"Generation to Generation: Life Cycles of the Family Business" is, in my opinion, a major contribution to the study and understanding of the complex nature of this most basic of human occupations - the family business.
As a business anthropologist, I found the life-cycle model applied to the study of the family business eye opening from both an academic and practical perspective.
There is a saying among family business owners and consultants that expresses the folk wisdom of about the family business as an institution and enterprise. It goes something like this , "The first generation creates, the second builds, and the third consumes the family business."
A business is an institution and organization created to perform the function of making money, i.e. producing an income, for the owner(s) by producing a good or service to meet a public need. The business can be as simple as the one person/owner/operator start-up shoe shine stand at the airport to the $7.5 billion a year 5th generation conglomerate, S.C. Johnson & Sons.
Although each is uniquely different, yet each will face, now face or has faced, the same challenges and crisis to its survival outlined in this model.
Gersick, Davis, Hampton and Lansberg develop a life cycle model for the family business that explains in clear, objective and sound social science terms why there is so much truth to this folk wisdom. The authors define the three key domains in which the family business exists and in which it must survive. Each of these domains has its own dynamic and its own life cycle. Each responds to different and sometimes conflicting demands from its environment.
These domains are the business enterprise, the ownership, and the family. In order to understand and effectively manage a family business, the founder and his/her successors must understand how these three domains are operating at any particular time to create opportunities and threats for the business.
The life cycle model draws upon the principles of business ownership models as established in corporate law, the dynamic theory of organizational life cycles and management structures, and the theories of human and family development found in psychology, sociology and anthropology. This comprehensive, integrated model focuses on the business enterprise as a institution and is explained using examples from real family businesses and corporations. It addresses the basic survival problem all family businesses face -- succession. But more than that the authors clearly outline the issues and alternatives at each phase of the life-cycle for the enterprise and the key actors in the family and the enterprise.
As a consultant/business coach to family businesses, I find the insights here validating of the observations I have made and experienced in my practice with clients. I also find it reassuring to see how the holistic approach, which takes all three domains into account, can produce an outcome that will satisfy the personal and business objectives of all the interests involved -- the business, the owners and the family.
I strongly recommend this book to anyone who owns, operates, is part of, or interested in family business. "
Showing posts with label complex systems. Show all posts
Showing posts with label complex systems. Show all posts
Monday, December 5, 2011
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Another branch in the Evolution of the TransOrganic
In a recent post, Welcome to the true TransOrganic Age we looked at the development of a technology that will enable a computer to create new life forms on demand. In this earlier essay we looked at the computer as the parent of the new life form where the machine code determines the process of assembling the DNA code.
In this essay we look at the other end of the spectrum, replacing the organic parts with synthetic parts to create life.
When computers become sentient, a new order of life will emerge. This will be an order of life which favors organic/machine integration such as we have seen portrayed in AVATAR and The Terminator series. Control of production in such a world will shift from DNA based life to trans-organic technology. Human, and other DNA based life forms, purpose in the world will be dependent on their economic value to the super-organic creatures which dominate the planet. These creatures will weigh the value of DNA life relative to non-DNA life for their survival their technological complexes and chose accordingly. This is another way of saying that societies and civilizations will struggle for survival based on the competition between, human capital or DNA capital and non-DNA capital represented by technology.
James Cameron's Avatar presents a fictional depiction of what this future might be like. The battle between "humanity" and "technology" is played out here on many levels. The Corporation, a super-organic entity representing Earth, is driven by its need for "food", the mineral Unobtanium which is found on Pandora. It is this premise which drives the story line.
One plot line which stands out, Jake Sully's story, is based on the fact that today's robotic and prosthetic technologies are breaking new ground in treating the human body traumatized by war, accidents and natural disasters. New ways to restore function to damaged bodies offer new opportunities for individuals to return as productive members of society. It creates economic value as well as a new economy for the super-organic civilization.
