The previous article identified a recurring trend in human history; each new stage of civilization resulted from the integration of tools invented in the prior stage. That is; the output of one tool becomes the input of another.

In general, this is what defines a “system”. One of the problems with systems is that if one major piece fails, the whole system falters.  Today we have computer systems, transportation systems, social systems and financial system that all behave in this way.

The financial system is built on five integrated pillars

Currency

A currency is a device that people use for both the storage and the exchange of value.  Currency serves as a proxy that represents the value of things that people produce it is not in itself a product.

Inventory

The accounting system keeps track of the things that people produce.  It is helpful to use a currency to represent the the storage and exchange of value from the things that people produce; but again, currency is only a representation of inventory.

Vetting

An economy must have a vetting mechanism that keeps the game fair otherwise nobody would play.  Today this includes a legal system, contracts, and institutions  - such as representative government – that defend the value of things that people produce.

Entrepreneurs

Classically, entrepreneurs are the merchant class who allocate land, labor, and money in various proportions and combinations as a means of organizing and matching the supply of things that people produce with the demand for what people produce.

Society

People define markets.  They supply the inventory that other people demand and they demand the inventory that other people supply.

Examples of financial system failures are legendary

The Enron Fiasco was an accounting system failure caused by a vetting mechanism failure. The housing bubble was a was a currency failure because CDOs effectively divorced the dollar from any meaningful representation of productivity.  The unemployment crisis is a social failure that limits the ability for people to supply the things that they demand.

The Inevitable Economy

So what if the functions of these same five pillars could be achieved and integrated in some other way? What if this is already happening?  Going through the list backwards to reflect a mirror image:

Society

People are reorganizing in new and different ways.  They increasingly use social media and mobile technology to supply and demand limitless information with which they then use to supply and demand many useful things of each other.

Entrepreneurs

Land, labor, and capital are becoming increasingly irrelevant in the age of non-scarce information – instead, entrepreneurs are allocation social, creative, and intellectual assets as a means of matching the supply and demand for the things that people need.

Vetting

Social contracts are playing an increasing role in keeping the game fair. It is not in the best interest for anyone to act with low integrity when they can be Googled in a matter of seconds.

Inventory

The knowledge asset inventory is forming in many applications and platforms – but it is not yet integrated. When this happens, an accounting system for social, creative, and intellectual assets will immediately emerge.

Finally, the currency

Any device that can represent human productivity better than today’s money will become that next currency.  This can only happen after the four pillars begin to integrate.

The currency is supported by the system. The system is NOT supported by the currency.  

]]> http://www.ingenesist.com/general-info/the-5-pillars-of-the-inevitable-economy.html/feed 1 http://www.ingenesist.com/general-info/ideas-are-the-new-currency.html http://www.ingenesist.com/general-info/ideas-are-the-new-currency.html#comments Tue, 20 Dec 2011 21:30:53 +0000 Dan Robles http://www.ingenesist.com/?p=6623

‘Tis the season for “The Year In Pictures” – the annual new year pictorial accounting of the events of the outgoing year.  Any rational collection for 2011 would include three events; Arab Spring, The Earthquake / Tsunami in Japan, and Occupy Wall Street. These three events eclipsed the Royal Wedding, Steve Jobs, the tenth anniversary of 9/11, the space shuttle retirement and even the end of the war in Iraq.

These three events tell a very interesting story of who we are and where we are going as a civilization.  

Classical economists such as David Ricardo and Adam Smith brought us the idea that a merchant class allocates land, labor, and capital in various combinations as “the factors of production” that match supply and demand for all that societies need via the invisible hand of market capitalism.

Yet, in a single hour, land, labor, and billions of units of Capital were wiped off the surface of the Earth by in Japan.   While we see the images of total destruction, there are hundreds of square miles that were untouched and where all seems quite normal – except for that invisible hand of radioactive cesium.  Land, labor, and capital failed as a an economic cornerstone for all those who had once called this land home.

In the Middle East, with few jobs and even fewer opportunities for youth, the quaint notion of “land and labor allocations” crumbled under the forces of people with mobile access to dynamic data, free information, community knowledge, innovation, and wisdom. Governments, with no relative shortage of money, were unable to challenge the opposing factors.  Again, the idea of land, labor, and capital as the economic cornerstone had failed.

Quite appropriately, Occupy Wall Street was executed on borrowed land, with borrowed labor, and borrowed capital.   The operation was peaceful so nobody died. The stock market did not even crash.  Politicians went largely unscathed and the attorneys stayed in their collective offices. Nothing physical was actually created, and therefore, nothing physical was actually destroyed.  However, a great deal was produced.

