only be exchanged by creating copies, which can then also be exchanged by creating further copies, and so on, all without any exclusive-’alienability’. Oops…

Hence the media-industries first tried an old tactic, which was to use the law of ‘copyright’ (which was and still is focussed only on the ‘possession-rights’ of publishers, not authors) to assert ‘possession’ over those virtual-assets. But the nature of information is that it ‘wants to be free’ – not necessarily in a monetary sense, but in that it’s only usable/accessible by creating copies, and copies of copies, and copies of copies of copies, which at some point will slip outside of any attempts at ‘control’.

Law alone didn’t work, so the next tactic was to try to control some crucial point in the physical ‘pipe’ for information: hence demands that the computer-industry should redesign all processor- or interface-chips to include ‘digital rights management’ that would be controllable only by Hollywood and their ilk. Not surprisingly, that didn’t go down very well with content-creators themselves – or the computer-industry, who happened to have their own lawyers and lobbyists too. Result: expensive stalemate – and still no ‘control’ of those naturally-volatile virtual-assets.

That’s been followed by one attempt after another to ‘control’ information, mostly by threats of legal action and the like. What the media-corporations are still not doing is facing up to the fact that not only is it inherently futile to try to control virtual-assets as if they’re physical, but doing so calls into question the theoretical and ethical basis of the entire possession-economy – physical-assets included. Definitely ‘oops’…

Which brings us back to the Kravitz/Phonedog case.

In that schema above, Twitter-follows are, in effect, a bundling of relational-asset (the perceived person-to-person link between the ‘follower’ and Kravitz) and virtual-asset (the information within Twitter that denotes the link) plus a certain element of aspirational-asset (because with some 17,000 ‘followers’, most of those will be more a link to the idea of Kravitz rather than a true relational-asset person-to-person link). What there isn’t anywhere in there is any physical-asset component – and hence nothing on which a notion of literally-exclusive ‘company property’ can make any sense.

I presume that somewhere there will be some utility that can extract a follower-list from Twitter – in other words, create a sort-of transferrable virtual-asset that Kravitz can give to Phonedog. Yet in practice even that makes little to no sense. First, the followers are not ‘customers’ in a transactional sense, either of Phonedog or of Kravitz: they’re just people who have a passing interest in what Kravitz might happen to say, an interest that may or may not relate to Phonedog as such, even in Kravitz’s (literal!) persona as ‘Phonedog_Noah’. It’s a trust-relationship, not ‘customer’-relationship. And second, transferring the list does not transfer the relationship: in fact it’s more likely to kill any potential relationship with the company, because it implicitly treats the ‘followers’ as if they themselves are nothing more than exchangeable ‘possessions’ – which many (most?) people would take as a fairly extreme insult. Certainly not conducive to creating trust, anyway.

In short, Phonedog’s attempts to ‘possess’ the relationships have all but guaranteed making it impossible for Kravitz to transfer them. The relationships are not under his control: relational-assets are real assets in a business sense, yet they exist only whilst they’re maintained by both parties to that relationship. The only direct option he has within Twitter is to destroy the link, by blocking: he can’t create a new ‘follower’ link, or transfer the link to someone else. (The equivalent is true with direct person-to-person links, of course.) Suing him for damages, about something that by definition isn’t in his control anyway, is both absurd and unfair.

There is (or, by now, probably only was) another option: emphasise the aspirational-asset element (person-to-idea rather than person-with-person), create a strong crosslink between the idea of Kravitz-as-employee-of-Phonedog and the idea of Phonedog-the-company, and use that crosslink to gently persuade Kravitz’s followers to also ‘follow’ Phonedog. (Note that a ‘follow’ to a company has a much higher aspirational-asset component than relational-asset component – something I probably need to explain in another post?) But all of that depends on fairly complex multi-way trust-relationships: for example, the followers need to trust Kravitz’s recommendation, and Kravitz also needs to trust that Phonedog will treat ‘his’ followers with similar respect. And again, there’s not much of those trust-interactions that’s under Kravitz’s personal control – hence again it makes little sense to try to assign him the sole legal responsibility for them.

In practice, Phonedog has done just about everything that they could do to destroy all of those trust-relationships – and then, having done so, tried to blame and even punish everyone else for their ‘loss’.

Not exactly wise, we might say?

Yet also not exactly uncommon, either. Quite the opposite, in fact…

The moral of this sad story, from an enterprise-architecture perspective, is be clear which asset-dimensions you’re dealing with in every context, and ensure that those assets are managed accordingly. Because if you aren’t clear about it, and fail to handle each asset-dimension appropriately, your organisation will inevitably find itself in this kind of mess. And the only people who ‘win’ from this kind of mess are the predators, parasites and scavengers in the legal-profession and elsewhere. Oh joys…

Over to you, perhaps?

One reason is implied this Tweet by Belgian consultant Patrick Van Renterghem:

itworks: Big discussion now about what happens when cloud vendors go bankrupt or out-of-service. Should [be] in the contract… #BAEA

“Should be in the contract…”: yes, indeed – but what should be in that contract? And why?

Without an enterprise-architecture that covers a broader scope than just the bare IT-transactions, we have no way to know what actually needs to be in that contract – and also in the parts that can’t be covered by contract, and that really do depend on relationships and trust. Which could be a serious problem from a business perspective. Hmm…

I’ve covered a fair bit of the detail of this in other posts here, such as ‘Enterprise-architecture and the Cloud‘. Some people seem to have misunderstood the questions there as somehow being ‘anti-Cloud’, or even ‘anti-IT’: it’s not. It’s about really looking at the whole context – about the whole ‘market-cycle’, about understanding the full implications of a customer-centric view, about maintaining consistency of service across all in-source and out-source relationships, and so on. And we do need to do that: because if we don’t, it can get really expensive.

Yet cloud-outsourcing is only one small example. As enterprise-architects, we also need to be able to extend out to a much broader business-picture, as Steve Denning describes in his Forbes post, ‘Clayton Christensen: How Pursuit of Profits Kills Innovation and the U.S. Economy‘

when a firm calculates the rate of return on a proposal to outsource manufacturing overseas, it typically does not include:

• The cost of the knowledge that is being lost, possibly forever.
• The cost of being unable to innovate in future, because critical knowledge has been lost.
• The consequent cost of its current business being destroyed by competitors emerging who can make a better product at lower cost.
• The missed opportunity of profits that could be made from innovations based on that knowledge that is being lost.

Failure to apply a proper enterprise-scope architecture-assessment of such themes can be more serious than merely expensive: mistakes at that level can easily kill a corporation. In short, it matters.

That kind of in-depth EA assessment might at first seem pernickety and pedantic, especially to those who just want to get moving. But as John Seddon warns, most of the ‘conventional’ methods to save money and effort usually end up costing far, far more: if we do need to cut costs, for example, we need to take more systemic, whole-of-context view in order to find the real places where those costs can be cut back. And the reality is that often they’re not where we’d expect them to be: hence, again, the need for a true enterprise-scope architecture.

Cloud-IT and other forms of outsourcing often look like the quickest, easiest and most practical way to cut costs. But Steve Denning quotes John Maynard Keynes to warn:

Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.

Most often, those ‘defunct economists’ have failed to account for the hidden costs of a context – particularly the real human costs, which can be ignored only at our peril, especially in the longer term. There are good reasons why those ideas became ‘defunct’: but unfortunately, it seems each new generation has to re-learn those reasons time and time again…

In our domains, those forgotten lessons are reflected in IT-centrism and the like, and the over-simplification of otherwise-valuable ideas such as ‘scientific management’ and ‘business process reengineering’, and, now, cloud-based IT-services. A key role of a whole-of-enterprise architecture, here in the context of outsourcing, is to remind us of why those lessons about the real complexities of outsourcing and the like are so important, and what they mean in real-world practice to Keynes’ ‘practical men’.

In short, use enterprise-architecture to help identify the real hidden-costs of outsourcing – so that your business doesn’t get hit by the bill when those hidden-costs come back to bite…

What I’ve been calling ‘Really-Big-Picture enterprise-architecture‘ is about looking at how we can apply enterprise-architecture ideas at a much larger scale, right up to a fully global scope. The simplest way to describe this is as follows:

• every society or culture is held together by mutual responsibilities
• in some (but not all) societies, there may be an overlay of personal possession
• arising from this concept of possession is a notion of property rights
• to support exchange of personal property in accordance with property-rights, we have point-to-point barter
• to resolve the point-to-point nature of barter, we introduce an intermediary currency
• to support futures in a currency-based economics, we introduce the idea of debt-based finance
• to support certain types of debt, we introduce financial-derivatives

All straightforward, all non-pejorative, a simple stack of overlays, each one built on top of the previous layers. We could summarise it visually like this:

There’s only one catch: it doesn’t work.

Most people realise by now that there are huge problems with financial-derivatives and the like: anything that is potentially-infinite that claims to have absolute rights over something that’s definitely finite is by definition going to be problematic. But that isn’t the core problem that we have to deal with.

Debt-based finance is a problem: it tends by definition to concentrate all wealth in the hands of those who control the mechanisms of debt. But that too isn’t the core problem that we have to deal with.

A lot of people argue that the problem lies with the currency: if we could switch to an alternate-currency, they say, everything would work out just fine. There are huge arguments about what kind of currency we should move to – time-based, ‘local energy’, reputation-points or whatever. But the reality is that all of those arguments are almost completely irrelevant, because currency itself isn’t the core problem that we have to deal with.

Some people say that we should drop the whole currency-thing, and go back to barter. But the point-to-point nature of barter causes huge problems, which in many ways currency does help to resolve. But in any case, barter isn’t the core problem that we have to deal with.

Quite a few people say that the real issue is around property-rights. Capitalists and communists alike will argue intensely over who has the right to possess, and who doesn’t. But this misses the point too, because property-rights in themselves aren’t the core problem that we have to deal with.

The real problem is the concept of possession – because that’s what breaks the mutuality of responsibilities on which a sustainable society and its economics depend. Possession is a literally childish view of an economy, one which asserts the primacy of ‘I’ over ‘We’. It’s a view which asserts that that the only thing that matters is my own needs and desires, that I am not responsible to others, either in the present or elsewhen – yet still insists that they are and must still be responsible to me. The reality is that the moment we allow that kind of pseudo-mutuality to exist, by definition we have a broken economy: there’s no way we can make it sustainable – especially over the longer-term.

Imagine an economy that’s run by, for and on behalf of the most childish in the society, and in which anyone who does take responsibility is punished for doing so. That would be insane, wouldn’t it? – in every sense of ‘insane’… Yet what we would have there is something remarkably similar to what we think of as ‘the economy’ in the present day – an ‘economy’ that’s ultimately based on the possessive self-centred temper-tantrums of a two-year-old…

Yet the fact is that anything based on a possession-model will tend automatically to create dysfunctional failure, to not only invent a status of ‘rich’ or ‘poor’ but an ever-widening gap between them, to always assign far higher priority to the present than to future or past, and to create a ‘trickle-up’ pyramid-game structure that can only appear to work as long as it can maintain an illusion of infinite ‘growth’ – because if the growth ever stops, its only option is to cannibalise itself into oblivion. There is no possible way to make a possession-based economy sustainable.

Which means that we have a rather serious problem. If possession doesn’t work – and not only doesn’t work, but by definition can’t work - and we need to move towards a truly sustainable economy – which, with seven billion humans and still increasing fast, we clearly do – then it means that we need to rethink not just possession itself, but everything that’s built on top of it. In short, every single one of those overlays is irrelevant, because they’re built on top of something that doesn’t work. Or, to put it in simple graphic form:

If the core problem is possession, then it should be evident that futzing around at any of the layers that are built on top of that myth of possession is not going to make any significant difference. It’s a waste of time, of effort, of everything else – a waste that we can ill afford right now, given the real inescapable all-too-literally ‘deadlines’ that we’re starting to face in the near future. Our only option is scrap the whole lot, and start again almost from scratch – because anything that retains any hint of possession in its structure will cause the whole thing to fail all over again.

And yet it’s scary just how much of our society and economics and the rest assume that possession is the only way to go. Just to give one small example: if “possession is nine-tenths of the law”, what does that tell us about what changes in law would be needed for a sustainable society? Not a trivial problem, yes…?

Yet I do believe that enterprise-architects have skills that could be genuinely useful for this type of challenge. We’re used to working at large scale, and at every scale, across every aspect of a whole system. We’re used to seeing how all of the different aspects come together to make a single unified whole. We’re used to doing roadmaps for change and suchlike – and the, uh, interesting politics that go with any large-scale change. What we have here is still enterprise-architecture, still the ‘big-picture’ – just a rather bigger picture than we’re used to, that’s all.

So that’s what I’m describing as ‘Really-Big-Picture Enterprise-Architecture’ – a form of enterprise-architecture where the ‘enterprise’ in scope is actually everything that happens and will happen in human activity on the entirety of the planet. In other words, probably the largest enterprise-architecture challenge that any of us will ever face. Interested?

Uh… probably that ‘The Plan’ is that there isn’t one? In fact that’s the whole point?

(Or, if you simply must have a plan, I could paraphrase a former colleague and say that the plan is to not have a specific plan.)

Why? Simple reason, really: the purpose of a plan is to control something. And since ‘control’ is itself little more than a rather forlorn myth – especially in this kind of context – then it really doesn’t make sense to have a plan, because ‘control’ doesn’t make sense either.

I do have a sense of the direction I’m headed, though. Call that ‘a plan’, if you like. Sort-of.

It’s still enterprise-architecture. But a much bigger view of enterprise-architecture than you’d normally see associated with that term.

[As an aside, one of the joys of this shift is that I won't have to waste any more time arguing with the IT-obsessed and, now, the business-obsessed, about their misuse of the term 'enterprise-architecture'. I know it's wrong, they know it's wrong, everyone knows it's wrong, and just about everyone knows the damage that that term-hijack is causing, too. But hey, if they really need to keep on 'pissin' in the pool', best to just leave 'em to it, I guess. At least when you come here, you do know that when I talk about 'enterprise architecture', I do mean 'enterprise', and 'architecture', and the way they fit together - and not some piddling point about how two IT-boxes talk to each other. Unless we do need to talk about that. Which we do sometimes, of course. ]

What I’m really aiming at is the architecture of the biggest enterprise we have: the human enterprise. All of it. Which takes place within a broader ecosystem, usually referred to as ‘this planet’ or suchlike. Which is, yes, kinda big…

[In Twitter and elsewhere I'll use the hashtag #rbpea to indicate this type of 'Really-Big-Picture Enterprise-Architecture'.]

Why? It’s because I can see there are some big, big, BIG architecture-type questions that just about no-one else seems to have addressed so far, if at all. Or even noticed, in most cases. Kind of ‘oops…’, if you like. A very big ‘oops…’.

Which means that someone needs to be doing something about that ‘very big oops…’. And I look around, and I can’t see anyone else doing it, or putting their hand up to do it. Which, uh, kinda suggests that it’s my turn to do something about it. Yikes… Yeah, kinda challenging, coming face to face with that…

It doesn’t mean I’ll necessarily be much good at it: others would probably be a lot better for this than I am, no doubt about that. But it’s clear that someone needs to hold the fort for now: and right now that ‘someone’ seems to be me. Oh well…

I certainly don’t claim to have ‘the Answers’; at the moment I’d barely claim to have more than a few good questions. But at least it’s something. And I do have some relevant skills and experience, so in that sense I do have some ’response-ability’ here. Hence, in that sense, my responsibility.

So that’s the ‘plan’, really: be responsible. See what I see, hear what I hear, feel what I feel, and then literally ‘be response-able’ about that. Be like Wangari Maathai’s hummingbird – or perhaps, in my case, more like a weary, wary old toad – just doing the best I can.

Not a big plan. Not a complicated plan, with a nice big complicated roadmap from ‘as-is’ to ‘to-be’ and crop-circles an’ all that, like what all those real, proper certififificateded enterprise-architects do.

But a plan. Sort-of.

Hmm…

There’s one part of this plan, though, that a fair few people may not like – and I perhaps ought to apologise for that in advance. (Though might be better to just stop apologising for everything anyway?) It’s just that being responsible also means being honest: and being honest about what I see is going to annoy a few folks – because to be blunt there are a heck of a lot of ideas and actions out there that are just plain dumb. Stupid: the definitely-not-a-good-idea kind of stupid. Often the darn-lucky-if-we-survive-this-one kind of really stupid, too. Sorry, but it’s true.

One example of that kind of ‘really-stupid’ is the notion of ‘rights‘, which just does not and cannot work, no matter how much people try to kludge to make it it look as if it does. It’s bullshit: it’s a ‘kiddies-anarchy’ view of the world, built around evasion of any notion of responsibility. And we need to stop pretending that it’s anything more than that – so that we then do have a chance to rebuild something that actually can and does work.

Ditto the entirety of what’s laughably called ‘economics‘. Ditto the whole notion of ‘intellectual property’ – or most any current form of so-called ‘property’, for that matter. Ditto, behind it, the entire concept of ‘possession‘. All of us know it’s all bullshit, a made-up fantasy to prop up the pretences of people whose idea of ‘making a living’ consists almost entirely of untrammelled theft – an ‘economy’ based on theft-without-end. Gosh: that’s an ‘economy’??? – doesn’t look like one to me… not in any sane sense of ‘economy’ that I’ve ever heard of, anyway… So why not say so? – before we really do all end up in drowning in this bullshit?

Sigh.

In that old fable of ‘the Emperor has no clothes’, it’s a naive kid that unknowingly calls everyone’s bluff, by saying the truth about what he see. But I’ve come to realise that in reality it isn’t some innocent kid: it’s a grumpy old toad like me. Which means that sometimes – often, perhaps – some people ain’t gonna like what I say about what I see. Too bad. Sorry, ’bout that, but there ’tis: there are only two choices here – it’s either be honest, or don’t bother, and from now on I’m a lot clearer about which one of those two I need to pick.