The wedding of technology with the human body began some 250,000 years ago with the first use of animal skins for protection from the elements. Today, this union has evolved to where we might expect the next generation will have a blue tooth implanted at birth to insure they have instant communication across the planet.
At the University of Reading, Kevin Warwick and Ben Whalley have taken an different and interesting approach. Build the machine and implant an organic brain. They have inserted a rats brain tissue into an mechanical robot and demonstrate how this organic brain can learn to control its mechanical body.
If the mind is the home of the soul, and brain the loci of mind, then here we have an alternative evolution track. Detach the organic soul from the organic constraints of the organic body. Then enable the soul to survive in a hostile physical environment by installing it into the appropriate robotic container. This may be a necessary step for humanity as a species to seed the universe with earth born intelligent life.
What does this mean for our mortality, our morality and our humanity?
In this essay we look at the other end of the spectrum, replacing the organic parts with synthetic parts to create life.
When computers become sentient, a new order of life will emerge. This will be an order of life which favors organic/machine integration such as we have seen portrayed in AVATAR and The Terminator series. Control of production in such a world will shift from DNA based life to trans-organic technology. Human, and other DNA based life forms, purpose in the world will be dependent on their economic value to the super-organic creatures which dominate the planet. These creatures will weigh the value of DNA life relative to non-DNA life for their survival their technological complexes and chose accordingly. This is another way of saying that societies and civilizations will struggle for survival based on the competition between, human capital or DNA capital and non-DNA capital represented by technology.
James Cameron's Avatar presents a fictional depiction of what this future might be like. The battle between "humanity" and "technology" is played out here on many levels. The Corporation, a super-organic entity representing Earth, is driven by its need for "food", the mineral Unobtanium which is found on Pandora. It is this premise which drives the story line.
One plot line which stands out, Jake Sully's story, is based on the fact that today's robotic and prosthetic technologies are breaking new ground in treating the human body traumatized by war, accidents and natural disasters. New ways to restore function to damaged bodies offer new opportunities for individuals to return as productive members of society. It creates economic value as well as a new economy for the super-organic civilization.
The wedding of technology with the human body began some 250,000 years ago with the first use of animal skins for protection from the elements. Today, this union has evolved to where we might expect the next generation will have a blue tooth implanted at birth to insure they have instant communication across the planet.
At the University of Reading, Kevin Warwick and Ben Whalley have taken an different and interesting approach. Build the machine and implant an organic brain. They have inserted a rats brain tissue into an mechanical robot and demonstrate how this organic brain can learn to control its mechanical body.
If the mind is the home of the soul, and brain the loci of mind, then here we have an alternative evolution track. Detach the organic soul from the organic constraints of the organic body. Then enable the soul to survive in a hostile physical environment by installing it into the appropriate robotic container. This may be a necessary step for humanity as a species to seed the universe with earth born intelligent life.
What does this mean for our mortality, our morality and our humanity?
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Welcome to the evolution to the true TransOrganic Age
Here is the announcement of the end of organic man as the dominate species on Earth and the raise of non organic man-made technology as the next evolutionary order of earthly life.
On April 25, 1953, James Watson and Francis Crick published their ground breaking paper Molecular Structure of Nucleic Acids: A Structure for Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid Today, a little over 57 years later, mankind can claim to have truly unlocked the secrets of the the gods: "How to create life through technological and non-organic means". Technology, building on the human capacity to change the environment has emerged as the TRANS-ORGANIC order of life.
As a graduate student in anthropology, I was fascinated by Philip K. Dick's 1968 novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? I speculated on what that future would mean to our definition of "human". That was 52 years ago.
Later, 38 years ago, the story was transformed into the Ridley Scott's 1982 Sci Ft classic movie, Blade Runner. Blade Runner depicted a distant future where the boundary between organic and trans-organic orders of life become blurred.
Suddenly, that future appears to be a lot closer to reality. The following, posted and presented on TED in May 2010, marks the public announcement of how technology, through the computer, will be able to create new life forms. Four bottles of chemicals, and a computer program and maybe an advanced HP chemical printer, life is created. How long before we can do this at home on our Iphone?