All three of these events had something in common – they all produced something very tangible.  They all produced an idea in the minds of others.

As we review the year we review it is increasingly evident that land, labor, and capital are inadequate to articulate what people actually produce.  It will be through these shortcomings of classical economics that a new economy will form.  The degree to which society actually produces the things that society actually needs, this new economy should not look much different.  The degree to which society does not actually need the things that capitalism produces, great new ideas will emerge.

What was once the land of opportunity can now become a planet of opportunity.

Photo Credit: David Shankbone via Mashable 

Millions of people are looking for Jobs.  Meanwhile, employers complain of a chronic “skills mismatch” that prevents them from hiring people or initiating new innovations.

When an engineer is laid off from an airplane manufacturer, a company like Starbucks has no idea what that person knows even though aircraft and milk steamers have a great deal in common from the perspective of the Engineer (both are pressure vessels subject to extreme environmental conditions).

The same is true for a marine engineer, and HVAC engineer, or an electrostatic coating machinery engineer.  Each of these disciplines has far more in common than they have differences.  However, if you compare the descriptions for any of these jobs, they sound like they all happen on different planets.

God forbid you are not an expert on MS Excel, which only takes a few hours for almost anyone to learn – yet not tagging that radio button can negate 20 years of experience that only 1% of people have the desire, discipline, and intellect to achieve.

The same holds true for many talents and professions. There are serious problems with the way that we discern the supply and demand for knowledge assets.

What is needed is an intermediate knowledge inventory in the commons that everyone can index to.  So when an engineer tags “pressure vessels” the term registers into the resident ontology of all observers.

Why is this better?

Of course companies are trying to eliminate variance and risk by hiring a person who has been trained by someone else – preferable a direct competitor.  On the other hand, the mantra of modern business is to innovate.  Innovation does not happen by duplicating yesterday’s ideas. Mixing diverse combinations of knowledge assets, and not all common knowledge assets, accelerates the process of Innovation.  Think of all the music that is yet to be created for lack of musicians to play the different instruments.

An intermediate knowledge inventory solves both problems by allowing companies to introduce diverse knowledge assets without introducing irrelevant knowledge assets.  It also gives people far more mobility to pursue specialties that they are most talented and interested in.  As such, the allocation of knowledge assets would improve to match supply of knowledge with the demand for knowledge in an innovation economy.

There is not a shortage or work, only a shortage of knowledge about knowledge.  

If we follow the Wall Street accounting model, the supply and demand for knowledge assets are cast against the factors of production; land, labor, and capital.  The typical corporate human resource department looks to the community for labor units within commuting distance to a factory, and who are willing to rent their time in exchange a minimum amount of money.

But Land is Obsolete

Technology has made the idea of “land” as a factor of production almost obsolete.  Knowledge assets travel over the Internet and can be deployed and organized in many ways across long distances without a factory.  Indeed there are server farms and automation houses where things are made if needed – but these are hardly factors of production as they once were.

What exactly is a Labor unit again?

Machines have replaced much of what we once called “labor”.  I am sitting at Starbucks where a smiling robot is the only thing missing from the age of automated lattes.  The social, creative, and intellectual capital required to create, design, maintain, and serve the technology is what ushers us into the knowledge economy and the associated innovation economy.

Capital is arbitrary

Everyone knows that money is created out of thin air when someone allocates their future productivity to the bankers balance sheet in exchange for a place to sleep.  When this game loses its entertainment value, “capital” as a factor of production will also become obsolete.

The Supply and Demand for Knowledge Assets:

Knowledge assets are deployed by teachers and replicated by student.  Teachers represent the supply of knowledge and students represent the demand for knowledge.  In between these two extremes are collaborations – that is, varying combinations of teaching and learning that ultimately results in a productive outcome such as a latte, automobile, or computer program.

If we sample a population of knowledge assets across some geographic area (Land) we would expect to find something that looks like a bell curve.

If the bell curve has a different shape, this tells us what things can be made and what things cannot (Labor).

So when people allocate their own productivity, they are in effect assigning their productivity to a community balance sheet (Capital).  They are saying “this is what we are willing to make because we have the freedom, liberty, and we intion to pursue our happiness”.

Hardly a Wall Street model.

The result is that the social, creative, and intellectual assets of people must now replace Land, Labor, and Capital as factors of production in the new value economy.  Trying to produce anything less would be inefficient in a Capitalist system – perhaps some may have noticed as much lately.