One thing I won’t do is put anyone else down. I’ll challenge the bullshit whenever I see it, and challenge hard about it at times (and expect others to challenge me about that, too): but it’ll always be about the ideas, the thinking, the action – not the person. I promise you that. So if you find yourself ‘taking it personally’ about something I’ve said, please look closely at yourself first, and before you come out all-guns-blazing at me – because it’s in that ‘taking it personal’ that you’re most likely to learn the most, and most likely to find out who you truly are.

Anyway, down to it. That’s the plan, sort-of. And yes, there’s a lot to do – and a lot to talk about with you, too, if you wish?

Enterprise-architecture, business architecture and that kind of stuff:

• practicingEA: At an engagement yesterday client kept using the word ‘enterprise’ 2 mean big company IT…hmmm. Not what #entarch means. >too right, Brian: real feeling of “oh no not again”… ::sigh::
• practicingEA: RT @eaStrategy: James McGovern: Is your HR department an impediment to Enterprise Innovation? http://dlvr.it/ntjfR #entarch
• practicingEA: Has it occurred to anyone else that ‘innovation process’ may be an oxymoron? Standardize through process what must begin w/ culture
• thoughttrans: RT @gkathan: @HarvardBiz Video: Managing Values Across Cultures http://s.hbr.org/r70Huk <empathy and listening as foundation #entarch
• CreatvEmergence: A Radical Shift Toward Design by @Digitaltonto: http://bit.ly/q47GlP via @timkastelle #bmgen #entarch
• practicingEA: By @frankdiana: A framework for #Digital strategy must align #Social, #Mobile, #Analytic and traditional channel efforts: http://wp.me/p17Oju-7Q #bizarch #entarch
• SAlhir: RT @FastCompany Using “Soft” Innovations To Create Amazing Customer Experiences http://bit.ly/oqdYtq Great read by @methodguy @adam_lowry #bmgen #entarch
• chrisdpotts: RT @simplicableanna: Live Your EA Dream — It’s hard to complain about EA as a career because it’s very flexible. http://bit.ly/n9l6jF #entarch
• jonhusband: Deep foresight .. “Beyond The Information Revolution” .. by Peter Drucker, Oct. 1999 .. http://bit.ly/cWRMVG
• thoughttrans: Does ur sales & marketing teams define the company biz model the same way? Or is it a challenge 4 the #entarch to get agreement?
• chrisdpotts: Great post! #CIO #entarch | RT @dhinchcliffe: New Post: The “Big Five” IT trends of the next half decade http://ow.ly/6LdLi >useful #futures exercise – though re-interpret in terms of ‘backbone vs edge’
• chrisdpotts: CIO Magazine vs Gartner, on “CIO versus CFO” http://bit.ly/nVJLMP #CIO #CFO #CEO >might suggest those ‘big-analyst’ surveys are all but useless?
• taotwit: RT @enectoux: Enterprise Architect is the glue not the guru http://bit.ly/oD7Ort #entarch +1 Good to see others with a similar message >good intro to John Wu’s ‘Light EA’
• gkathan: RT @ebuise: Interesting SlideShare presentation : Next Generation Enterprise Architecture by Richard Veryard http://slidesha.re/nbPmnk #entarch via @enectoux
• toddbiske: RT @dougnewdick: Post: Avoiding the Standard Metaphors for Enterprise Architecture  http://bit.ly/prHJoY #entarch cc @simplicableanna @toddbiske
• gkathan: RT @DropMind Visualizing Values, Beliefs and Memories http://bit.ly/p1VUBk via @IQmatrix #mindmapping #visualthinking >> #entarch
• ArtBourbon: RT @fmheir: Cloud gives business the power to bypass their CIO: is this good or bad? http://goo.gl/P7F1Y #entarch
• taotwit: VPEC-T’ing my website for @thoughttrans http://post.ly/3Szab >practical use of #entarch for own consult-biz
• gkathan: RT @patrickpijl: 5 tips on how to visualize your business model (canvas) #bmgen via @erikvdpluijm http://bit.ly/q1Oayh (at http://businessmodelsinc.com/ )
• SAlhir: RT @richardharmer: Purposeful Leadership http://ow.ly/6MnSO < Also Purposeful Enterprise http://bit.ly/RUJYu and Meaningfully-Purposeful Enterprise http://bit.ly/cpMvQ5 >large-scope #entarch etc
• vernaallee: RT @maryadamsICA: RT @ballard_ip: Wise managers know their biz is more intangible than tangible. Assess your fundamentals: http://goo.gl/bLx83 >useful questions here #entarch
• DavidGurteen: The future of work is to freelance within an organisation http://bit.ly/pjHY0z >v.strong recommend #entarch
• toddbiske: RT @datachick: Why You Need An Enterprise Architect Before You Need A Project Manager http://zite.to/q2SvuN < Love Project Taxonomy >using an enterprise-taxonomy to clarify project-impact #entarch
• tetradian: [post] Governance in a responsibility-based enterprise-architecture http://bit.ly/oBoSie #entarch #economics #sustainability
• tetradian: [post] Simpler version of ‘EA-governance thought-experiment’ http://bit.ly/pfUvFN #entarch #economics #sustainability
• tetradian: [post] One more try… http://bit.ly/oSXAVQ #entarch #futures #economics #sustainability
• davidcushman: Ryanair must get over themselves. Their customers don’t ‘choose’ to fly with them. Genuine alternatives rarely exist. #ripefordisruption >rapidly becoming one of the most hated players in the airline industry…
• gkathan: RT @enectoux http://ow.ly/6Mw4y #entarch <theory without practice is useless – practice without theory is blind
• gkathan: RT @HugoR: Rethinking Design Thinking [PDF] http://bit.ly/nWSUku #innovation #designthinking #servicedesign
• 5Di: X ,Y and XY – and eight roles of EA http://bit.ly/rttEXe #entarch #EA >nice taxonomy / overview by @taotwit
• adrianrcampbell: #EntArch mantra by @enectoux  http://bit.ly/opMtnI >neat mind-map of 22-point checklist
• gkathan: RT @RikNemanick: RT @HarvardBiz – Interesting rethinking of corporate value assumptions: http://s.hbr.org/pVqONy #leadership #strategy >looks good on paper, but see views from disgruntled scientists in the Comments section… mismatch b/w theory and practice?
• gkathan: RT @yoemprendo: Design Thinking…the video http://bit.ly/mTF37W #emprendedor #visualthinking [1hr video-presentation by Tim Brown (IDEO) at MIT-Sloan]
• EAatWork: Combine #BMGEN and #Archimate 2.0 motivation extension to identify stakeholders http://tinyurl.com/eaatwork-ME-BMGEN #entarch
• SAlhir: RT @KnowledgeBishop: In an age of incivility, customers thirst for courtesy. #custserv >incivility creates anti-clients #entarch
• unorder: You can learn a lot from story based theme park rides. They boil story elements to the minimum. Normality, trouble, resolution. #bizstory
• DavidGurteen: The Future of Work Is Now http://bit.ly/pvXq6N /like @elsua I am living that life >strong recommend #entarch
• CreatvEmergence: Rethinking Creativity and Innovation – Slideshare : http://slidesha.re/qpRDC6 >useful for #entarch etc
• BillIves: RT @darwineco: The enterprise opportunity of Big Data: Closing the “clue gap” http://zd.net/r6QEBn >useful overview #entarch
• business_design: Yeah RT @thestartupdaily: Vision Cannot be Outsourced #startups  http://bit.ly/nReOVM >core in #entarch
• ArtBourbon: RT @the99percent: More efficient doesn’t always mean more productive. On slowing down & prioritizing the old-fashioned way http://cot.ag/g4irbf
• ArtBourbon: RT @pbmobi: Kipling’s six servants, sketched when thinking about why conceptual architecture sketchnote by @ruthmalan http://twitpic.com/6w67qf #entarch
• taotwit: @BPMForReal: The Seven Deadly Sins of Business Process Management (BPM) http://bit.ly/odMm6m #bpm #entarch
• chrisdpotts: “So, you want to talk to me about #bizarch. Let’s start with how you feel about business.” #bizarch (likewise, #entarch, #ITarch, etc)
• chrisdpotts: “The end of the nanny state of IT”.  @TheEconomist on consumer technology and the workplace. http://ow.ly/6QzF4 #CIO #entarch #strategy
• SAlhir: RT @bhc3 The new productivity stack: connect, consume, collect, contribute, communicate, convene, collaborate @EllenLevy #sis11 #entarch #bpm #collab
• SAlhir: RT @Jabaldaia Change focus – Hidden needs of invisible people in innovation http://bit.ly/pf7zhX >depth in #bmgen #entarch etc
• gkathan: RT @OndrejGalik: Is experience an obstacle to “can do” attitude? http://bit.ly/n5fJHa #entarch #consult
• gkathan: RT @pbmobi: An example of Next Generation #entarch ? Certainly a lot more engaging than the usual text & diagrams stuff http://bit.ly/qBzUgi >it’s still text-and-graphics – but yes, the infographic format is a lot more interesting than most ‘student guides’
• gkathan: #entarch as value delivery network – OMG is approaching with VDML Value Delivery Model Language [97pg PDF] http://bit.ly/preNKI
• gkathan: RT @business901: RT @tampereSI: Here’s a fine special issue on #ServiceDesign http://j.mp/4sEDgk #entarch #bpm
• gkathan: customer service experience #story with jeff the cabbie – http://bit.ly/pADyWd #cmo #servicedesign #entarch #bizstory
• SAlhir: RT @flowchainsensei: “possibility to create value collaboratively because of ‘shared meaning and purpose’” http://bit.ly/nKOzsX #entarch #bizarch #bmgen
• tetradian: [post] A human view of Simple, Complicated and Complex http://bit.ly/n2qni2 #entarch (thx @rightfuture)
• SAlhir: RT @jukkaam 37 best freemium links. – Freemium Blog http://lnkd.in/pVKUAh RT @paidioreilly #businessmode #bmgen #strategy
• taotwit: By @dougnewdick: Why Bother With Concepts? http://wp.me/p1kIJV-7O /via @wordpressdotcom #entarch
• business_design: RT @bill_fischer: Charles Eames 1972 interview. As good a description of Design Thinking as you’ll find! http://is.gd/AZjjv3 #imd_mit
• SAlhir: RT @Jabaldaia #DesignThinking. Simplicity and the pleasure of performing http://bit.ly/dRWkjp >for #bmgen #innovation etc
• gkathan: RT @pbmobi: Information Use in Conceptual Design: Existing Taxonomies and New Approaches http://bit.ly/nWsJKB via @ruthmalan #entarch >an interesting read, includes some useful how-to
• JosvanOosten: Scaling-up Social Impact by Giving Away Value? We’re Open to that Idea http://dlvr.it/pvVVg >great example of how bypassing possession and the ‘intellectual property’ farrago speeds things up immensely #bmgen #entarch

Another discussion about the vexed topic of enterprise-architecture and ‘the Cloud’:

• 5Di: Delloite: #entarch Does the Cloud make EA irrelevant? http://goo.gl/Ot5rY – one of many similar voices >oh gawd, not again… this is all #itarch not #entarch..
• chrisdpotts: Deloitte confuses #entarch with #ITarch. Shame. | RT @5Di: Delloite: Does the Cloud make EA irrelevant? http://goo.gl/Ot5rY // You’d expect something called “Corn Flakes” to be flakes made of corn. “Enterprise Architecture”, same principle. #entarch #CIO
• kvistgaard: RT @chrisdpotts: Deloitte confuses #entarch with #ITarch. Shame. | RT  http://goo.gl/Ot5rY <- Who doesn’t when even TOGAF does?
• chrisdpotts: @kvistgaard The Open Group is an IT standards consortium. How it values #entarch is very different from eg enterprise execs. #CIO
• ArtBourbon: @tetradian re Deloitte: Cloud and EA – that’s up there with “does a fish make a bicycle irrelevant?”.
• gkathan: RT @5Di Delloite: #entarch Does the Cloud make EA irrelevant? http://goo.gl/Ot5rY – one of many similar voices > wiha ) consltnt #fail
• jcithinker: @tetradian Delloitte/Cloud/EA I think the question should be “Does actual EA make Delloitte irrelevant?” #entarch

And another discussion on enterprise-architecture and Cloud:

• aojensen: As phk of FreeBSD says: #cloud is no different to the IBM mainframe. // It puzzles me why so many people put #entarch and # cloud in the same tweet. The former is a mgmt function, the latter a tech concern. // In other words, #cloud is a solution pattern and delivery mechanism. #entarch is about systemic management of all of the enterprise. // Thus, #cloud architect is nothing but a fancy word for solution architect. // Okay, rant over. #entarch
• tetradian: @aojensen: “puzzles me why .. people put #entarch and #cloud in same tweet” – is valid if about enterprise strategy or strategy-to-tactics
• aojensen: @tetradian true, but then it is still a delivery mechanism realising a certain strategic/emergent intent.
• tetradian: @aojensen for viable biz-strategy, #cloud needs #entarch much more than entarch needs cloud – cloud can be biz-lethal without proper entarch
• dougnewdick: @tetradian @aojensen couldn’t agree with Tom more – whether you are talking EITA or “proper ” EA
• tetradian: [post] Enterprise-architecture and the cloud http://bit.ly/qBSHqO #entarch #cloud (thx @aojensen @dougnewdick)

Assorted stuff about people and their in-person interactions in the workplace:

• oscarberg: The power of conversations: 1. They bring people closer // 2. They put data into context // 3. They keep activities together and make work flow // 4. They connect people & information // 5. They create new information & insights // Supporting open conversations, in any direction, is only feasible way to avoid siloed orgs #collab #GoodToTalk #entarch
• KMskunkworks: Do we know how to design and manage an open knowledge system? http://wp.me/pUfyy-b6 #km
• SAlhir: RT @storiedstrategy intellectually&culturally opposed to manipulation of individuals for organisational purposes. #complexity #leadership
• DavidGurteen: Why Being Irrational Is Important http://bit.ly/qNUkeZ #KM #collab #creativity #innovation
• BillIves: Valuing Those Who Tell You the Bitter Truth http://nyti.ms/pxL7SU >great interview w CEO of Stetson: generalism as a skill, challenges of self-honesty etc – strong recommend #entarch
• toddbiske: RT @skemsley: Org Charts and Architecture Management – same problems for managing specialized COEs such as BPM http://j.mp/q8p5i2
• CreatvEmergence: “I don’t think there’s any artist of any value who doesn’t doubt what they’re doing” ~Francis Ford Coppola via @jhagel >must admit that right now I’m really glad to hear that…
• SAlhir: RT @ddrrnt: Uncertainty, Innovation, and the Alchemy of Fear – http://bit.ly/nIxBb2
• SAlhir: RT @LeadToday: Before you quit remember why you started. >another point I need to remember at the moment…
• vernaallee: RT @timkastelle: Excellent post by @jabaldaia Organizational behavior on #Innovation http://bit.ly/qv7sHw
• DavidGurteen: Harold Jarche: “the truth is utterly concealed” http://bit.ly/qyBprF #collab #orgarch #sustainability
• SAlhir: RT @MarkOOakes: Innovation & comfort don’t coexist. By definition, Innovation creates uncertainty. Hence, Innovators embrace discomfort >however, discomfort does not in itself cause innovation – beware of false-logic here?
• unorder: RT @mschenkau: Anecdote: Using social norms to change behaviour http://bit.ly/p9JlDj >apply to adoption for #e20 #bpm #entarch etc?
• business_design: Excellent! RT @fieltnotes: @business_design You will like this too: Why We Sketch http://bit.ly/ayRilE #bmgen >useful overview of visual-notetaking etc
• simonbrown: Interesting discussion RT @TotherAlistair: Nice and thoughtful comments posted to Last Responsible Moment Reconsidered http://a.cockburn.us/3227. >applies to all forms of #decisionmaking – in #entarch and elsewhere
• gkathan: RT @IQmatrix: Here is a Visual Thinking Metaphor that will help you clarify your goals — http://ow.ly/6Qh5D #visualthinking
• SAlhir: RT @EskoKilpi: Human interaction cannot be understood as predictive processes but as patterns http://bit.ly/fF59CU #entarch #collab

All manner of stuff about collaboration online:

• DavidGurteen: Publicness and Real Love by @euan http://bit.ly/p7tN6B #collab #socbiz #socmedia #society
• oscarberg: Culture Challenges and Adoption with Collaboration http://flpbd.it/7axK by @collabguy #e20 #socbiz #collab
• craighepburn: Great social site recommendation by @dtapscott http://www.tigweb.org/ [Taking IT Global] largest online community of youth interested in global positive change
• craighepburn: Connected networks = social production = self organization which is driving the worlds revolutions &cultural shifts quicker than ever before
• thoughttrans: RT @jeffjarvis: Do you think Aetna cares that so many hate it so much? Doubt it. That’s its business plan. Hassle=profit. http://j.mp/l36Ue9 >’Aetna Hate’ website: good example of social-media as mutual-support network for clients transitioning to anti-clients… #entarch
• getstoried: +1 RT @karlaarcher: Don’t be afraid to tell your story. It’s yours for a reason >> http://goo.gl/fb/XvxVs #blogging #storytelling via @creding >applies to #bizstory too

The usual spread of IT-related stuff:

• practicingEA: #Forrester Communities: Preparing for 2011 release of top trends for EA to watch. Preview http://bit.ly/oOlObg #entarch #itarch
• BillIves: RT @dhinchcliffe: The Next Generation Enterprise Platform http://ow.ly/6LhjG by @mfauscette >is about #itarch not #entarch (of course?), but relevant anyway
• basvg: new post in TOGAF-series: Figuring out the baseline architecture and target architecture. http://j.mp/rs47x2 or http://j.mp/pNJAOO #entarch #itarch #TOGAF
• practicingEA: RT @fauzanmohd: EA: Zachman weighs in on cloud’s effect on enterprise architecture: John Zachman created the Zachman Framework m… http://bit.ly/oW74Ae >good points on #cloud / #itarch and, eventually, #entarch too
• davidsprott: Mission impossible? Or how to achieve the SOA vision. http://tinyurl.com/6h6ub3u #itarch #entarch
• davidsprott: SOA Reboot – How to Use a Business-Focused Approach in #SOA Design and Governance http://tinyurl.com/68hgjmf #itarch
• greefhorst: KPI’s for Enterprise Architecture: http://www.smartkpis.com/kpi/functional-areas/information-technology/enterprise-architecture/pag2.html >useful resource, if more for #itarch than #entarch
• tetradian: (via @empiricator) InfoQ on IBM’s Service-Oriented Enterprise http://bit.ly/qgFBZe >yet more IT-centric  ‘ #entarch ‘: yawn..
• chrisdpotts: #ITarch – your highest priority: the principles for creating great architecture with consumer IT & tactics for making sure they’re applied. >dunno about ‘highest priority’, but important for most current contexts, yes

Stuff about the societal big-picture:

• BillIves: RT @dhinchcliffe: How Did the Robot End Up With My Job?: http://nyti.ms/niEduo future belongs to those who co-create it #bizarch #economics #society
• gkathan: culture = language, beliefs, values and norms, custom roles, knowledge, and skills which combine to make up the way of life of any society >applies to orgs/enterprises as much as to nations etc
• SAlhir: RT @Digitaltonto We Won. They Lost. Right? http://bit.ly/mRo8Uc >nicely ironic meta-analogy… #society #culture #economics #orgarch
• SAlhir: RT @CoCreatr values, valuation, valuta, #futureofmoney [new post]: If money itself becomes the commodity http://bit.ly/oauC2L #futureofwork >sigh… yet more attempts to apply tissue band-aids to an inherently broken and inherently non-functional system…
• SAlhir: RT @Jabaldaia Integrative thinking and the misuse of power http://bit.ly/epCV52 #society
• oscarberg: RT @LOLGOP: It’s official. More people have been arrested for protesting Wall Street than for crashing our economy. >in such a dysfunctional model of the ‘economy’, is anyone surprised at this…?
• SAlhir: RT @the99percent Settle in for Sunday reading… The Michael Lewis World Tour of Economic Collapse: http://cot.ag/oHUelq >series of articles in Vanity Fair:Iceland, Greece, Ireland, Germany, California #economics #society
• SAlhir: RT @sapinker Compassion Fatigue – NYTimes.com http://nyti.ms/qv4iUO >key issue for responsibility-based cultures #society #entarch #economics
• SAlhir: RT @umairh @cate_long: “Truth is, there are no real lines dividing Wall St & Main St & Washington” http://wapo.st/cPScM1 by @moorehn
• chrisdpotts: Macroeconomic #entarch:  world economy will grow from people’s Enterprise, individually & structurally, in exploiting Capital (all forms).
• CreatvEmergence: Co-creative Global Citizens – new blog post http://shar.es/bmDul >Michelle James – always innovative, always worth reading
• 5Di: +1 RT @HarvardBiz What Shareholder Value is Really About http://s.hbr.org/nwc03d – Enterprise Debt? #entarch >as usual, HBR article confuses price with ‘value’, with one stakeholder-group arbitrarily privileged over all others…
• gkathan: RT @HarvardBiz: How To Make Companies Think Long-Term http://s.hbr.org/o0VimF >yes, a good start to corp-reform – much, much more is needed
• tetradian: (via @thoughttrans) Jeff Jarvis: #OccupyWallStreet & the failure of institutions http://bit.ly/q6Sjsx >loss of trust kills any structure for #society or #economics etc
• gkathan: RT @manfredbodner: a beautiful #vision how to save the world in 4min50sec – and how to get 45mio americans off #foodstamps http://youtu.be/HR-YrD_KB0M >yes: now one further step – shift to a responsibility-based model, not a possession-based one #society #economics
• CreatvEmergence: The visual story of Occupy Wall Street I The Atlantic http://bit.ly/nkTwzz via @deb_lavoy
• jdevoo: RT @tomfid: We’re in deep doodoo when geoengineering rises to the top of the agenda http://goo.gl/TT81m >yup… someone hasn’t heard of Department of Unintended-Consequences, have they…
• jdevoo: RT @VenessaMiemis: How Can Business-to-Business Trade Networks Build Local Resilience? http://bit.ly/o8UFdq #futureofmoney #localeconomy >useful review of the context, but as usual gets lost in the delusion that some currency-based model is ‘the solution’…
• Eclectopedic: http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/ The previous RT of those no longer part of the 99% is incredibly sad, but these stories are almost as compelling. >the same reasons behind the ‘Arab Spring’, now arousing in the US as well
• SAlhir: RT @umairh: An economy without a working social contract is like a brain without a mind. >certainly one without a heart, anyway
• SAlhir: RT @loopdiloop: The creative class is a lie – Salon.com http://j.mp/qeVRRP >interesting read #culture #society #economics
• SAlhir: RT @euan The great thing about my kids’ schools having so many rules is that it helps build their dissent muscles. #society #culture
• CreatvEmergence: The Case for Play, storytelling, role-playing – http://chronicle.com/article/The-Case-for-Play/126382/ #society #culture
• SAlhir: RT @sexythinker As movements like #occupywallstreet think more about “Conscience-Creative-Connected Capitalism” http://bit.ly/pjt97a >yes, huge change is needed: which is why they lost me at “profitable growth”, and it went steadily further downhill at every step… deckchairs-on-Titanic again, exactly what’s not needed right now… ::sigh::
• jdevoo: RT @dkorten: A dynamite #occupywallstreet video http://bit.ly/qPfCmR #neweconomy >’Arab Spring’, anyone?
• SAlhir: RT @goonth Sage words from @rushkoff -> Think Occupy Wall St. is a phase? You don’t get it. http://ht.ly/6RpRG
• basvg: RT @Lefsetz: 30 years ago we had Steve Jobs, Johnny Cash, and Bob Hope. Now, 30 years later in America, we have no jobs, no cash, no hope. >”coming soon – World Tour!” …
• ironick: RT @jeremyscahill: At bank, I joked w banker. “I was just on Wall St protesting you.” He replied, “I was there protesting me too.” #OWS

A back-and-forth about a harshly-critical view of current economic theory:

• smbounds: RT @socialtechno: How economists lost touch with reality (and were proud of it.) John Kay  http://bit.ly/nKjMLY >yep…
• Cybersal: @tetradian That John Kay article you tweeted is brilliant http://bit.ly/pVpNsr Same argument could be applied to #entarch
• tetradian: @Cybersal “Same argument could be applied to #entarch ” – yes, exactly – like you, I do wish more EA folks recognised that fact… sigh… // (it’s also why I suggest that whole-enterprise EA could have an important role to play in bringing us to a more sane economics…)
• ironick: Wow! John Kay: Absurdity of #economics. demand 4 universality,consistency&rigor is ideology not science http://bit.ly/rs8IES ht @tetradian

A variety of insightful responses to the death of Steve Jobs:

• davidcushman: RT @karaswisher: So much more poignant now: Apple Steve Jobs Narrating The Crazy Ones – 1997 http://youtu.be/8rwsuXHA7RA >an incredibly powerful reminder of what we can indeed do…
• SAlhir: RT @dhinchcliffe: RT @joshgreenman: Another Jobs lesson: education, pedigree and market dominance are ultimately no match for imagination.
• thoughttrans: RT @thisissethsblog: Seth’s Blog: A eulogy of action http://bit.ly/qImS25 >great response from Seth Godin
• joemckendrick: Steve Jobs: seven ways he taught us to ‘think different’ http://smrt.io/oFqPx3
• oscarberg: RT @jwmoss: Steve Jobs was born out of wedlock, put up for adoption at birth, dropped out of college, then changed the world. What’s your excuse?
• thinksmith: Tears again today…but a different kind: via @TheOnion – Last American Who Knew What The Fuck He Was Doing Dies http://onion.com/pQtc5S >well, yes, that’s the Onion, isn’t it? – “praising with faint damns”, one might say…
• SAlhir: RT @gabrielroth @evangineer: corporation is most powerful tool we’ve ever invented.typically used as club or lever.SJobs used as paintbrush.
• SAlhir: RT @gapingvoid: My #SteveJobs tribute is also a free high-rez download http://bit.ly/pC3Key Feel free to print out etc. >a version of ‘The Crazy Ones’ done as only Hugh can…
• SAlhir: Steve Jobs didn’t http://bit.ly/oI1Amq >quietly brilliant – strong recommend for #entarch #bizarch #orgarch etc

And, of course, all the other stuff:

• SAlhir: RT @storiedstrategy A Map of Woman’s Heart: Rare Vintage Gem from the 1800s | Brain Pickings http://ow.ly/6L3OG >hm… nothing much changed in almost 200 years, I see…
• davidriveroll: Useful WordPress Code Snippets and Hacks | webexpedition18 http://bit.ly/q8CsDC // A comparison of leading WordPress theme frameworks | Webdesigner Depot http://bit.ly/pJgRrn via @feedly
• business_design: 10% of my time I’d love being an employee who’s told what to do. 85% of my time I’m excited to be an entrepreneur. 5% = just lost… >agree – though I’d make that ‘just lost…’ figure a lot higher…
• vernaallee: Extraordinary Living Bridges Made of Growing Roots and Vines http://inhabitat.com/extraordinary-living-bridges-are-made-of-growing-roots-and-vines/
• CreatvEmergence: Science & aesthetics -The Feynman Series (pt 1) – Beauty [video] http://youtu.be/cRmbwczTC6E via @edwardharran >the irrepressible Richard Feynman narrates this quietly-beautiful 5min video
• DavidGurteen: It is in your moments of decision that your destiny is shaped. Anthony Robbins http://bit.ly/pkTuRg >or, in long moments of indecision, where it slumps like a tired souffle…
• SAlhir: RT @FredCuellar: 10 Things To Stop Caring About Today http://j.mp/nvX0Fv via @zite >another useful reminder…
• davidriveroll: Just posted a photo http://instagr.am/p/PKiwr/ >okay, so I happen to like old doorknockers…
• SAlhir: RT @robbiecat How much does it cost to develop an iPad App? http://bit.ly/pUYMcb via @polymash #mobile #iPad >in short, not cheap…
• DavidGurteen: Two basic rules of life: 1) Change is inevitable. 2) Everybody resists change. W. Edwards Deming http://bit.ly/r7iUd2
• jdevoo: RT @Modernegezegden: Born before about 1990? Then this pic will tickle you;  http://yfrog.com/o0lehhij >nice – “what’s the link between a pencil and a cassette-tape?”

So: here’s the background.

No-one would doubt that, globally speaking, we all have a few problems at present. Global financial crash, some serious environmental overshoots, an evident reshuffle going on in the global power-positioning between various nation-states, and increasing social unrest even (or perhaps especially) in so-called ‘developed’ countries.

Yet those are almost trivial compared to what any competent futurist could see coming up on the horizon. Seriously.

So much of “Seriously.”, in fact, that there’s no possible way that we’d still be able to survive long-term – or even medium-term – with what we currently think of as ‘business-as-usual’. And I don’t just mean business-survival or suchlike – I mean survival. Period.

Hence we’re talking about an urgent need here for some truly fundamental changes. Not just minor tweaks of the deckchairs on the Titanic.

We still see lots of attempts at such ‘tweaking’, of course. The most popular seems to be about trying to tweak individual parts of the existing money-system – which by now everyone knows isn’t going to work. Perhaps the next most popular type of tweak is the search for ‘alternative currencies‘. Yet all of those ideas fail at the first hurdle, because the real source of the problem goes much deeper than that. Trying to build yet another structure on top of something that already doesn’t work is kinda futile, really…

The real problem is about possession. But it isn’t about who has the money, or who possesses the property: those kinds of problems are ‘fixable’ by ordinary political means. No: the real problem is the entire concept of possession itself. And that’s a lot deeper than just politics: that one really is fundamental.

And the problem is that possession doesn’t work. It never has. That’s the whole point. The notion that “possession makes the world go round” is a total delusion: most times, possession is what makes it go stop. Which, ultimately, is why it guarantees a world that doesn’t work. (Like now. Only worse.)

‘Possession’ is a screaming toddler’s refusal to share – a refusal to accept that the complexities and responsibilities that make a social world viable are always mutual, and must necessarily apply to everyone.

To be blunt, the myth of ‘possession’ arose when some foolish parent failed to pacify and placate a selfish, self-centred, screaming child. Kind of embarrassing to realise that so much of our vaunted ‘world-economy’ has its roots in the nursery, in the possessive temper-tantrum of a child lost in the ‘terrible twos’. Most children do grow out of it, eventually; but some don’t grow out of it at all – and that’s where the problems start…

Unfortunately, too many two-year-olds learnt that screaming and stealing and hitting people and holding onto things that they don’t need will seem to give them ‘control’ over others. The screamers do indeed ‘get results’, for themselves, for a while – but only by making it harder and harder for everyone else to sort out the resultant mess.

More unfortunately, it’s very addictive: it gives apparently-good results in the short-term, but at the cost of screwing things up in the longer-term.

Even more unfortunately, it’s also very infective: when stealing ‘wins’, who wants to be the ‘loser’? Which is why, some 5000 years or so after this mistake first became established - apparently starting within a small sub-clan somewhere in what later became called Mesopotamia – we now have an entire global structure that actively rewards even the most obsessive self-centredness, and actively punishes almost any form of responsibility. Which is why we now have a global economy and a global environment right on the brink of total collapse. Oops…

So, what do we about it?

Let’s start right from the beginning:

The core foundation of all economics and social structures is a ‘value-network’ of interlocking mutual responsibilities.

That part of ‘the economy’ does still work. And we know it works, because we can see it do so in many different contexts and at many different scales, from high-functioning households to the internals of high-functioning businesses, and in most of the now-few ‘traditional’ societies that have so far managed to withstand the ravages of ‘development’.

A possession-based economy is, in effect, a dysfunctional overlay on top of a responsibility-based economy. To be blunt, a selfish-child’s version of an economy, in which everything is deemed to be centred solely around themselves. (Technically, it’s a ‘subject-based’ model: all others are deemed to be subjects of self.)

The fundamental basis of a possession-economy is that it ignores or rejects outright many of the mutual-responsibilities that make an economy viable and sustainable over the longer-term. In effect, it ‘sweeps the mess under the carpet’, and attempts to conceal the mess via a myth of ‘infinite growth’. Yet those responsibilities don’t simply disappear because we ignore them: they’re still there, still gathering metaphoric interest (to use the monetary term). So when the myth of ‘infinite growth’ hits up against the real-world’s finite limits – which is what’s happening now – the whole thing is going to come apart at the seams. At that point, the only viable option is to reinstate what does actually work: a responsibility-based economics.

Which means that we’ll have to dismantle the entire superstructure of possession, and everything built on top of that as well; and then rebuild a new set of structures pretty much from scratch, starting from right down at the root-level, and then building upward again from there. Which is definitely a non-trivial challenge: but we really do not have any choice about that. (If we want to survive, that is…)

The catch is that the change-over has to be total: no exceptions at all. Possession is highly-addictive, and fatally-infective: if we allow any of it to remain, it will destroy the economy all over again – and we won’t be able to survive another mess like this one. There’s no getting round that fact: it really is all, or nothing. Literally.

Which where it gets kinda scary…

Possession has to go. Perhaps doesn’t sound so bad at first, because it might seem too abstract to matter. But we mean that this applies to all notions of possession, in every one of its real-world forms. No exceptions. No exceptions.

Which means barter has to go too, because barter assumes that we must already possess something, in an exclusive sense, in order to be able to exchange it for something else.

Which means that money, or currency in any form, also has to go, because in effect that’s just an overlay on top of barter.

Which means, among other things, that the entire monetary-system has to go; the entire banking-system and finance-system has to go; the entirety of microeconomics, the entire system of pricing and valuation, yes, that all has to go too. And the entire tax-system has to be re-thought from scratch, along with the entire social-benefits system, the fundamentals of the insurance-system, the fundamentals of most medical-care systems, the fundamentals of most forms of trade, and much, much, much more.

The entirety of the property-system needs to be restructured from scratch, refocussed around responsibilities: in a responsibility-based economy, we own something not because we claim to ‘possess’ it, but because we declare and demonstrate responsibility for it.

Yep: this isn’t something that we can fix up with a few minor tweaks here and there – which is all that most people seem to be aiming for at present. It’s big. Really big. Huge. And yet it’s probably the only chance that we have to get out of this mess.

And just to make it even more fun, we also have to remove all forms of possession in the social sphere. Of which the most important, most pervasive, and most pernicious, is the concept of ‘rights’. (Ouch… not going to be popular for saying that, am I? )

Yet the blunt fact is that ‘rights’ aren’t real: they only exist because of the mutual responsibilities that create the conditions that we want when we talk of ‘rights’. And the other blunt fact is that most so-called ‘rights’ are actually little more than a sneaky method to evade key aspects of the mutuality of those responsibilities, and attempt to offload the responsibilities onto everyone else. Which is, technically, a form of abuse – and hence, in many cases, a fully state-sponsored form of structural abuse against those who are deemed not to have the respective ‘rights’. Which is why things often don’t work very well – especially whenever someone insists on bringing their purported ‘rights’ into the picture… Most so-called ‘human rights’ exist solely to compensate for someone else’s so-called ‘rights’: and the only viable way to sort out the resultant shambles is to get rid of the whole mess of ‘rights’, and focus on the responsibilities instead.