Humanity's capacity to create solutions to its evolutionary problems by technological means has been nature's unique adaptive strategy for our species. Now the tables appear to be turned. Nature and evolution will be directed by Technology using the tools discovered and invented by human for its purposes. The capability of purposefully synthesizing DNA marks the emergence of The Trans-organic Order of life.
What will this mean for our species in 10, 20, or 50 years?
On April 25, 1953, James Watson and Francis Crick published their ground breaking paper Molecular Structure of Nucleic Acids: A Structure for Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid Today, a little over 57 years later, mankind can claim to have truly unlocked the secrets of the the gods: "How to create life through technological and non-organic means". Technology, building on the human capacity to change the environment has emerged as the TRANS-ORGANIC order of life.
As a graduate student in anthropology, I was fascinated by Philip K. Dick's 1968 novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? I speculated on what that future would mean to our definition of "human". That was 52 years ago.
Later, 38 years ago, the story was transformed into the Ridley Scott's 1982 Sci Ft classic movie, Blade Runner. Blade Runner depicted a distant future where the boundary between organic and trans-organic orders of life become blurred.
Suddenly, that future appears to be a lot closer to reality. The following, posted and presented on TED in May 2010, marks the public announcement of how technology, through the computer, will be able to create new life forms. Four bottles of chemicals, and a computer program and maybe an advanced HP chemical printer, life is created. How long before we can do this at home on our Iphone?
Humanity's capacity to create solutions to its evolutionary problems by technological means has been nature's unique adaptive strategy for our species. Now the tables appear to be turned. Nature and evolution will be directed by Technology using the tools discovered and invented by human for its purposes. The capability of purposefully synthesizing DNA marks the emergence of The Trans-organic Order of life.
What will this mean for our species in 10, 20, or 50 years?
Friday, March 5, 2010
Financial Engineering as the wave of future for the Superorganic evolution
This is an NSF (National Science Foundation) sponsored lecture by Doctor Andrew Lo of MIT in which he attempts to explain the technology behind the financial crisis of 2007 - 2009. He addresses the issue of who or what was responsible. His conclusions are that it was the free market and human behavior which ultimately brought about the crisis. The technology of modern financial engineering has created products which are far more complex than the systems designed to regulate and control these markets could adapt to in a timely manner. That is, success in regulating these instruments requires perfect timely in a perfect free market by totally rational human actors, none of which exists.
Financial systems are super organic systems. They exist and operate at the societal level. As social systems they are beyond the control of single individual actors. They depend on the coordinated actions of many moving parts and the perfect synchronization of all elements in the process to achieve the 'engineered" outcome. These action turn out to be the parts in an imperfect free market being synchronized by poorly prepared and integrated human actors.
While Dr. Lo's lecture deals with rather complex issues, his presentation is geared to an informed, but not necessarily technically trained, audience. His presentation style, illustrated with simple PowerPoint slides, is understandable and enjoyable.
Financial systems are super organic systems. They exist and operate at the societal level. As social systems they are beyond the control of single individual actors. They depend on the coordinated actions of many moving parts and the perfect synchronization of all elements in the process to achieve the 'engineered" outcome. These action turn out to be the parts in an imperfect free market being synchronized by poorly prepared and integrated human actors.
While Dr. Lo's lecture deals with rather complex issues, his presentation is geared to an informed, but not necessarily technically trained, audience. His presentation style, illustrated with simple PowerPoint slides, is understandable and enjoyable.
Are Mathematical Models the Cause for Financial Crisis in the Global Economy? from jojimbo on Vimeo.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Introduction to Chaos Theory and the Superorganic
The complexity of life on this planet and in our universe is a wonder of infinite possibilities which the human mind has yet to comprehend. Businesses startup and then fail, stock markets go up and then down, all the while governments muddle along trying to maintain some sense of order and security for their members. Yet even these best of intentions are overwhelmed by chance. The human tendency for linear thinking is very useful for solving the routine problems of daily life, but a total disaster in uncertain times and circumstances.