]]> http://www.ingenesist.com/general-info/supply-and-demand-for-knowledge-assets.html/feed 5 http://www.ingenesist.com/general-info/it-is-time-to-evolve.html http://www.ingenesist.com/general-info/it-is-time-to-evolve.html#comments Tue, 04 Oct 2011 21:13:01 +0000 Dan Robles http://www.ingenesist.com/?p=6417

I saw a Fox News commentary on the Occupy Wall Street movement.  They interviewed a bunch of kids who were taking part in the parade and asked them a simple question: “So, what do you expect to replace Capitalism with?”

Then Fox, in their fair and balanced tradition, portrayed their subjects as the poster children of a failed education system (some children left behind after all) and further testimony to the failure of the Obama Administration. because obviously “These kids don’t know how the real world works”.

The Pundits can’t climb the tree any better.

Unfortunately, nobody else has an answer to that question either – none of the pundits or anchors produced anything except the tired argument that we tried Socialism and it failed so therefore more Capitalism is the only way to fix Capitalism.

It’s a Simple Problem

Market Capitalism only articulates value in the things that people make which can physically sit on a market shelf.  Market Capitalism does not articulate the value of individual people; those things that people make in society.

Of course, it is also a double edge sword since those that really don’t produce anything – like hedge fund managers, pundits, and politicians – will become impoverished. Meanwhile, those who really do produce things – like teachers, engineers, and firemen – will become wealthy.  So watch how the lines are redrawn in this debate.

How the world really works

The Internet and social media have shifted the factors of production away from land, labor, and capital to a higher order of human organization.  This is what we need to be talking about.  People today produce things with knowledge – social, creative, and intellectual knowledge.  These are the factors of production for that 99% of the value that exists on Earth.

A Simple Solution

After many a blue face, I’ll say it again; there is no way to build anything meaningful without an inventory of parts.  Car companies have inventories of parts, Banks have inventories of assets, even biology has an inventory of genomes – but there is no knowledge inventory for our communities.  We don’t know what we do or do not know.  We have absolutely no idea how valuable we are yet we complain that we’re impoverished.  Meanwhile corporation create technology to replace people when people could be just as easily be creating technology to replace corporations.

How on Earth can we determine supply and demand for knowledge assets without an inventory?  How can we expect to create any type of fair and rational economy from a bunch of invisible stuff milling around the parks?  There is no escape from Market Capitalism and no path to Social Capitalism without a Knowledge Inventory, period.

A Stunning Omission

This is a very easy problem to solve and we have all the cards waiting to be stacked in our favor using the tools that are right in front of our collective noses.  If we fail at something so simple, then we deserve to be enslaved.  After all, 100,000 years ago, such people would have been eaten by tigers.  It’s time to Evolve.

Commercial airlines continue to astonish the traveling public with an ever-increasing array of new ways to charge extra fees.  The newest scheme is to charge 5 dollars to have a customer service agent print your boarding pass.  You can get around this by using your own printer, or using a free kiosk – which undoubtedly will not be free for long.

Your schedule or theirs?

Meanwhile, the different prices that people pay for the same trip continues to fluctuate wildly. There are very few products whose price defies supply and demand or actually increases as it approaches it’s expiration date.

People who book 4-6 weeks in advance have the highest probability of getting the lowest fair – as long as the don’t buy the ticket on a weekend.  Buying a ticket on a Tuesday morning 4 weeks in advance can yield a 50% discount of the person who bought their ticket 2 weeks in advance on a Saturday afternoon.

Obviously, there must be some net average cost for a seat, per mile traveled with all services restored, so why can’t we save the drama and loss of productivity and use the average price? An “average revenue per seat mile” price is good enough for Wall Street Annual Report – why not the rest of us?. Another nagging question: why can’t I use frequent flier miles to buy lunch on the plane or carry extra suitcase?  What, they don’t accept their own currency…?!?!

Are You Gamed by FlyVille?

The airline industry has been gamified and people are hard wired to play along – of course they complain, but they also learn to behave in a manner that they perceive to be in their own best interest, but actually is in the Airline’s best interest.  Tacit collusion among airlines can now play out using frequent flier miles, copycat fares, and lowered customer expectations.  How much time do people spend playing this game?

This is also the environment where a competitor can emerge with a  “counter-game”.

Social Flights was launched a few months ago with a very simple data landscape; a means and manner in which people can meet to ride share on private aircraft.  Currently, the amount of time required for a social flights customer to execute a flight plan – that is, organize people in their community with shared flight intentions – may still be greater than the time and harassment of just going through the flow of the commercial airline abyss.   Over time, however, this will change.