In short, the entire notion of ‘rights’ is a form of possession – or more often the ‘anti-possession’ of a claimed absence of responsibility. Which is why ‘rights’ have to go, too.

Yes, I’m serious: no rights. For anyone. Anywhere. Ever. Instead, we have to replace every single purported ‘right’ with social-structures that are based on the actual underlying mutual-responsibilities, to deliver the same overall results, and more. (That’s not hard to do, by the way: most businesses do it internally all of the time, in one way or another. Yet for many people, though, the ending of the delusion of ‘rights’ is definitely going to be the hardest part of this to face…)

So: no possession, no barter, no money, and no rights. Think that might mean a few changes to most our existing institutions, then…?

Which, in turn, is why most of those institutions aren’t likely to be much help here either:

• Would you trust a banker to supervise the end of the entire banking-system?
• Would you trust a lawyer to supervise the end of most current law?
• Would you trust an economist to rethink the entire economy?
• Would you trust a government to rethink the entire nature of government?

Hmm… probably not?

So who could do this work that so obviously and urgently needs to be done?

It’s going to need someone with a solid background in futures. Most futurists, though would, only deal with the abstract, the future – they don’t deal much with the nitty-gritty of ‘the now’.

It’s going to need someone with some solid experience in negotiation, in governance, and design for governance. A lot of people in the social-work space could do that – but they usually don’t have much experience of futures, or of dealing with anything that isn’t primarily about people.

It’s going to need to need a total re-think of business-processes, business-models and business in general, in just about every possible field of work. Most business analysts could do that, if it was all about money – which it isn’t. Which kind of rules them out for this work as well.

It’s going to need to cross an enormous scope – in a way, it’d be literally everything. Not a good role for single-domain specialists, then.

Which kinda bring us back to the skillsets of the enterprise-architect: futures-oriented, but practical; people-oriented, but with a solid grasp of the technical too; a lot of experience with re-thinking every aspect of business, outside of a purely money-oriented scope; and above all, consummate generalists.

So yeah, does kinda look like the ball’s in our court, doesn’t it?

Hmm…

Comments, anyone?

Step 1: The aim of the ‘thought-experiment’ is to devise a form of governance for a responsibility-based economics for an enterprise of any scale. What we’ll be working on during this thought-experiment is identifying the core constraints for a ‘to-be’ architecture for that requirement.

(Ultimately, we’d need to be talking about governance for economics at a global scale, but it might be best to start with something a bit smaller: your own organisation, for example, in relation to its industry and business-context.)

Step 2: For the purposes of the thought-experiment, take it as a given that any claim of ‘possession’, in any form whatsoever, will cause failure of the respective economic system in the medium- to longer-term. We must therefore class all forms and variants of possession as ‘disallowed’ from the to-be architecture.

(See the previous posts for the background to this assertion. It does happen to be true, but for now let’s bypass any argument by saying that we’re just using it as a nominally-arbitrary assumption for a thought-experiment.)

Step 3: For the purpose here, take it also as a given that possession, and hence all of its overlays, is itself an overlay on top of a responsibility-based economy – a structure of interlocking mutual responsibilities. Because of this, everything that would perhaps more usually be described in terms of possession or its derivatives – the ‘disallowed’ items from the previous step – may instead be described in terms of mutual responsibilities.

(Again, see the previous posts for the detail on that, but for now just take it as an assumption “solely for the purposes of the thought-experiment” etc.)

Step 4: Outline a ‘to-be’ architecture whose core content consists of the responsibility-based replacements for all ‘disallowed’ items. No exceptions can be permitted, because any instance of a possession-based model will inevitably ‘infect’ and eventually destroy the sustainability of the responsibility-based model.

– Step 4a: All concepts of exclusive-possession are ‘disallowed’; societal management of those resources must be described in terms of personal responsibilities for and to those resources, and interlocks between mutual responsibilities for the use (‘exploitation’) of those resources, including all responsibilities to others either elsewhere or elsewhen.

– Step 4b: All concepts of ‘anti-possession’ – a purported ‘right’ to not be responsible for some aspect of a managed resource – are also ‘disallowed’; governance-mechanisms should be defined so as to ensure that the respective personal and/or mutual responsibilities are not evaded.

– Step 4c: All concepts of possession of inherent priority, privilege or ‘entitlement’ are ‘disallowed’. (Note that this means that, by definition, all concepts of supposed ‘rights’ must be ‘disallowed’ – including all purported property rights, right to free speech, right to silence, women’s rights, etc. Which, yes, is going to be seriously challenging for a lot of folks… but for now, play safe, and keep reminding people that this is ‘only a thought-experiment’.) Instead, identify the mutual responsibilities that underpin and/or are evaded in order to create the context for each purported ‘right’ at present, and – as for ‘anti-possession’ – devise governance that would resolve and prevent evasion of mutual-responsibilities in that context.

– Step 4d: From 4a and 4c, all concepts of exclusive ‘property rights’ are ‘disallowed’: this includes physical-property, real-estate, land-title, so-called ‘intellectual property’, brands, cultural-stories and the like. Note that in effect this also includes beliefs about ‘possession of the truth’, such as are common in many forms of law, and in scientism and in similar models of religious or quasi-religious belief. Identify the mutual-responsibilities and evasions of responsibilities that underpin all of these ‘possessions’, and sketch out forms of governance that do also acknowledge and respect people’s emotional and spiritual attachment to things, to places and to ideas.

– Step 4e: All concepts of ‘possession’ of others are ‘disallowed’. Note that such concepts are commonly either explicit or implied in many social relationships, such as employment-contracts, marriage, notions of ‘custody’ of children, etc. As above, identify the actual responsibilities that would be required in each case – taking into account the fundamental differences that would apply in a non-possession-based economic and societal model – and sketch out governance that would support those responsibilities and their mutualities.

– Step 4f: Scan language in use within the context, for possessives such as ‘my’ , ‘your’, ‘his’, ‘hers’, ‘their’, ‘its’, ‘the company’s’ etc, to identify any implied forms or assertions of ‘possession’. All such forms would be classed as ‘disallowed’, as above; identify, document and model the underlying mutual-responsibilities, also as above.

– Step 4g: All concepts of barter presume the existence of a possession-based model of ‘right to exchange’, and hence are automatically ‘disallowed’. Identify the mutual responsibilities implied by any barter-exchange, and devise alternative mechanisms – and governance for those mechanisms – that are based on the actual underlying responsibilities.

– Step 4h: All concepts of ‘currency’ (including money, tokens, time-based currencies, money-based taxes or fines etc) represent purported possession-based ‘rights to resources’, and hence are automatically ‘disallowed’. As for barter above, identify the mutual-responsibilities – and, often, evasions of responsibilities – that underly such concepts, and devise alternative exchange-mechanisms and governance that are based on the actual underlying responsibilities.

(Note that all of the above is the minimum that would need to be in place in order to create and maintain a viable and sustainable economy. A lot of this might no doubt seem seem seriously scary, but it’s essential to realise that there can be no exceptions here. We can’t cling on to some favoured part of the possession-economy, because any remnant part of the existing possession-based structures will inevitably destroy everything – there is no way round that bald fact. Hence the work here.

Don’t forget that, by definition, every form of ‘possession’ and every so-called ‘right’ is actually based on mutual-responsibilities: the responsibilities themselves are rarely acknowledged, and the mutualities of those responsibilities even less so, yet without them, the ‘right’ or whatever would not and could not exist. To illustrate this, try a very simple exercise: take that classic US description of ‘the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’, and identify the responsibilities that underpin each of those ‘rights’. In reality, every ‘right’ is an arbitrary fiction; but the responsibilities that underly them are real. Hence why we really are best off by discarding the entire concept of ‘rights’, and keep a firm focus on the real responsibilities instead.)

Step 5: Sketch out mechanisms of exchange, and forms of governance for such exchange and relationship, that fully enact and support all of the mutual-responsibilities identify within all the work of the previous step. Document and model all of this as a ‘to-be’ enterprise-architecture for the respective scope.

(Most of this is a straightforward ‘to-be’ architecture-modelling exercise: it’s focussed on governance rather than, say, IT-applications or physical infrastructure, but the principles and process are exactly the same as usual.)

Step 6 (optional):  Map out an ‘as-is’ architecture for the same scope, based on the various current possession-based structures.

(This again should be straightforward: in essence, it’s just describing what we already know and, uh, love…)

Step 7 (optional – requires Step 6): Develop a gap-analysis between ‘to-be’ and ‘as-is’, to identify requirements for change from the present context to a viable and sustainable responsibility-based socioeconomic model.

(This is the part that gets seriously scary for a lot of people… Notice how many existing institutions simply don’t exist any more in the ‘to-be’ model: banks, insurances, pensions, monetary taxes, most concepts of ‘valuation’, the entire money-system, large chunks of the legal system, large chunks of current education, religion, science, and much else besides. What’s interesting is what doesn’t change: for example, most market transactions still have to happen somehow, but via a responsibility-based model rather than via ‘rights of exclusion’.)

Once all of this is done, documented, discussed with stakeholders and the rest… – only then can we sensibly start talking about possible ‘solutions’, ‘roadmaps for change’, and the like.

(Again, this is standard architecture-practice: other than for Agile-style exploratory experiments, we don’t talk about ‘solutions’ until the requirements are properly understood. There are way too many people wanting to rush off into some form or other of instant-’solution’ – particularly around would ‘alternative-currencies’ and the like – but it’s a complete waste of time and effort unless and until this work is done…)

Oh, and in case you wondered whether any of this is feasible? – if so, perhaps take a look at some the various state-wide or nation-wide emergency-management legislation scattered around the globe…? In Australia, for example, the person in charge of a declared emergency already has the legal right to take possession of anything at all “as he sees fit”, offering only “such compensation as he sees fit”: and there’s nothing whatsoever to stop a government declaring a national-scale emergency and literally taking possession of the whole country – with no payment required at all. The same will almost certainly also be true for your own country… interesting, huh?

Anyway, try this out for yourself, if you would? – and let me know what insights arise for you in doing so, perhaps?

Enterprise-architecture and the other ‘business big-picture’ stuff:

• SAlhir: RT @Jabaldaia Network analysis in innovation may surprise us http://bit.ly/nDy4eA
• ArtBourbon: RT @pbmobi: (high-level) Enterprise Backbone of Nespresso   http://bit.ly/mOJTuL #entarch #bizarch >>plus comment from me [ArtBourbon]
• jdevoo: RT @maxjpucher: Untamed Processes at #BPM Forum 2011 http://wp.me/pNFv-qh #ACM >> pre-req: systems thinking
• business_design: Impressively accurate mindmap of my #BIF7 talk about the #bmgen book story by @AmandaFenton http://goo.gl/C9XIP cc @theBIF >useful first-hand example of product business-drivers
• CreatvEmergence: Broken Logic, the Age of Uncertainty and Emergence by @Digitaltonto http://bit.ly/nyHAVr via @complexified
• business_design: Excellent observation RT @SAI: Microsoft Needs A New Business Model For Windows 8 Tablets by @fromedome http://read.bi/nDBwHu #bmgen >good illustration of what happens to predatory business-models…
• ironick: RT @WENOVSKI: Design Thinking = continually changing your mind about #DesignThinking >good point… #entarch
• Bebela239: RT @dtapscott: RT @Social_Innovate: FastCompany: Hassle Maps: The Genesis Of Demand http://bit.ly/p6LOSO #bmgen
• Bebela239: RT @Jabaldaia: RT @johnrougeux: @Jabaldaia @behradmirafshar if you’re interested in design thinking for change, check out Design Impact: http://j.mp/qRgMxq
• Bebela239: RT @gigaom: The smarter enterprise http://dlvr.it/n0X8G >nice sales-pitch for #cloud?
• davidcushman: Facebook’s broken strategy: http://bit.ly/qB365V #bmgen #bizarch #entarch
• Bebela239: RT @Digitaltonto: Content Strategy vs. Content Skills http://bit.ly/qy5QEb >useful distinction #bmgen #bizarch
• gkathan: RT @ebuise: #Complexity Awareness: (book) http://bit.ly/nifs6C. Incl.  table of Open & Closed approaches via @complexified @mijori23  @TriarchyPress >interesting… #entarch etc
• getstoried: Amen RT @clementyeung: Can you really say you’re an effective listener when your objective is to convert people to your way of thinking? >hm… good point in #entarch etc…
• tetradian: [post] Rethinking the architecture of management http://bit.ly/odw1ZT #entarch #business #culture
• bergmart: 2011 is the year of a breakthrough in EA in Netherlands: finally EA is getting attention from boardroom #entarch >hooray! – “some sense at last / sense at last / great god almighty, sense at last!”
• oscarberg: Sometimes I realize that not everyone is working in fast-paced knowledge-intense businesses >yep…
• vernaallee: Update on the Value Delivery Modeling Language: Advances in Value Modeling | ValueNetworks.com http://shar.es/HLEuy >important development for whole-enterprise #entarch etc
• gkathan: RT @veronicamassoud: This is for those who love #servicedesign – a brilliant recommended book list http://www.servicedesignbooks.org/browse/
• DavidGurteen: Blog Post: Five quotations that represent my values http://bit.ly/pqO913 >core #entarch for one of the leading figures of #km etc
• joemckendrick: Is cloud computing too good to be true? Ask these nine questions first http://onforb.es/nSX9ju >solid advice from a respected IT-industry commentator #bizarch #entarch
• aojensen: Could gov’t #entarch and transparency avoid a financial crisis double dip? Yes, if euro countries had a shared policy architecture. // Shared policies of financial control and instruments could support much better control of risks in gov’t #entarch.
• practicingEA: Tripping on your shoelaces – is it possible for IT to lead too much? http://bit.ly/qXGuQj >a good leading-question from Brian Hopkins – post your replies on the Forrester site? #entarch
• practicingEA: How do you get business leaders engaged in Enterprise Architecture? http://bit.ly/rswtC3 #entarch >classic IT-oriented view of #entarch, but useful anyway
• chrisdpotts: Reading a global enterprise’s report to investment analysts – talks extensively about Financial Architecture. #entarch #bizarch #bizecology >good news – very necessary
• DavidGurteen: When Knowledge Sharing Turns to Knowledge Hiding http://t.co/dZIcJgok >key issue is loss of trust… #entarch
• DavidGurteen: Dave Polllard: The End of Strategy http://bit.ly/nTIvMT >recommend #entarch
• chrisdpotts: Experiences-Oriented #entarch (principle): people’s actual experiences often differ from our design. Sometimes, they’re exactly the opposite
• gkathan: RT @HarvardBiz: Management Tip: Communicate Your Company’s Values http://s.hbr.org/qRQTec >’obvious’ but essential #entarch
• pedrorsousaea: By @adrianrcampbell: The difference between Business Architect and Business Analyst http://bit.ly/qpkCaU >useful comparison-table #entarch
• tetradian: [post] Management as ‘just another service’ http://bit.ly/o8JQcV #entarch #orgarch
• thoughttrans: RT @simonsinek: Tactics are the things you do. Strategy are the things you do together. One strategy always trumps lots of tactics.
• practicingEA: Forbes: Lesson from Netflix: customer experience is the lens through which decisions must be viewed http://onforb.es/ntqoTM #bizarch
• Bebela239: RT @dtapscott: RT @GuyKawasaki: Innovation lessons from non-profits http://is.gd/BqGud9 #bizarch
• Bebela239: RT @HuffingtonPost: Simple technologies can improve the lives of millions http://huff.to/qnQWEk > #bmgen for the real world…
• practicingEA: RT @alexcullen: From the Forrester Communities: Summarizing how you get business leaders engaged in EA http://community.forrester.com/thread/5234
• oscarberg: Control is an illusion. When you think you are in control, you are at most vulnerable. // Don’t strive for control (since it’s an illusion). Strive to be prepared for the unexpected. >Taylorists please note? #entarch
• taotwit: Finally got around to tarting-up 5Di website – says more about what we do & more tablet friendly http://bit.ly/cQUefl >important innovator in #entarch etc
• livsystems: RT @johnmaeda: Artists are trained to work on the minutest of details while simultaneously keeping the *whole* in full perspective. >is key to #entarch etc too
• nickmalik: [post] Governance in the “organic” enterprise http://bit.ly/nm3Hcy (inspired by @tetradian “Mgmt as a service”) #entarch #orgarch #CIO
• taotwit: via @ebuise @DavidHolzmer: Tom Atlee: Whole System Conversations and the Voice of the Whole http://bit.ly/ncJBdb #entarch
• taotwit: Recent conversations tell me “What is a ‘Service’” debate continues: back-to-the-future.. – posts from 2009: http://bit.ly/16Bcg and http://bit.ly/l7q49 #entarch
• taotwit: Just VPEC-T’d my own website – doh, all back to front! Note to self: eat my own dog food – will do better! // While kicking myself for falling into trap ‘Cobblers’ Children’ I found this http://bit.ly/pEaTdF // VPEC-T’d version of my website to follow soon – hopefully you’ll see the difference! >consultants need biz-plans too…
• SAlhir: RT @ericries The Lean Start Up – A Business Model for Online Course | Courses That Matter http://ericri.es/o9ur8e #bmgen
• taotwit: When is striving for Simplicity in IT-EA a good thing and when…? #entarch http://post.ly/3PZWW >an important challenge for #entarch…
• SAlhir: RT @flowchainsensei: Henry Mintzberg: “[re: MBA] total sham. You cannot create a manager or leader in classroom.” http://youtu.be/_NRWtd_SiU8 // “Lots of companies have totally lost any sense of community. We need to rebuild that sense.”
• EAatWork: [post] overview of concepts in proposed #archimate 2.0 motivation extension http://tinyurl.com/eaatwork-a-motivationextension #entarch #itarch
• business_design: Must read for innovators RT @Paul4innovating: Understanding Innovation the W L Gore Way http://shar.es/b1lBN #innochat #innovation #bmgen
• tetradian: [post] Rebalancing top-down management-architectures http://bit.ly/qeGsWh #orgarch #entarch
• getstoried: Have you read The Gort Cloud? Really smart #storytelling for green eco-entrepreneur movement – http://bit.ly/pEXlMA #bmgen #bizarch #anticlient #sustainability
• hebsgaard: Gil Yehuda: Open Source and Corporate Culture. http://bit.ly/oeiiuK #entarch
• blomr: [BizzDesign] We are setting next steps in the implementation of business models. From business model to architecture model to process innovation and back #itarch #entarch #bpm
• tetradian: [post] What is the boundary of a service? http://bit.ly/ruCaBU #entarch (thx @emovere)
• business_design: Interesting take on a new (business model) battle RT @claychristensen: Disruption, the iPad and the Kindle Fire: http://bit.ly/rnZsLP #bmgen
• rettema: Reading niche construction: as important as natural selection in evolution [Wikipedia] http://bit.ly/n5F5yY >applicable to #entarch #bmgen etc
• gkathan: RT @stevebanhegyi Before any culture can change radically, there needs to be a supporting foundation of shared values. #culture #merger >strong agree #entarch
• joyce_hostyn: the downside of SMART goals bit.ly/nHFFhR >interesting – but more ‘both/and’ than ‘either/or’? #entarch
• tetradian: [post] What can we simplify in enterprise-architectures? http://bit.ly/pOYhNn #entarch (thx @taotwit)
• CreatvEmergence: New blog post by @timkastelle: Make Your Own Map to Make Novel Connections – http://bit.ly/raMBwG #innovation
• ironick: RT @MrAlanCooper: Call it Gall’s Law: All complex systems end up accomplishing the opposite of their original intentions.
• DavidGurteen: Jack Vinson: Culture is nebulous, focus on what you can change http://bit.ly/rnLfza >focus on behaviours, not ‘culture’ – some good points here, not sure I fully agree #entarch
• thoughttrans: Sometimes I have too many big ideas for enterprises to comprehend. I need to keep my mouth shut more! >the joys of the internal idea-hamster…
• greblhad: A capability is always more than the sum of its parts #entarch
• basvg: stories about what can go wrong if you do not follow standards are both interesting and scary! #entarch
• rettema: Adaptive lag hypothesis in niche constructions http://www.anthro.utah.edu/PDFs/laland-ea-15-95.pdf
• gkathan: RT @tonybosma: OxfordEconomics: 6 seismic shifts that transform the global playing field and affect companies in all industries [PDF] http://pwc.to/q2hMfQ #report #trends
• gkathan: RT @simplicableanna: How to build a smoking hot enterprise taxonomy  http://bit.ly/qe2KrW #entarch #cio
• thoughttrans: “The passion in the (he)art” – One last post as my morphing continues.. http://ow.ly/6KzYV #bizarch #entarch