Linear thinking is the process of thinking that If A happens, then experience teaches us that B follows. Linear thinking is based on the assumption that there are universal truths which explain the world we live in. It is a form of thinking which is the hallmark of the ideolog and partisan. That is, "there is my way or no way."
Yet beyond the circle of our immediate experience, the truth of such thinking quickly disappears and complexities fog our judgement and ability to coop with the new or unusual. The Superorganic is a level of social organization beyond the individual and beyond the immediate family where we first encounter the limitations of linear thinking applied to human behavior. As the recent movie, It's Complicated, shows even the simplest of human relationships can become unpredicably humorous and sad when the linear thinking of one party fails to account for the linear thinking and circumstances of others.
How do we understand the world when it is becoming more and more complex by the minute? How do we understand and deal with the chaos in our lives?
The following video may help you to understand how Nonlinear thinking gives us an alternative way of thinking about the Chaos in our lives.
Chaos theory is the way to begin to understand how the superorganic behaves.
Linear thinking is the process of thinking that If A happens, then experience teaches us that B follows. Linear thinking is based on the assumption that there are universal truths which explain the world we live in. It is a form of thinking which is the hallmark of the ideolog and partisan. That is, "there is my way or no way."
Yet beyond the circle of our immediate experience, the truth of such thinking quickly disappears and complexities fog our judgement and ability to coop with the new or unusual. The Superorganic is a level of social organization beyond the individual and beyond the immediate family where we first encounter the limitations of linear thinking applied to human behavior. As the recent movie, It's Complicated, shows even the simplest of human relationships can become unpredicably humorous and sad when the linear thinking of one party fails to account for the linear thinking and circumstances of others.
How do we understand the world when it is becoming more and more complex by the minute? How do we understand and deal with the chaos in our lives?
The following video may help you to understand how Nonlinear thinking gives us an alternative way of thinking about the Chaos in our lives.
Chaos theory is the way to begin to understand how the superorganic behaves.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
TOO BIG TO FAIL: Systematic Pragmatism or Moral Hazard
The Economic crisis of 2008-2009 is summarized in the PBS program, Frontline's February 17, 2009 "Inside the Meltdown". This crisis threatened to bring down the American and global economy and lead to the popularization of the phrase "Too big to fail."
"Too big to fail" means that a superorganic entity, "Corporation," is so complex and so intertwined with the other elements that make up the many levels of the superorganic entity known as the "Nation", that the failure of the former could result in the fatal failure or death of the latter.
As the Frontline report makes clear -- when it comes to the superorganic, human moral principles come up against the question of systematic pragmatism. When the survival of the whole depends upon the survival of the one critical part that is TOO BIG TO FAIL, then how do we, as individuals, justify and come to an accommodation with the paradox of personal responsibility vs the greater good?
The questions it raises for us are two-fold:
Should the greed and selfishness which fostered the systematic breakdown of Wall Street's investment banks be punished by letting the individual and institutional immorality be punished by letting them fail regardless of the collateral damage to the nation's financial system? (Moral Hazard)
Or, Should those responsibility for safe guarding the United States' financial system as a whole, step forward and take over the failed system, and, in effect, reward greed and stupidity in order to mitigate the collateral damage and to save the system? (Systematic Pragmatism)
As we come out of the depths of the crisis, it is time to take stock.
Here is the paradox we now face, what was TOO BIG TO FAIL, is today MUCH TOO BIG TO FAIL.
For example: As part of the Bush/Obama solution to the crisis -- big investment banks that failed have been allowed to fail in the case of Lehman Brothers, or forced to merge with stronger ones, i.e. J.P. Morgan/Bear Sterns and Bank of American/Merrill-Lynch. In either case, where there were 5; now there are 2.
Financial innovation such a credit default swaps are sold with no regard to the "product liability" concerns that innovators in other sectors of the economy are held to. Should there be an FDA or CPSC to oversee the manufacture and marketing of "toxic" assets. Should the stock analyst be held accountable for false advertising? Where are the trial lawyers and regulators?
Should the fund managers for the nation's retirement funds, the major investors in Wall Street, be held accountable for their failure as fiduciary agents to safe guard the long term interests of their clients. Should there be special rules for fiduciary capitalism to distinguish it from entrepreneurial capitalism?
Do the survivors of the crisis represent a healthy new heart for our financial system or are they part of the same cancer in the system?
Are the moral ideals of a "free market" and "capitalistic political system" still philosophically valid principles for government today in a global, instantaneous economy where private corporations are free to move assets anywhere at any time without any responsibility to anyone for the consequences?
If governments are the courts and banks of last resort for their people (citizens), can a republican democracy limit their exposure to financial failure while maintaining a principle of moral hazard applicable to its citizens and institutions equally?
Or, Does a systematic pragmatism require a redefinition of the principles of republican democracy and a formal differentiation in the role of government toward different segments of its citizens?
Should any corporation be allowed to become TOO BIG TO FAIL?
These are the questions the American people and their representatives must address in the remaining months of 2009 and will answer in the election of 2010.
"Too big to fail" means that a superorganic entity, "Corporation," is so complex and so intertwined with the other elements that make up the many levels of the superorganic entity known as the "Nation", that the failure of the former could result in the fatal failure or death of the latter.
As the Frontline report makes clear -- when it comes to the superorganic, human moral principles come up against the question of systematic pragmatism. When the survival of the whole depends upon the survival of the one critical part that is TOO BIG TO FAIL, then how do we, as individuals, justify and come to an accommodation with the paradox of personal responsibility vs the greater good?
The questions it raises for us are two-fold:
Should the greed and selfishness which fostered the systematic breakdown of Wall Street's investment banks be punished by letting the individual and institutional immorality be punished by letting them fail regardless of the collateral damage to the nation's financial system? (Moral Hazard)
Or, Should those responsibility for safe guarding the United States' financial system as a whole, step forward and take over the failed system, and, in effect, reward greed and stupidity in order to mitigate the collateral damage and to save the system? (Systematic Pragmatism)
As we come out of the depths of the crisis, it is time to take stock.
Here is the paradox we now face, what was TOO BIG TO FAIL, is today MUCH TOO BIG TO FAIL.
For example: As part of the Bush/Obama solution to the crisis -- big investment banks that failed have been allowed to fail in the case of Lehman Brothers, or forced to merge with stronger ones, i.e. J.P. Morgan/Bear Sterns and Bank of American/Merrill-Lynch. In either case, where there were 5; now there are 2.
Financial innovation such a credit default swaps are sold with no regard to the "product liability" concerns that innovators in other sectors of the economy are held to. Should there be an FDA or CPSC to oversee the manufacture and marketing of "toxic" assets. Should the stock analyst be held accountable for false advertising? Where are the trial lawyers and regulators?
Should the fund managers for the nation's retirement funds, the major investors in Wall Street, be held accountable for their failure as fiduciary agents to safe guard the long term interests of their clients. Should there be special rules for fiduciary capitalism to distinguish it from entrepreneurial capitalism?
Do the survivors of the crisis represent a healthy new heart for our financial system or are they part of the same cancer in the system?
Are the moral ideals of a "free market" and "capitalistic political system" still philosophically valid principles for government today in a global, instantaneous economy where private corporations are free to move assets anywhere at any time without any responsibility to anyone for the consequences?
If governments are the courts and banks of last resort for their people (citizens), can a republican democracy limit their exposure to financial failure while maintaining a principle of moral hazard applicable to its citizens and institutions equally?
Or, Does a systematic pragmatism require a redefinition of the principles of republican democracy and a formal differentiation in the role of government toward different segments of its citizens?
Should any corporation be allowed to become TOO BIG TO FAIL?
These are the questions the American people and their representatives must address in the remaining months of 2009 and will answer in the election of 2010.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Emergence and Superorganic
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)