A brief back-and-forth re ‘visionary’ enterprise-architecture:

• thoughttrans: What happens when the #entarch is more of a visionary than the C-Levels of the organization? >good question…
• Limbrey: @tetradian @thoughttrans.  Depends – is the #entarch is a good salesman? (Or woman).
• thoughttrans: @limbrey Is it a salesman or his/her storytelling ability to paint the vision for the non-visionary? @tetradian #entarch

Very brief back-and-forth on the classic ‘five whys’ investigation-technique:

• taotwit: Five Whys: A technique for preventing leap-to-solution #bcdesign #entarch http://t.co/Js8BLBDH
• kdierc: @taotwit great technique, applying it for years now… Drives people crazy sometimes
• taotwit: @kdierc yes, illustrates why EAs need consulting skills to execute

Another brief back-and-forth on the relative-priority for IT and other technology in enterprise-architecture:

• gkathan: RT @strategyarch: Enterprise Architecture challenges: Organization culture & Dynamics comes first, Technology the last. #Entarch
• ArtBourbon: @tetradian only if the technology has a purely supporting function // by which I mean we have to stop equating technology with the IT department
• tetradian: @ArtBourbon true – in most cases they need to be considered in parallel/iteratively [also yes, strong agree re 'technology' broader than IT]
• ArtBourbon: @tetradian then we are of one mind – good eh?
• tetradian: @ArtBourbon nah, c’mon… be no fun if we agreed on everything, now would it?

A happy back-and-forth on ‘the most useful tool for enterprise-architecture’:

• chrisdpotts: RT @strategyarch: Which is the most useful tool for Enterprise Architects ? I say whiteboard. #Entarch >agreed
• MartijnLinssen: @tetradian @chrisdpotts @strategyarch: Which is the most useful tool for Enterprise Architects ? < A0 plotter by far
• tetradian: @MartijnLinssen A0 plotter is kinda outside my price-bracket… – guess I’ll have to stick with whiteboard for now?
• MartijnLinssen: @tetradian Same here, but clients usually have one. Makes for great conversation material
• greblhad: @tetradian @chrisdpotts @strategyarch @MartijnLinssen: Which is the most useful tool for Enterprise Architects ? < A great colleague
• enectoux: @greblhad @tetradian @chrisdpotts @strategyarch @MartijnLinssen our brains.
• m_vrijhoef: @tetradian @chrisdpotts @strategyarch Brown paper & port-its in many colors and sizes are even better than whiteboard!

Another quick back-and-forth on business-models:

• greblhad: If business models is truly about behaviour then we need to care about feedback more than structure #bmgen #entarch
• rettema: “@tetradian: RT @greblhad: If business models is truly about behaviour …feedback more than structure #bmgen #entarch” true but ? // behavior appr. char. is they work with empirical facts to predict future bhvr like #LSS #bmgen does not.

Yet another very brief back-and-forth, this time on trust and vision in enterprise-architectures:

• craighepburn: Im loving the new @british_airways ad campaign #ToFlyToServe Just hope the crew live up to the challenge.  http://twitpic.com/6sqjdd
• davidcushman: @craighepburn @british_airways that’s the thing about rediscovered Purpose. Don’t just say you do it, do what it means. Show it. >role of vision (‘Purpose’) in #entarch

All the person-to-person stuff (and person-within-person stuff too):

• bonifer: RT @adaptivecoach: When we work alone we are limited to our own abilities. When we ask others for help our collective power is limitless. >yeah, yeah, I know… just wish I could do it, is all…
• ArtBourbon: RT @adraffin: http://bit.ly/p1gYVh < Interesting: remit of #CIO expanding to all tech? Would this increase or reduce IT centrism? #entarch >under present tendencies, almost certainly IT-centrism… oh well…
• DavidGurteen: When Consensus Doesn’t Work http://bit.ly/oCkzV0 >recommend #decisionmaking
• DavidGurteen: Dilbert: The futility of setting goals http://bit.ly/pPBzxl > ::sigh::… painfully accurate, as always…
• SAlhir: RT @How2LeadChange Recommended resource :- “#ChangeManagement – facing up to the horror of it all”. http://tinyurl.com/333zya4 >ouch… but yes, definitely useful
• CreatvEmergence: frog design: 3 Things Wile E Coyote Teaches Us About Creative Intelligence I FastCo Design – http://bit.ly/hYT62x via @johnsonwhitney
• SAlhir: RT @intmf: How Teddy Bears Can Make Your Company More Ethical – Video – @HarvardBiz – http://is.gd/DCyKRG #collab #orgarch
• SAlhir: Communication, Conversation, Collaboration – Where are you? http://bit.ly/nVwros
• DavidGurteen: Blog Post: A conversation doesn’t just shuffle the deck of cards — it creates new ones http://t.co/vp32qXxW #km #collab
• chrisdpotts: RT @AlanSee: If you’re not speaking to the emotional side of the brain, you’re not talking to the decision maker … emotion makes people take action
• SAlhir: RT @CreatvEmerence @edwardharran: “Command and Control Only Leads to More Chaos” Margaret Wheatley: http://on.ft.com/pYJnEs cc @integral_org_au
• CreatvEmergence: A Permaculture way to organize people – http://bit.ly/oC5SAG via  @CurtisOgden #collab #orgarch
• CreatvEmergence: Better Ideas Through Failure I WSJ http://on.wsj.com/mP7jZi via @ralph_ohr
• Bonifer: Is leadership irrelevant? (no, just the old models) http://onforb.es/nTpaxY #gamechangers >sigh… (tho’ good to see that even Forbes is championing for real change in the current mess…)
• davegray: Some great new games on the #gamestorming blog http://gogamestorm.com // “Status Center” added by @SmartAsHell http://www.gogamestorm.com/?p=767 // “Merrill Covey Matrix” added by @lukehohmann http://www.gogamestorm.com/?p=775 // “Learning Matrix” added by @lukehohmann http://www.gogamestorm.com/?p=758 // “Question Balloons” added by @SmartAsHell http://www.gogamestorm.com/?p=740 // “Project Jeopardy” added by @ninmah http://www.gogamestorm.com/?p=743 // “Circles and Soup” added by @lukehohmann http://www.gogamestorm.com/?p=747 // “Crossfire” added by @ninmah http://www.gogamestorm.com/?p=753 #gamestorming
• SAlhir: RT @TheEconomist: Bosses think their firms are caring. Their minions disagree http://econ.st/odQpBz >oops… – even the term ‘minions’ illustrates this… #collab #entarch
• Bebela239: RT @HarvardBiz: CEOs not only need a new set of beliefs, they need the courage to act on them – @JeffreyPfeffer. http://s.hbr.org/n5XsG3 #FixtheSystem
• oscarberg: RT @GuyKawasaki: The importance of employee engagement [infographic] http://is.gd/rGD74n #entarch
• CreatvEmergence: RT @deb_lavoy Purpose, meaning & recognition more powerful motivators than economic self-interest I HBR s.hbr.org/nhsfHw #entarch #orgarch #NoRewards
• oscarberg: Collaboration and your company: Seven steps to get started http://bit.ly/rbpNCm by @GrahamHill via @krcraft @Choypw #collab
• BillIves: RT @rhappe: 18% of disengaged employees actually undermine their co-workers success @andyjankowski #SISV >yup – they become ‘anti-employees’, much like ‘anti-clients’
• ArtBourbon: RT @alainpaquin: Knowledge workers spend anywhere from 15%-35% of each day just searching for the right information – IDC report – pdf: http://ow.ly/6HC8V
• gkathan: RT @Leadershipfreak: Weak leaders control others – strong leaders release them. “You’ll lose if they can’t disagree” http://bit.ly/qP61b0
• taotwit: +1 RT @j4ngis Me like!  “The creative adult is the child who survived”  http://bit.ly/nqxL59 >’me like!’ too
• DavidGurteen: The easiest success measurement tool is a simple question. What did you do today to move forward? http://bit.ly/mUpJfL
• SAlhir: RT @flowchainsensei: Until folks understand fundamental differences between mindsets, ALL methods are top-down micro-waterfall mgmt vehicle
• thinksmith: RT @jessedee: Success: what people think it looks like; what it actually looks like http://yfrog.com/h7l7dbpj
• alphalo: An interview with me about open collaboration http://youtu.be/GnfZmo2tNwc // My thoughts on facilitation, workshops, and workshop workshops for social change http://youtu.be/MKPtDECoad4 >alpha is a key innovator in social-contexts #economics #society
• davegray: Design your obsolescence by @elliotfelix http://bit.ly/nYOVMh #collab #consulting
• gkathan: RT @Leadershipfreak: “The 4 Facets of Trust” by @GeoffreyWebb  http://bit.ly/pGlr9I – the pic is enough reason to drop over! #collab #entarch
• SAlhir: RT @flowchainsensei @hjarche: The Crisis of Meaning in the Knowledge Workforce http://ur1.ca/59eqr it’s the elephant in every boardroom >the irrepressible Luis Suares…
• DavidGurteen: Gandhi’s Top 10 Fundamentals for Changing the World http://bit.ly/rpClwn >1: Change yourself; 2: You are in control; 3: Forgive and let it go; 4: Without action you aren’t going anywhere; 5: Take care of this moment; 6: Everyone is human; 7: Persist; 8: See the good in people and help them; 9: Be congruent, be authentic, be your true self; 10: Continue to grow and evolve.
• CreatvEmergence: Keep Listening, but Start Talking by @johnsonwhitney – HBR http://bit.ly/oK666V < Why http://bit.ly/DprL5 is all particpatory learnng methds
• CreatvEmergence: RT @DavidHolzmer: Evolutionary Leadership: The Embodiment of Systems Being – Rethinking Complexity http://bit.ly/obmhrI
• gkathan: RT @jukkaam: Anti-Conventional Thinking (ACT): you should never criticize ideas in a brainstorm  http://bit.ly/nsu58r #creativity #innovation >another application of the business-anarchist theme
• DavidGurteen: Howard Jarche: The new knowledge worker http://bit.ly/pr8AXn #KM #collab #orgarch

The other person-to-person stuff that has some kind of medium in the middle:

• oscarberg: RT @mijori23: If #SocBiz doesn’t thrill employees it’s b/c it’s being driven at them instead of allowing them to pursue their interests >yep…
• craighepburn: RT @hybridoriental: I love this concept of ‘Customer Service 2.0′ by @nixonmcinnes http://nowtweet.it/407 #socbiz
• CreatvEmergence: Structure of interactive narrative “Designing Interactive Narrative” – @StephenDinehart’s lecture – http://lnkd.in/PACXRb
• joyce_hostyn: Measuring our way to future success http://slidesha.re/oGsHjh by @congbo connected world as relationship platform #servicedesign #cx
• livsystems: From the “wouldn’t a mat and a couple of marbles be cheaper” dept: http://youtu.be/VaNzbCtxtcY <- cool #ux though >yes, cool #ux – yet it subsumes all imagination: not a good idea…
• BillIves: post: Avoiding Analysis Paralysis from Information Overload http://bit.ly/qTEJ2b #km
• gkathan: RT @uxmag: New article- http://uxm.ag/jz – Service Design: Setting The Stage For The Consummate Experience – #ux #servicedesign
• SAlhir: RT @loopdiloop Field – Ephemeral Structures http://ow.ly/6I4WN >interesting network-visualisation in what turns out to be an advert for a cellphone
• davidcushman: Kindle Fire just confirms (again) for me the future isn’t device specific http://fasterfuture.blogspot.com/2010/09/device-centric-era-is-about-to-end.html
• davegray: Great post on collaboration and social flow from @lirons: http://bit.ly/nHKzj5 #socbiz #connectedco
• joyce_hostyn: RT @danmartell: What features your customers ask for is never as interesting as why they want them. http://awe.sm/5W2I6 #bmgen #product #servicedesign
• davegray: RT @counternotions: “There will come a point where the accumulated complexity of our existing systems is greater than the complexity of creating a new one.” >applies to a lot of contexts…
• practicingEA: RT @jameskobielus: Had a great idea. FrownBook. The social network for curmudgeons. There’s a “dislike” button. And a hair-trigger “unfollow” feature.
• oscarberg: Video about Eureka!, the social idea platform we use within Tieto (now productified) http://ht.ly/6JDoB #socbiz #innovation
• oscarberg: A short reminder why we’re doing this #socbiz thing http://slidesha.re/gMfpRh >yep… (and a quiet recommend…)
• rtolido: in case of fire, exit building BEFORE tweeting about it #slowtech http://bit.ly/qz4sL7 >becoming an internet classic, this one…

Anything IT-related:

• jdevoo: RT @LivWatson: XBRL Open Source Tools: http://bit.ly/nP5Khy
• gkathan: RT @cbcurran: #CIO Thoughts? : The 4 Types of CIO Dashboards http://bit.ly/15YHHU >useful summary #itarch #entarch
• adrianrcampbell RT @marcgeelen: on-line #archimate modeling tool http://bit.ly/qXQ1Sl #itarch #entarch
• gkathan: @RT @samarin: <blog post> Writing IT strategy http://bit.ly/ohTu7H >useful how-to #itarch #entarch #strategy
• practicingEA: RT @SmartDataCo: BPM and MDM are connected @juliebhunt / http://soc.li/yDDjNeE
• practicingEA: RT @SmartDataCo: DR is a good cloud use case @onlinetech / http://soc.li/6V0PwBV >hmm… will admit I still have my doubts… #itarch #entarch
• bergmart: Great stuff by Nist: cloud computing reference architecture http://twurl.nl/w2vqg4 #itarch #cloud
• joemckendrick: Cloud is already reshaping businesses in profound ways http://bit.ly/oXkfRw >is now about more than just ‘cost-cutting’ #itarch #entarch
• theopengroup: New on The Open Group Blog: Update on the EMMMv™ Forum, by Sarina Viljoen, The Open Group South Africa http://ow.ly/6HuwN >reference-architectures for mining/exploration etc #itarch #entarch
• theopengroup: Read The Open Group’s professional certification newsletter! #TOGAF, Open CITS and Open CA + New LinkedIn Groups http://p0.vresp.com/k418rK
• EAatWork: Nice dynamic viewpoint feature in future #archi 2.0 Check it out at http://bit.ly/nHA7rL #archimate #entarch >very nice!
• gkathan: why is #itgovernance so difficult ? http://oreil.ly/ggge3T >sounds like a case for a proper #entarch …?
• gkathan: #ITgovernance ensures that IT is working on the right things at the right time to enable business goals while managing associated risks
• gkathan: RT @InfoQ: Model-Driven Approach to Service-Oriented Enterprise (SOE) http://bit.ly/oXvMcL >nice, but why is it only for IT???
• jdevoo: Cloud Relevance for Development Professionals http://j.mp/nyTWLG >> curious about g-clouds overlaying sovereign borders… >good comment: where technology dreams meet up with political realities…
• rtolido: our ‘TRAIN to SCOOTER applications’ whitepaper now available. Hope you like it, let me know! http://goo.gl/CfUaW #itarch >recommend: can read online, or download via registration
• EAatWork: Archi 2.0 released: Dynamic viewpoints, same element on same view etc http://bit.ly/pPc38k >grt work by @Architool #archimate
• simonbrown: Updated slide set for “Software Architecture for Developers” online http://bit.ly/bCIvPG (Effective Sketches rolled in http://bit.ly/obrsp2) >most of Simon’s thinking on #swarch is directly applicable to #itarch #entarch etc – strong recommend

The real ‘big-picture’ in a human sense:

• Bebela239: RT @guardian: Charlie Brooker: If capitalism has failed, how the hell do we pay for our Shreddies? http://gu.com/p/326ad/tw >strong recommend #futureofmoney
• Bebela239: RT @Digitaltonto: RT @dscofield: Important essay by @julieanixter on @IXchat: Venessa Miemis on Why the Future of Money Matters http://flpbd.it/QS1m >useful points, though in some ways reinforces my view that the only viable future for money is that it has no future, in any form whatsoever
• SAlhir: RT @DavidHolzmer (EXCERPT) Jeremy Rifkin: The Third Industrial Revolution: Toward a New Economic Paradigm – http://bit.ly/pFtyud #society #economics
• ironick: nytimes art: forget sensors, models, #IT — #smartcities embrace openness, randomness and serendipity http://nyti.ms/qLCMtV ht @nraford >will be interesting to see how this one pans out in real-life…
• davidcushman: RT @AndeGregson: RT @howarthm: Someone told truth on BBC. Amazing video of trader blowing cover http://youtu.be/aC19fEqR5bA // open your eyes and ears to this one. >impressive obscenity of the money-economy: “I’m looking forward to a crash, this is how we make money”… #society #economy
• tetradian: [post] Why are the elite the elite? http://bit.ly/qSUdpk #entarch #society #culture
• davidcushman: RT @umairh: The Institutional Innovation Manifesto – Umair Haque – Harvard Business Review: http://t.co/bxFXzOAy >yep… #economics #society
• jdevoo: RT @theneweconomics: It’s Ecological Debt Day – for the rest of 2011 we are living beyond nature’s means http://bit.ly/qLlZmV #economics #sustainability
• davidcushman: RT @euan: Blogging about broadcasters, trust, the web and Alessio Rastani  http://bit.ly/ptHi6p >where traditional-news ‘sources’ are not what they seem – and no-one checks…
• Bebela239: RT @wired: How can we save the web from withering? “A single source repository and a good owner to drive it,” says Joe Hewitt http://bit.ly/rqpDsJ >very good points… (note also that ‘owner’ here is about responsibility, not ‘possession’)
• Bebela239: RT @Digitaltonto: Broken Logic, the Age of Uncertainty and Emergence | Digital Tonto http://bit.ly/nyHAVr
• thoughttrans: RT @annemcx: Happiness is a revolutionary act http://bit.ly/niAzdx that’s one of your best imo @gapingvoid
• joyce_hostyn: behavioral economics principles that can inform energy policy  http://bit.ly/rmkBma #servicedesign
• SAlhir: RT @DavidHolzmer: The Need for Systems Thinking at the Top | Sustainability by Design http://bit.ly/nK7mcF #politics #economics #society
• smbounds: Lighting your tapwater: Graphic evidence for the strict control of #fracking for coal-seam gas in Oz http://tinyurl.com/64glo8o >yikes…
• SAlhir: RT @flowchainsensei: Are MBAs just another certification Ponzi scheme, like CSMs? >a very good question… #society #orgarch #entarch
• thoughttrans: Seth Godin: The forever recession (and the coming revolution) http://bit.ly/ogK3Y6 >v.big-picture #entarch ?
• SAlhir: RT @umairh Human dignity can rarely be advanced unless a society has the courage to comprehend human fragility. >v.good point… #society #culture #economics
• business_design: Cool! RT @ECorner: Three things #entrepreneurs do for the economy. Watch this sketchbook video from @KauffmanFDN http://bit.ly/riDtSI #bmgen >nice, though absolutely bog-standard (i.e. non-sustainable) concept of business / #economics etc
• DavidGurteen: Digital Judgement http://bit.ly/pwFQWE #KM #culture #education
• davidcushman: Daughter, 6: If I were rich I’d pay people to do my homework. >a frighteningly large number of people seem to think that variants on that theme are what ‘wealth’ is… #society #economics #stupidity …
• DavidGurteen: Must watch: “The Corporation” (documentary, in 23 chapters) http://bit.ly/pno0rd #socialchange >real-#economics classic…
• davidcushman: RT @umairh: This is what we call a “kleptocracy”. And I wish I was exaggerating when I said that. http://bit.ly/nJh6OF >sigh…
• SAlhir: TimeMag: Message to Businesses: Uncertainty is Here to Stay http://ti.me/ndmavE #bizarch #economics
• alphalo: autopoetic self-replicating hyperlocal circles of social transformation are the way to create large scale social transformation >I think he means a pattern of person-to-person relationships, but I’m not sure…? – if so, then yes // Birth autopoeitic self-replicating hyperlocal circle network with starter circles. Starter circles purpose is to start other circles. // A strangers meeting/circle that incorporates the gift circle http://ow.ly/6Kzsb
• SAlhir: RT @umairh: bingo. RT @matthewstoller: And this one, @umairh  http://yfrog.com/o03q6vnj >yup… #bizarch #economics

Something so special it needs a category all of its own:

• jdevoo: We are all Hummingbirds. Rest in peace Wangari Maathai http://bit.ly/r5xdbC >”I do the best I can” – powerful reminder…

And, of course, the not-to-be-missed none-of-the-above:

• DavidGurteen: Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time, and it annoys the pig. Robert Heinlein http://bit.ly/oZmlhY >one of my favourite quotes…
• jdevoo: Old San Francisco – interactive historical map and timeline 1850-2000 http://bit.ly/rjCgwh via @jhagel #fb
• thinksmith: Was just struggling with some logo thinking, and this solid collection showed up in my inbox via @linkedin http://designshack.co.uk/articles/graphics/50-fantastically-clever-logos >nice…!
• michellemilla: “You can make a lot of friends while traveling if you sketch in bars.” via @davegray #gamestorming >nice advice…
• Bebela239: RT @wired: Set up ten video camera traps in the Indonesian jungle, gather footage for one month, condense into five minutes http://bit.ly/q6nbzt
• Bebela239: RT @OpiceBlum: @ITRCSD: What to Do if You’ve Been Hacked http://on.wsj.com/ra8Jc5 via @WSJ #infosec #hacking
• Bebela239: RT @nybooks: Mariana Cook’s stunning photographs of stone walls–some of them thousands of years old–from around the world: http://j.mp/qiZBvj
• jdevoo: RT @HeleneMenu: Sustainable Living Plan Targets at Unilever Global: http://bit.ly/nmAeV2 #csr #entarch
• ironick: RT @fontsforfree: New font added: Ironick http://www.fontsforfree.net/fonts/ironick/ < my own font. cool!
• tetradian: [post] Apologising for the apologies http://bit.ly/nn20Rc #society #culture
• SAlhir: RT @nowthink Apologizing always doesn’t mean you are wrong and others are right…It means you respect your relationship more than your ego.

(Don’t panic: this is only about getting started in doing so – not the whole thing! But collectively, as enterprise-architects, we do need to get started on this, as a matter of real urgency, because the longer we all leave it, the faster we run out of options when the crunch really does come – and all the indications are that that’s not far ahead at all. (Remember that I’ve worked as a professional futurist? From what I see right now, I’d say that we do have perhaps ten years from now to get everything set up, though no more than fifty years beyond that to get the entire world economy changed over to a sustainable model. If we don’t get properly started within the current decade, I’d estimate that we’d have perhaps at most ten more years beyond that of ‘business as usual’ before the whole thing collapses worldwide in an all-too-literally bloody mess. Look at any of the planetary-scale indicators right now: you’ll see that no, I’m not being alarmist at all, and yes, it really is that serious…)

And no doubt you might ask “Shouldn’t it be the lawyers who do should do this – not us?” If so, all I can say is “listen to what you’ve just said…” – because right now, to be blunt, would you trust any lawyer, or certainly any group of lawyers, to lead any kind of constructive change, especially at this kind of scale? I wouldn’t: with very few exceptions, they’re way too embedded in the current models, in every possible way – which makes them almost the least appropriate group to guide a fundamental rethink of governance and the law. By contrast, whole-enterprise architects have a lot of practice at linking things across a very broad scope, at every layer from very abstract to very concrete; and most will have had a lot of experience at all manner of governance-issues of every category, from rules to algorithms to guidelines to principles, dealing with and negotiating on a vast array of interpersonal issues and wicked-problems between just about every feasible group of stakeholders – all of which makes EAs one of the few groups of people who do have the background and experience for this task. Hence this post.)

To make sense of what follows, you’ll probably need to have read at least the following posts:

• (on the Sidewise blog) ‘The future of money is that it has no future‘
• ‘The architecture of a no-money economy‘
• ‘An economics challenge for enterprise-architects‘
• ‘Responses to ‘EA economics challenge’‘

All of those posts explored one specific aspect of what’s needed for a viable societal model, namely the architecture of its economics. What I want to do here is start going one step deeper, exploring the core architectural-principles for a system of law and governance that would underpin that economics.

(What should be clear to everyone by now is that the current system of economics, and the system of property-law that underpins it, is not sustainable. Or, to put it the other way round, a sustainable economy depends on a system of sustainable law – which doesn’t exist at present. The best that current economic-law can achieve is what I’ve described as ‘That Worst Possible System‘, where resources will inevitably end up where they’re least needed. The worst it can achieve is, well, a lot worse… and from a futurist perspective, it’s patently obvious that that’s where we’re headed right now.

Which, to put it mildly, means that we’re all in trouble. Deep trouble.

The catch, of course, is that most people won’t believe that fact. Or won’t want to believe it, more to the point. Which in itself is a problem – especially for anyone who happens to find themselves in the unhappy role of ‘the messenger’ in the age-old game of “the best way to respond to bad news is to shoot the messenger”…

Hence, for public-consumption, probably best to describe all of what follows as ‘merely a thought-experiment’. Except that it isn’t. At all.

Anyway… to continue…)

I perhaps need to make it clear that I won’t be presenting or promoting anything here that purports to be ‘The Answer’. Any competent enterprise-architect should recognise that we’re nowhere near that stage as yet: we’ve barely even started on ‘The Question’…

We do have a fairly good idea of ‘The Vision’, though – namely something like ‘a world that works in a sustainable way, with an economics that works in a sustainable way’. (I don’t think anyone would disagree with that? – or anyone vaguely-sane, anyway?) So that’ll do as a starting-point: we can leave detailed discussion of values and the like until somewhat later.

Given that starting-point, the next thing we need to establish are the fundamental constraints that any would-be ‘solution’ must address. And it’s those constraints that are the main focus for this first-stage thought-experiment here.

What came up from the research behind the previous posts was as follows:

– The money-system has now become almost completely detached from any concrete reality or from any feasible form of control: so we now have a potentially-infinite system that has no inherent constraints or controls, but that somehow supposedly obtains ‘rights’ to an inherently-constrained pool of concrete resources. That’s a very serious problem in itself: yet money in itself is not the core source of the problems we face.

– The primary purpose of all money-type mechanisms is to resolve a structural problem with barter: barter-exchanges can only take place on a point-to-point basis at or close to real-time, so a ‘currency’ of some kind provides a token of mutual trust that supports multi-way indirect non-real-time exchanges across the agreed jurisdiction of that currency. This in turn depends on a mechanism of ‘valuation’, which in essence is now all but completely broken: yet valuation in itself is not the core source of the problems.

– The same problems apply to all forms of ‘currency’: hence the currency-type is not the core source of the problems. (Hence there is no point is wasting time or effort on any form of ‘alternative-currency’, because by definition no type of ‘currency’ can resolve the real underlying economic problems.)

– Barter assumes some form of exchange of services or resources; in turn, a barter-based economy assumes that everyone has access to ‘exchangeable resources’, or ‘tradable services’ – which is simply not the case at all. Small children, the ill, the elderly, and anyone undertaking care-work or the like for such people, will either have nothing to exchange, or no time to engage in so-called ‘economic activity’. The fact that a barter-based economy – and hence any money-based economy – will therefore be unable to cover the economic relationships of more than perhaps half the people of the world, is in itself a serious problem: yet barter in itself is not the core source of the problems.

– Barter-exchanges assume that each participant has the ‘right’ to exchange the resource or service – which in turn assumes the ‘right’ to withhold that resource or service, otherwise there would be no need for the type of ‘quid pro quo’ exchanges managed through barter and the like. Such purported ‘rights’ of exclusion are typically termed ‘property-rights’, and ultimately almost all trails of provenance for purported ‘property-rights’ end up in some arbitrary act of expropriation – or, bluntly, theft – which is in itself a serious problem: yet ‘property-rights’ in themselves are not the core source of the problem.

– Right at the root – underpinning all of the above – is a concept of possession. It is, in essence, the two-year-old’s view of the world: “Mine!” It arises from an inability to perceive that the economic world depends on complex interlocking of mutual responsibilities, and hence an inability to trust that resources and services will be there as needed. It can also be seen as ‘possession’ of a purported right to not be responsible to others for some aspect of a resource or service – a peculiar form of possession that we might describe as ‘anti-possession’. The result is that all attempts at possession or any of its variants will cause resources and services to not be available where, when and to whom they are needed – and hence possession itself becomes its own dysfunctional self-confirming prophecy.

There’s a lot more detail that could be gone into here, but in essence it all comes down to this: the core problem that underpins all economic dysfunctionality is a concept of possession.

To put it at its bluntest and simplest: no system of sustainable law can incorporate any concept of possession, in any form whatsoever, applying to any type of resource or service. That includes physical-property, intellectual-property, relationships, ideas, theories, beliefs, religion, anything: none of them can be ‘possessed’ in any way.

(Interestingly, any attempts at ‘possession’ usually result in the respective person being ‘possessed’ by that which is considered to be possessed: a point which is expressed well in the Buddhist concept of ‘attachment’. Yet there’s a further twist, in that an attempt at rejection of possession is itself a form of possession, the possession of the absence of something. In a more complete Buddhist view, ‘non-attachment’ – ahimsa - is a synonym not of ‘detachment’, but of non-detachment.)

What does work is mutual responsibility: a model of ownership based on responsibility or stewardship. We ‘own’ something because we accept responsibility for that ‘something’ – and for no other reason. We do not have a ‘right’ to withhold it from anyone, other than as an expression of that personal responsibility.

All economic systems are ultimately based on interlocking mutual responsibilities: ’possession’ is merely a dysfunctional and literally ‘self-ish’ overlay on top of a responsibility-based economic model.

Most ‘traditional’ economies are responsibility-based. The internal operation of most households – the literal meaning of ‘economics’ – is responsibility-based. Most aspects of the internal operations of most organisations are responsibility-based. All possession-based, barter-based, currency-based or money-based economic-models are aberrations that are inherently guaranteed to cause economic failure. This is, of course, almost the exact opposite of what we’re usually taught about economics…

It is true that a possession-based model will seem to deliver better economic results in the short-term: yet it does so solely by offloading some form of economic-responsibility to elsewhere and/or elsewhen. To be blunt, it ‘succeeds’ solely via stealing either from others in the present, the future or, in some specific examples, the past. Its primary method for concealing the theft is via a concept of ‘growth’: once such ‘growth’ ceases – as it always must in any closed system – its only remaining option is to cannibalise itself into oblivion. There is no possible way to make a possession-based economy sustainable.

So, that’s the context of this architectural ‘thought-experiment’:

– The vision is a sustainable world.

– The constraints are that since all forms of possession lead to economic relationships that are inherently unsustainable, that world cannot include any form of possession, and hence also cannot include any form of possession-based ‘property’, any withholding-based exchange, barter, currency, money, or finance.

– Corollaries from those constraints include an assertion that any form of ‘growth’-based economics is likely to be delusory; likewise that any concept of ‘control’ is likely to be delusory.

– By definition, possession-based societal-control mechanisms cannot be used for societal control in this model: this includes fines, confiscation of property, and many other types of inclusion or exclusion. Likewise monetary taxes, pensions, benefits and similar mechanisms for ‘wealth-distribution’ and suchlike will not be available. (It’s quite a long list of other things that would vanish, too: banks, insurances, mortgages, loans, credit-cards, wages, salaries, ‘gifts’, bribes and much, much more. Interesting, yes? )

As enterprise-architects we do know how to do governance for this kind of world: it’s exactly what we deal with when we talk about a ‘project owner’ or ‘process owner’ or ‘business-rule owner’. It’s also the type of context that we deal with when getting different stakeholders and project-groups together to resolve architectural conflicts. And we also know how to do roadmaps for change, and how to deal with some of those really difficult change-adoption issues. In that sense, the only real difficulty for this ‘thought-experiment’ should be in scaling all of that experience up to a much broader scope – and again, we know how to handle scaling-issues of this type.

So there’s the governance-challenge:

• How do we make this work?
• What governance do we need?
• In what ways does the governance change in different contexts – simple rule-based ‘law’, legal-algorithm, pattern-based guidelines, or overarching principles?
• What checks and balances are needed for each form of governance?
• Who are the stakeholders in each case?
• What are the responsibilities for each stakeholder?
• How do we identify and monitor the mutualities and interlocks between those responsibilities?
• Within the governance-mechanisms, how do we balance all the conflicting needs?
• How do we support viable, sustainable forms of conflict-resolution that do not simply collapse into ‘wicked-problems’ time and time again?

That’s it. It’s huge, sure; yet it’s also urgent…

So: over to you: any comments? Any questions? Or any answers, perhaps?

Enterprise-architecture, business-architecture and the ‘business big-picture’:

• SAlhir: RT @complexified “Secrets of the Six Principles” – great primer on #complexity in orgs, and case studies. [PDF] http://bit.ly/q6JPcR
• thoughttrans: Can roadmaps be both strategic and tactical? >I would say yes #entarch #bizarch #itarch
• SAlhir: RT @Digitaltonto An Innovation Roadmap http://bit.ly/p5UXG2 #bmgen #bizarch #entarch
• SAlhir: RT @JenniferSertl #Value & #Innovation create markets says @michaeleporter http://bit.ly/nM5tdo & @nigelcameron http://bit.ly/mUxd7W
• SAlhir: RT @JenniferSertl HBR’s Treasure Trove On Strategy [PDF] http://bit.ly/pc2ELH #bmgen #bizarch #entarch
• oscarberg: RT @EskoKilpi: Social business is very different from industrial corporation http://bit.ly/qymNmE #socbiz #entarch
• gkathan: RT @pbmobi: New sketches, comments, references: ideas about Enterprise Backbone Architecture http://bit.ly/pOoOBZ #entarch
• chrisdpotts: “The Consumer Has the Technology. The Market Has The Process” (article:PDF) http://bit.ly/oDI4bd #entarch #BPM #strategy #bizecology
• SAlhir: RT @Annemcx: @gnva via @joesmithdesign Connected Futures – Why time-frames are good to define design research approach: http://l.gnva.com/oGI9QM
• SAlhir: RT @moia @Joi @flowchainsensei: “cost of planning, predicting and managing…exceeds the cost of actually doing” http://bit.ly/q7cWcN
• SAlhir: The Old World View focused on Efficiency and Effectiveness, and the New World View focuses on Creativity and Innovation #entarch
• chrisdpotts: Reminder: http://bit.ly/pbFNFP | RT @petersjolin: @chrisdpotts For the performance of the enterprise’s architecture.
• gkathan: RT @jukkaam 5 Questions That Kill Innovation: a how-to guide http://bit.ly/qGAvKs RT @philderidder #innovation #entarch #bmgen
• practicingEA: Forrester Communities: Lessons Learned from Enterprise Architecture Mistakes http://bit.ly/oP5K2q >recommend #entarch
• tonyrestell: RT @lisat2: 7 Lessons from Running a Consulting Company by @neilpatel http://bit.ly/mVasAC | wise words >useful advice…
• oscarberg: Transparency is Good for Business http://bit.ly/mYtIEI #socbiz #bizarch #entarch
• rettema: RT @kerfors: Volkswagen’s Vehicles Schema (Vocabulary or Ontology in #SemanticWeb parlance)  http://ow.ly/6yAt6 via @kidehen >useful complete example of an ontology in full business-use
• SAlhir: RT @SameerPatel: RT @Jon_Ferrara: Changing How We Manage Change – great post by @GrahamHill on @marktamis blog http://wp.me/pCUEC-5m >useful how-to reminders
• gkathan: RT @pbmobi: Don’t start modeling without first making some sketches! http://bit.ly/r85xEI #entarch #itarch #bizarch >more on Peter Bakker’s ‘tubemapping’ concept
• taotwit: RT @bmichelson: Roundtable: Enterprise Architects & Complex Event Processing http://bit.ly/mZaHvY <– with @taotwit & @tibbetts
• kdierc: RT @alecsharp: BPMN and UML are non-issues in any successful project I’ve seen in the past decade, so I wish ppl wouldn’t refer to them as “the standard.” #bpm #entarch
• DavidGurteen: Google Wallet: First Impressions http://on.mash.to/r3m22r > #itarch and #ux meet #bmgen and #bizarch?
• thoughttrans: One more time … enterprise architecture goes beyond corporate boundaries >why is this simple fact so difficult for so many people to understand?
• joemckendrick: Health care delivered, via technology, at very low cost http://smrt.io/pI5hHh >US-specific detail, but could be relevant anywhere #bmgen #socbiz
• gkathan: RT @johnokraut via @IATV: This Is Service Design Thinking: Customer Journey Canvas [PDF] http://bit.ly/qkE26D #bizarch #entarch #bpm
• business_design: interesting insights RT @om: How technology is changing business [Infographic] http://bit.ly/pLtKjW >a lot more than just technology, please…
• business_design: RT @trueventures: Adrian Slywotzky: improve your business through the art of Hassle Maps http://tru.vc/piLrAZ #bmgen >recommend
• oscarberg: @RT @kasey428: HBR.org: Companies Do Well if Workers Feel OK About Speaking Up http://bit.ly/p87v0m >simple stats (avg. 7.9% return vs 2.1%) to impact of functional vs dysfunctional power-models within org
• theopengroup: Are Business Process Management and Business Architecture a perfect match? http://nblo.gs/nnkUG >good sense from Serge Thorn #entarch #bpm
• rettema: #EntArch is a one time design that survived at least a decade of business turbulences of the enterprise that is serves // You cannot design or create an #EntArch, You can only conclude it was an architecture when you look back. #MyQuote
• ironick: panarchy calls 4 panarchitecture http://bit.ly/ex1fJy RT @angel_m @giusdesimone @jurgenappelo Panarchy: an amazing concept! >Nick Gall’s original Gartner article on a key concept in #entarch etc – recommend
• jdevoo: RT @adamwerbach: Supply chain footprinting is on the rise http://bit.ly/pizgvK #entarch
• EABard: How Should We Make Hard Decisions? http://zite.to/niFo7a via @zite #strategy #entarch (will admit I love the quote “capitalism makes everything complicated”… )
• jdevoo: RT @frogdesign: “the question is never about the technology, or even the system—it is about the people” http://bit.ly/q6MVsA #mhealth #innovation #entarch
• SAlhir: RT @Serve4impact: This Is Service Design Thinking: Deconstructing a Textbook : UXmatters http://bit.ly/pt6L0X #tisdt #entarch
• tetradian: [post] Dependency and resilience in enterprise-architecture models http://bit.ly/rpSyVk (for @pbmobi) #entarch #metamodel
• chrisdpotts: The most important relationship Enterprise Architects now need is with the enterprise’s Brand managers.  #entarch #CIO #CMO >mild disagree: it’s an important relationship, yes, but never ‘the most important’ – in a true #entarch, everywhere and nowhere is ‘the most important’, all at the same time…
• chrisdpotts: IT Consumerization means it’s no longer a constraint on #entarch #strategy that many people think EA is something to do with #IT. >v.strong disagree: the association with IT still makes it all but impossible to assess #entarch issues that do not revolve around (or even include) IT
• business_design: RT @tonysilbert: @jhagel two shifts: 1) from knowledge stock to knowledge flow (proprietary to open mindset) 2) from push to pull #BIF7 #bizarch #entarch
• chrisdpotts: Difference between #entarch & #bizarch = difference between enterprise & business.  Architecture = architecture, whatever the subject.
• CreatvEmergence: RT @DavidHolzmer: HBR: Netflix’s Bold Disruptive Innovation http://bit.ly/ny1h4S #bmgen #bizarch #strategy
• CreatvEmergence: Four pains of a new idea – http://bit.ly/jCf1S4 – by @MaxMckeown #innovation #bmgen
• gkathan: RT @jeannelking Cool look into #visualthinking: The Anatomy Of An Infographic, from @SpyreStudios http://fb.me/11BHBkSI4 #entarch toolbox >useful how-to
• ArtBourbon: RT @pbmobi: http://bit.ly/qZijIu Made a prototype of a #bmgen neuron network in CPN Tools! Small step toward the Enterprise Backbone #entarch >>good stuff. posted a comment >more ongoing #entarch idea-exploration from Peter Bakker
• SAlhir: RT @storiedstrategy Change is synonymous with strategy and emergence. #Change is #complexity. not a function & cannot be managed or planned. >in some ways ‘change management’ is more about how we manage ourselves in change, not change itself – have always liked Senge’s book-title ‘The Dance of Change’ for that reason
• gkathan: RT @OndrejGalik [Post] 4.Lesson Learned for #entarch: Start From Yourself http://wp.me/p1kuQj-5I >yes – recommend
• oscarberg: All businesses are social, but are held back by anti-social structures designed for economies of scale & efficiency // Businesses need to free themselves from the optimization straight-jacket to become more responsive, agile & innovative
• gkathan: RT @CMatignon: Understanding Business Rules is a challenge – here is my epiphany on the subject! http://bit.ly/mZebDs #decisionmgt #decision #entarch
• gkathan: RT @Sellers_Richard: “Relevance v Preference: Rethinking #Brand Differentiation” http://ow.ly/6AxqC by @carol_phillips #MENGonline #CMO #Marketing #bmgen #bizarch
• SAlhir: RT @slapCompany Why live your values? Contribution and community are what await you when you live your values. >also for #entarch etc
• SAlhir: RT @Design4people Value Was in Conversation!Embracing Inclusion with Design Thinking;Driving Innovation http://bit.ly/qiAxhX #designthinking
• caro_buck: Why most product launches fail… http://hbr.org/2011/04/why-most-product-launches-fail/sb3/1 Interesting read. #bmgen #bizarch
• taotwit: RT @roygrubb: RT @seabird20: Bt moving from “build to last” mentality to a “build to change” mentality. >> So complex adaptive?  (@taotwit) #entarch >the ‘backbone vs Agile’ trade-off
• joyce_hostyn: 10 patterns for org change when your business model is being disrupted by digital media http://slidesha.re/qIrhs2 by @mpedson via @deb_lavoy #bmgen #socbiz
• joemckendrick: Medical ‘tricorder’ device competition coming in 2012 http://smrt.io/nlMX5M >big X-prize, also very big #bmgen opportunity…?
• greefhorst: RT @ebuise: An interesting framework for architect competency – http://sfi.cc/digvl #entarch #bizarch via  @ruthmalan @systemsflow >useful resources for #entarch
• SAlhir: RT @ArnoldBeekes Stephen Denning: Can Organizations Be Profitable AND Responsible? Review of book ‘Management Reset’ http://onforb.es/raZ0IZ #orgarch #entarch
• tetradian: [post] Backbone and business-rules http://bit.ly/rpNnaM (thx #pbmobi @taotwit @CMatignon) #entarch #itarch #bpm
• business_design: a) describe what job you are getting done for each customer segm. b) describe the value prop for each segm. #BusinessModelInnovationWorkout #bmgen

A rather graphic first-hand example of ‘how to create an anti-client’:

• aojensen: Thanks, #telstra. Charged me with $ 59.00 for moving my antiquated POTS landline to a new address, 2 km away. 1994, anyone? // And by the way, I only chose to move and not close my #telstra subscription so that #TPG could move my ADSL2 connection. // So #TPG actually require a #telstra landline to be in place in order to test if they can deliver naked ADSL2. // And then #TPG charge me with an additional $ 59 just for relocating the ADSL2 line to another address. All up, this is nearly $ 120. // #Telstra and #TPG, you are punishing and not serving consumers. How come you punish customer loyalty? Had I known this PRIOR to moving // my landline, I would have avoided both of you, #Telstra and #TPG. In other words, you suck big time. #fail
• alecsharp: @aojensen Be grateful for their ineptitude – you now have a Telco case study to add to the repertoire of Telco stupidity we thrive on.

A back-and-forth between Nick Gall and Chris Potts on experience-orientation in enterprise-architecture:

• ironick: +1 tho sadly ~no conventional #entarch is exp-centric. Need #designthinking. RT @chrisdpotts: “It’s an experiences-centric architecture”
• chrisdpotts: @ironick If conventional #entarch is falling out of step with today’s realities, then it’s time for Enterprise Architects to innovate.
• ironick: @chrisdpotts +1. here’s how #entarch should become more experience-centric: http://bit.ly/aPYzup >pointer to Nick Gall’s ‘Hybrid Thinking’ paper, unfortunately behind Gartner paywall
• chrisdpotts: @ironick Enterprises can design appearances. Experiences are co-created with consumer. #entarch #bizecology #valuenetworks #RecrEAtion
• ironick: @chrisdpotts +1 exploratory co-creation is a fundamental aspect of #hybridthinking #designthinking. needs to be applied to #entarch
• chrisdpotts: @ironick Experiences are co-created as they happen. They are emotional & depend on many live variables.  #entarch #bizecology #valuenetworks
• ironick: @chrisdpotts +1. experiences have big emotional part. we CAN architect in advance 2 afford better co-creative exps. #hybridthinking #entarch
• ironick: @chrisdpotts Better #entarch is 1 part #wabisabi, 1 part #bricolage, 1 part #panarchy, bound with #designthinking. result #hybridthinking

A really useful Tweet-summary, mostly by Gene Leganza, of the CIO/CMO (Chief Information Officer / Chief Marketing Officer) conference:

• gleganza: #CIOCMO11 Keynotes getting started. Sharyn Leaver doing intros. // Sharyn comparing CIOs and CMOs to Romeo & Juliet: The indivs get along; their respective orgs & culture make it tough going // Sharyn laying out sources of competitive advantage over time… // Age of Manufacturing, Age of Distribution, Age of Info all lead to now: Age of the Customer // MPOV: Others have declared other periods the “age of the customer,” but the groundswell of social and web 2.0 make it REALLY now
• gleganza: Bobby Cameron and Jeff Ernst taking the stage for the #Forrester keynotes at #CIOCMO11 // Title of session is “New Opportunities Emerge When Marketing & IT Focus On The Customer Life Cycle” // Bobby using modes of dress to point out the traditional differences btwn IT and Marketing people // Jeff Ernst, Marketing-related analyst, talking about the relationship btwn Marketing and IT becoming mission critical // Jeff comparing Blockbuster (bankrupt) & Netflix // “customers want less” !? // customers want less hassle, less time, less need for support // Less is more [convenience] // Tech-fueled customer-led disruption redefine the customer experience  // Bobby & Jeff: CIOs & CMOs must partner to drive customer obsession to win in the Age Of The Customer // Bobby: CMOs and CIOs are uniquely positioned to partner in driving customer obsession  // CMOs instill customer obsession across the value chain, while CIOs coordinate interactions and information across the value chain
• joyce_hostyn: RT @forrester: RT @TomGrantForr: A big part of “The Age Of The Customer” is getting technology adoption, not just deployment. #ADF11
• chrisdpotts: RT @forrester: Difference between IT and Marketing is imploding driven by this Age of the Customer. – Cameron #ciocmo11
• gleganza: Case studies on CMO/CIO partnerships: Catepillar, IBM, Adidas, P&G #CIOCMO11 // Caterpillar example: Disruption from buyer behavior changes // Caterpillar: Traditional sales method — dealer in person with buyer BUT… // …now 56% buy tractors online! Major change in buying behavior, even for tractors! // So Caterpillar studied key customer touchpoints in cust experience lifecycle – IT/Marketing partnership for studying use cases
• gleganza: IBM story-12% revenue increase year-on-year for Q1 – Whatever they’re doing, it’s working #CIOCMO11 // IBM has complex ecosystem of brands, partners, & suppliers // IBM’s VP of Order to Cash & Marketing Transformation partnered with VP of Marketing totally revamped their systems 4 customer info // Now there’s a job title…Does YOUR org have a “VP of Order-to-Cash and Marketing Transformation”?
• gleganza: Adidas case: They target 15-25 yr olds who have to have the “new thing”  #CIOCMO11 // Adidas having to shorten their product dev cycles // Adidas CIO and CMO don’t obsess over Nike, the gorilla in their space, but on their customers // Adidas Marketing didn’t get IT issues, IT didn’t get Marketing, so for major World Cup effort, created a joint team // “social listening team” ID’ed athletes to sponsor and used social media to test campaigns
• gleganza: P&G example: Lots of brands, in biz 174 years! #CIOCMO11 // P&G: Global CIO drove “virtual modeling and simulation services” to speed up prod dev cycle: supports product innovation // P&G used to take 6-7 weeks to do customer testing with physical mockups // P&G created virtual environment in hours or days, not weeks. // P&G has a library of shelves in a virtual library-can simulate customer experience in Target, Walmart stores
• gleganza: Bobby and Jeff about to take questions from CIO & CMO audience #CIOCMO11 // [I'm doing a breakout session later with CIOs and CMOs to address tech planning issues; will be interesting to see the interaction]
• gleganza: Q: What did the CIOs and CMOs really do 2 make  changes happen? A: Weekly CIO/CMO meetings generating ideas, maintaining momentum #CIOCMO11 // P&G CIO aggregated 170 common services as part of prod dev lifecycle; goal was not cost-related but all about enabling innovation
• gleganza: Q: Role of CMO on defining priorities for program/project agenda. Role in project portfolio mgt? #CIOCMO11 // A. In P&G, funding is ongoing payment structure btwn internal customers (eg, marketing) and IT org-continued funding based on sat
• gleganza: Q: Have analysts seen ancillary depts (HR, etc) change processes to accommodate this customer focus thing? A: Absolutely… #CIOCMO11 // …processes change to recognize ROI from all the related activity
• gleganza: Q: Is main problem for orgs power struggles? A: Perception probs: Marketing less important than operational systems in IT’s eyes #CIOCMO11 // …IT has HAD to focus on keeping operational systems highly available. Made Marketing a second-class citizen of sorts // Bobby: so the prob is language, metrics, lots of things: it’s systemic. Solution is to make customer obsession systemic
• gleganza: Nigel Fenwick & Luca Paderni keynote at #CIOCMO11 starting // Nigel invoking those HSBC ads to illlustrate the issue of perspective // Nigel hands off to Luca with a Dilbert cartoon showing IT’s perspective of marketing (hint-it’s not flattering) // Luca counters with an image representing Marketing’s view of IT: a snail. touche! // Luca & Nigel’s solution follows the basic people-process-technology model // People: Merge IT and Marketing. OK, not really merge the orgs,but get these ppl working together. Get left & right brains together
• gleganza: Supervalu example: Formed joint IT/Marketing team w/shared budget & matrix reporting #CIOCMO11
• gleganza: AB InBev example-Again, shared IT/Marketing ownership, in this case for customer retention #CIOCMO11 // Lesson: restructure teams, co-locate teams, share accountability
• gleganza: Now the process part… #CIOCMO11 // Process focus is on time to market, speed, agility
• gleganza: Supervalu: “Agile-like” methods, rapid prototyping (disposable solutions), 90-day value creation #CIOCMO11
• gleganza: Nissan example-Formed marketing technology steering committee; did tech and design together via CIO/CMO collaboration #CIOCMO11 // Nissan’s result: significantly increased transparency // “Plan for fast failure”
• gleganza: Rolls Royce example: Real-time analytics for global data on engine failures #CIOCMO11 // RR: Warnings on need for engine maintenance sent to ground crews
• gleganza: Survey data: CIO hires staff w/marketing expertise? CIOs 33% yes, CMOs 20% yes #CIOCMO11
• gleganza: Q: Need additional CxO to make CIO/CMO partnership work? COO? A: Yes. Starts with CIO/CMO, but gotta get to key execs #CIOCMO11 // …especially gotta get the execs with checkbooks bought in and involved
• gleganza: Q: Culture of orgs before ‘harmonic conversion?’ A: Supervalu-traditional separation; hired new execs to make it happen #CIOCMO11 // “Cultural shift starts with leadership”
• gleganza: Q: 90 days “a luxury” to prove value-what to do if extreme speed necessary? #CIOCMO11 // A: Short time horizon? Challenge shifts to selecting projects/pilots with more likelihood of success  // Business metrics on business outcomes are the way to measure success for BOTH IT and Marketing

Narrative-knowledge, creativity, leadership and other things to do with in-person collaboration:

• davegray: Awesome. RT @inkblurt: @ptquattlebaum reveals contents of his workshop-ready “stormbox” http://bit.ly/njLNkW #vizthink #gamestorming >recommend also for #entarch etc
• KMskunkworks: Six critical things your company wants to know http://bit.ly/qCFsSd #KNet2011 #KCube #Innovation #Training >aka Zachman? #entarch
• SAlhir: RT @JenniferSertl At the heart of execution is an individual who has choices to make. >ie. #entarch is people, not just IT!
• SAlhir: RT @CoreyBlake9000 Perspective is everything @IdeaSandbox:How to Frame Problems To Create Better Solutions http://bit.ly/or9sEe @RTCompanies #innovation #creativity
• SAlhir: RT @nowthink: The ‘perceived’ complexity of a task will grow in direct proportion to the amount of time we procrastinate. | RT @MarkOOakes >ouch…
• DavidGurteen: Is all knowledge practical? http://bit.ly/n2NHo3 #KM
• DavidGurteen: Nick Milton: Top 7 tips for knowledge management success http://bit.ly/picTcV #KM >view #entarch as KM too?
• KMskunkworks: Do you exploit the value in success or do you only dig through failure? http://wp.me/pUfyy-aU #KNet2011 #innovation #training, #KM >important re lessons-learned etc
• DavidGurteen: Collaboration processes – a first pass guide http://bit.ly/ruy1hc #KM >another great Nick Milton how-to
• SAlhir: RT @atownley @thinktank_ @MaxMckeown: Great quote from great thinker “No, no, you’re not thinking, you’re just being logical.” -Niels Bohr >yup, see that one all too often… (in me as much as in others… )
• DavidGurteen: Jack Vinson: Rules of knowledge management http://bit.ly/ru0YhP #KM >also useful for eg. #lenscraft etc
• DavidGurteen: Basic design for extraordinary conversations http://bit.ly/oo8O9z #conversation #GoodToTalk >useful summary how-to for any context in #entarch etc
• BillIves: new post – The Untapped Sources of Business Intelligence http://bit.ly/pDhZTm #bizarch
• CreatvEmergence: RT @zspencer: The beauty of soft systems thinking is not how it breaks things apart, but how it emphasizes their interconnectedness. #bif7
• CreatvEmergence: Natural Resistance in the Creative Process – http://shar.es/HMwnT
• SAlhir: RT @NewCommGlobal RT @kenblanchard @LeaderChat: How to Listen for Values: #Values’ role in #leadership. http://ow.ly/6oszF #entarch #collab
• oscarberg: Why do I have to collaborate? http://bit.ly/pr7D4q by @eskokilpi < “Work is communication between interdependent people” #socbiz #collab
• rettema: RT @GuyKawasaki: Storytelling vs corporate speak [infographic] http://is.gd/9B7IUd >use for #entarch etc?
• gkathan: RT @Leadershipfreak #1 Post over the last 7 days: “The #Leadership Quality No One Ever Mentions” http://ht.ly/6CHYp #success >>strong agree! >”inviting others in” #collab
• DavidGurteen: A clear introduction to the concept of ‘Ba’ http://bit.ly/oydfO3 >a #KM classic: apply in #entarch?
• SAlhir: RT @adaptivecoach Why do we persist on calling them “soft” skills? They are the hardest of all. If they weren’t we’d all be masters of them. >good point…
• DavidGurteen: Seth’s Blog: Post-mortem or pre-natal http://bit.ly/qkk12n #KM >good distinction re purpose of After Action Review and the like in #entarch etc
• SAlhir: The Six Diseases http://bit.ly/TheSixDiseases // 1: The desire for victory (‘ends’) // 2:  The desire to resort to technical cunning (‘means’) // 3: The desire to display all that you have learned (‘individual/collective’) // 4: The desire to overawe the enemy (‘conflict/adversity’) // 5: The desire to play a passive role (‘engagement/disengagement’) // 6: The desire to get rid of whatever disease you are likely to be infected with (‘perfection’) >martial-arts meets #entarch? – v.brief, but recommend

Social-media, ‘social-business’, user-experience and other aspects of the online world:

• BillIves: RT @rossdawson: Mashable: Anatomy of a social media crisis http://on.mash.to/pA0RTj >useful overview of disaster-recovery planning etc #socmedia #entarch
• SAlhir: RT @JenniferSertl RT @newcommglobal Porter’s 5 Forces in the Age of Social Media http://bit.ly/qPsghI #bmgen #socbiz
• CreatvEmergence: By @deb_lavoy Social Business and Enlightenment 2.0 http://wp.me/p823O-8E >respect is central #entarch
• oscarberg: Some thoughts for our new blog: Designing the digital workplace of the future http://bit.ly/nGQy3Y #socbiz #e20
• BillIves: RT @jonhusband: “10 General Principles for Leading & Managing in Networked Knowledge Workplace” http://bit.ly/94G7u9 #collab #e20 #socbiz #entarch
• craighepburn: RT @Whatleydude: #SMWBeirut Social media isn’t about technology, it isn’t about being on or offline, it’s simply about Being Human http://bit.ly/1zjRYz
• joyce_hostyn: points don’t work in long run, need flow to connect with intrinsic motivation RT @webtechman gamification 101 http://bit.ly/p15UZl >finally something sensible beyond the usual ‘gamification’ hype…
• BillIves: RT @marciamarcia: Enjoying a wise metaphor of social media elements like those on a periodic table http://j.mp/p0sOxG >nice visual-classification of key people, tools etc #socmedia #socbiz
• joyce_hostyn: watch for pitfalls of #storytelling > make the reader the hero “Storytelling and the Art of Email Writing” http://bit.ly/pJzHmm
• jdevoo: RT @stephaniewojcik: Electronic government services in Europe: Strategies, projects and applications (pdf) http://bit.ly/owzYCW #egov #w3 socbiz
• oscarberg: Blogged: Can this be your future of work environment? http://goo.gl/fb/boFyU >people-oriented #entarch
• oscarberg: Investigating current social business scenarios http://bit.ly/nta8M7 by @for_desire_it <  Avoiding social islands & social silos #socbiz
• SAlhir: RT @ArnoldBeekes Social networking enters the dreaded “It’s Complicated” stage http://bit.ly/nNrK2A >”less is the new more” for #socbiz #entarch etc
• SAlhir: RT @EskoKilpi: RT @hrheingold Howard Rheingold (1998): The Art of Hosting Good Conversations Online http://bit.ly/o8Zeet >how-to for #socmedia #socbiz #km etc

IT-architecture, IT-systems and other matters IT-related:

• SAlhir: RT @nyike Agile != (Sprint cycle + standups) | (coding – documentation) >good way to put it… #swdev #entarch
• basvg: new post in TOGAF series: starting architecture with a vision http://bit.ly/p7Styh >useful #TOGAF best-practices #itarch #entarch
• joemckendrick: Cloud Computing May be a Shot in the Arm our Economy Needs – Forbes http://onforb.es/oBpJS4 #itarch #bizarch
• practicingEA: From the Forrester Communities: Xforming #entarch to strategic focus? How to do you get it done? http://bit.ly/qJj9uF >good points, though still very much TOGAF-style IT-centrism
• adrianrcampbell: John A Zachman: Cloud Computing and #EntArch http://bit.ly/qOfHHn
• joemckendrick: At Forbes site, I make the case for cloud computing as a game-changer for many aspects of the economy http://onforb.es/oBpJS4 #cloud #itarch
• SAlhir: How Agile are We? Agility Health Quotient/Index (AHQ/AHI) http://bit.ly/Agility-Health // People: Commitment & Accountability // Value: = Results in Context // Collaboration: Flow-&-Pull or Batch-&-Push // Expeditious/Fast, Reactive, or Responsive #agile #lean #scrum #kanban >recommend – a kind of SEMPER for s/w-dev etc #entarch
• taotwit: Thinking framework for Business/IT ‘Systems’ behavior based on Cynefin http://bit.ly/qIOkyI >useful insights – recommend #entarch
• richardveryard: Notes on Interface: At an architecture workshop in Vienna last week, I put together a few slides to address some… http://bit.ly/prOxuF #itarch #ux
• davidsprott: In today’s complex world Dependency Analysis should be the No1 technique. Pleased to see HP’s Mark Potts agrees http://tinyurl.com/3r4nw8q #itarch #entarch
• basvg: RT @ericschabell: Avoid the new vendor lock-in, use an Open cloud solution! #OpenShift http://sgp.cm/858fa5 >good how-to on a very necessary #itarch #entarch concern re #cloud
• kdierc: RT @MartijnLinssen: The ERP paradox http://bit.ly/oo5G0b #sap #itarch #entarch #governance
• gkathan: RT @decisionmgt: Just uploaded ‘Decision Management Systems Part One Decision Discovery’ to SlideShare. http://slidesha.re/ruF973 #itarch #entarch #bpm
• theopengroup: Great new post on The Open Group Blog by Eric Boulay: “How EA is leading enterprise transformation in France” http://ow.ly/6D8rN #entarch

Society, culture, economics, sustainability and other real ‘big-picture’ themes:

• SAlhir: RT @JenniferSertl: A graceful approach to the dance between wealth & power http://on.ft.com/qANjOX RT @flowchainsensei >an FT view of power in the business context
• CreatvEmergence: 8 Current Technologies That Will Shape Our Future: http://mashable.com/2011/09/18/future-technology/ via @JamesBurgin @mashable >interesting and relatively sensible example of technology-futures
• CreatvEmergence: The beauty about finding your calling: it’s impossible for anyone or any data to persuade or “reason” you out of it >good illustration around what I’ve been saying on non-money economics
• tetradian: [post] An economics challenge for enterprise-architects http://bit.ly/prtXwg #entarch #economics #society
• tetradian: [post] Responses to ‘EA economics challenge’ http://bit.ly/pqFvmJ #entarch #economics #society
• SAlhir: RT @DavidHolzmer: Sustainability Community Tackles the Problem of Language – http://bit.ly/olqsvR >language and #bizstory: “focus less on the complex science behind sustainability and more on the stories that move and persuade” – same could said for #entarch etc
• business_design: !! RT @claychristensen: RT @arstechnica: Study: patent trolls have cost innovators half a trillion dollars http://bit.ly/qZvTBS … >oh the joys of the ‘intellectual-property’ scam…
• JosvanOosten: Why the Impossible Happens More Often http://dlvr.it/mKft0 #futures
• rtolido: in the unlikely case you missed it: the past and future of famous logos http://bit.ly/r0l5uo >nicely ironic view of business…
• davidcushman: RT @loudmouthman: Yet more evidence of 3d printers being used for purposes that govts will try to ban them for : http://bit.ly/qIBScv >more surface evidence of the much deeper problem of possession/’right-to-exclude’ in #culture #economics etc
• ArtBourbon: RT @vernaallee: Stephen Denning: Critical value networks at risk? http://onforb.es/rcWlCU >>knee-jerk outsourcing and the risks of shareholder capitalism >outsourcing as an addictive short-term performance-enhancing drug: “investment-bankers as drug-dealers in pin-stripe suits” – recommend #economics #society #culture #bizarch #entarch
• hvaelama: #democracy needs people with capacity to 1.critical thinking 2. think as a citizen of world 3. put themselves in the position of others >yes, I’d say that’s a minimum requirement – so we have a serious problem with current ‘democracy’ that acknowledges none of these needs… #society #politics
• CreatvEmergence: RT @sebpaquet: Liquids heat up for a long time before the first bubbles appear; this doesn’t mean nothing is happening.
• davidsprott: These days I always read the economist back to front. This (Ray Anderson obit) illustrates why. http://econ.st/nIrn46 >a quiet recommend on #entarch etc…
• Bebela239: RT @fastcompany: New website @Slave_Footprint tells you how much slave labor has gone into everything you own. http://bit.ly/pwk75M by @arielhs >ouch… another Inconvenient Truth… #society #culture #economics #sustainability
• DavidGurteen: How questioning economic growth left me feeling like a “Pilgrim from the 25th Century” http://bit.ly/ornSdK >recommend! – I’ve been having much the same struggle elsewhere…
• DavidGurteen: Moving from Understanding and Protest to Direct Action http://bit.ly/oOEd1V #SocialGood
• Bonifer: RT @ffunch: There are real scarcities, of course. A good economic system would be one that manages them, rather than rewarding multiplying them. #economics #society #culture #possession

A sizeable back-and-forth on my post about the (lack of) future for money:

• tetradian: [post] The future of money is that it has no future http://bit.ly/piDi8r #economics #society #culture
• gkathan: RT @tetradian [post] The future of money is that it has no future http://t.co/6ANZ27GZ #economics #society #culture <how to “deal” with responsibility?
• tetradian: @gkathan re responsibility, see e.g. http://bit.ly/nGAyNO or http://bit.ly/r4tP2m or http://bit.ly/nZxpIR or http://bit.ly/q2rnYt
• tetradian: [post] The architecture of a no-money economy http://bit.ly/poCT6W #entarch #economics #society
• tetradian: [post] An economics challenge for enterprise-architects http://bit.ly/prtXwg #entarch #economics #society
• chrisdpotts: @tetradian re: http://bit.ly/prtXwg Echoing my recent Tweet, each of us is an economy-of-one.  If we’re in a household, it’s a layer on top. // Being an economy-of-one, each of can use the 4 Factors of Production to create value (Land, Labor, Capital, Enterprise) #entarch
• tetradian: @chrisdpotts agree re ‘layer on top’; less agree on ’4 Factors of Production’, b/c in many ways they assume possession, which doesn’t work // the ’4 Factors’ are valid, but they need a major re-think to work in a responsibility-based economy – hence this work
• MartijnLinssen: Great post but link to #entarch confuses > RT @tetradian: An economics challenge for enterprise-architects http://bit.ly/prtXwg #entarch
• tetradian: @MartijnLinssen why does link to EA confuse? – to me economics (esp. macroeconomics) is whole-enterprise architecture at very large scale
• richardveryard: @chrisdpotts @tetradian I talk about the 4 factors of production in my paper on the future of money. #LongFinance http://tinyurl.com/639k3xz
• m_vrijhoef: @MartijnLinssen @tetradian Shortest answer to the posed problem: Unified common goals, disposal of religion and value of ‘self’
• tetradian: @m_vrijhoef agree, perhaps esp. about ‘disposal of religion’ – possession-/money-economy _is_ a dysfunctional religion (w/out morals.. )
• MartijnLinssen: @tetradian it was a pretty “controversial” post and I liked it, but ending references to #entarch sent me into the woods
• chrisdpotts: @tetradian Re:  Factors of Production. The assumption of possession is in the eye of the beholder. #entarch // A #strategy that depends on a rethink of the basics of Economics has a low chance of success.
• tetradian: @chrisdpotts I fear you miss the point here: this isn’t mainstream strategy, it’s root-economics, at least 2-3 layers deeper than strategy! // why did you introduce the red-herring of strategy? all the posts made it clear this was _not_ about strategy…?
• rettema: @tetradian interesting timing Tom , see mckinsey quarterly #sustainable http://e.mckinseyquarterly.com/147e4fa98layfousibojkwkaaaaaabxqr5nzsp4fxj4yaaaaa
• tetradian: @rettema many thanks for that McKinsey pointer – is a good illustration of what doesn’t/can’t work…

And the small section without a name – the one that everyone likes most?

• davegray: Offmaps (iPhone app) is a lifesaver for data-roaming travelers. Downloadable maps, offline navigation by triangulating local wifi points
• thoughttrans: RT @presentationzen: Yoda pie chart http://post.ly/3GUtq <BRILLIANT!  I need to blow that one up and wallpaper my wall w it!
• SAlhir: Bitcasa – Infinite Storage on Your Desktop – Sign up for Beta now! http://www.bitcasa.com/beta-signup?share=1745445624 via @Bitcasa
• SAlhir: Two TED talks by Barry Schwartz: on our loss of wisdom http://bit.ly/1aB27F , on the paradox of choice http://bit.ly/19n2yD