Frequent Influence Miles

Suppose that Social Flights deployed frequent flier miles?  Suppose these could be awarded for organizing a social flight plan to a social network?  Suppose miles could be redeemed for discounts on hotels, car rentals, and ground services (think AAA)? Restaurants, entertainment and events routinely pay commissions to concierge referrals, why wouldn’t they also redeem Social Flights Flier Miles in the same manner?

What if Social Flights frequent flier miles could be earned and redeemed without actually flying, but by simply organizing communities until your perfect trip comes along?  What if a person with high Social Flights Frequent Flier Miles represented a better social influence predictor than say, a Klout score or Twitter follower count?  Would vendors want to know who these magical people are?  Will vendors compensate them for their influence in a community?  Wouldn’t the community then define the ads that get pitched?

What’s the end game? Let’s transform the industry together.  Seeking game designers to build the next generation of air travel

]]> http://www.ingenesist.com/general-info/the-gamification-of-air-travel.html/feed 0 http://www.ingenesist.com/general-info/control-the-information-and-control-the-game.html http://www.ingenesist.com/general-info/control-the-information-and-control-the-game.html#comments Mon, 09 May 2011 20:34:16 +0000 Dan Robles http://www.ingenesist.com/?p=5825

Social media is progressing in a direction where the SM application controls your information – not you.  This is a game that you cannot win unless they let you win.  Social Flights changes the rules by letting you control your own information.  As such, we are growing in popularity among entrepreneurs who are looking for a game they can win playing by a new set of rules.

Social Flights is comprised of 2 components; Social Flights Corporate and Social Flights Travel Tribes.  The corporate application provides vertical integration while the Travel Tribes provide horizontal integration.  Each is hugely dependent on the other, but the travel tribe is where the value is.

Vertical Integration involves information technology; the collection and formation of system data.  This is the information that helps groups stay in contact with each other giving the origin community a portal into the destination community (and vice versa) for a given flight.  This helps airplane operators schedule flights, and it helps communities become attractive to entrepreneurs and other communities.

The horizontal integration is where information originates and terminates.  The Travel Tribe disseminates information on the ground at both the origin and destination.  What happens in a Travel Tribe, stays in a Travel tribe.

The most important aspect of data and information control is the ability to restrict it from communities who are not part of the transaction. Nobody else can know where you are going except you and the airplane operator – that’s what makes the game private.  Nobody needs to know how much you are paying for a hotel room or travel service except you and the service provider – that’s what makes the game valuable.  Nobody needs to know what you are doing on the ground except you and your friends  - that’s what makes the game social.

A Value Game depends on the control of information.  If someone else controls the information – they control the Value and there can be no game. They also control the use of information and the information technology.  Don’t take this point likely; whoever controls the use of the information also controls the technology (vertical integration), not the other way around.   Technology is deployed to the game – the game is not deployed to the technology.  So, if you control the game, then you control the usage and the deployment of the technology; i.e., you control the value.

(Diagram credit and reference:  Seven Faces of Information Literacy in Higher Education by Christine Bruce)

Eric Rosenblith 1920-2010

I have been putting off writing this blog post until I could find a simple answer to the question “What is an Ingenesist?”.  I invented the term “Ingenesist” to capture the creative, intellectual and social nature of human ingenuity without falling back on current definitions and the silos that perpetuate them. Something has gone wrong with the world and the solution could not be found in the current world view – I needed a new word for my work.

Ingenesist comes from the Latin (ingeniare), French (ingénieur), and Spanish (ingeniero) word for Engineer.  These words, of course, were created long before an engineer was defined by such alphabet soup as BSME. MSCE, IEEE, ABET, NCEES, EIT, PE, etc…  The term ‘Ingenesist’ was meant to represent people whose ideas and actions increase the productivity of other people.

A friend of mine lost his dad yesterday.  I read the obituary and could not help but realize that this person lived through what were likely the darkest and the brightest hours of modern human civilization.  He was an artist and a teacher.

Then I hit the quote in Mr. Rosenblith’s obituary:

“We truly need to be thinkers, poets, painters, engineers, and philosophers.’’ – Eric Rosenblith

And that is how I found my simple answer.  With humility and simplicity, he captured the creative, intellectual and social nature of human ingenuity. The least I could do was finally write this blog post.

My sincere condolences to Alan and his family.  Please support the Symbionomics Project on Kickstarter

We call this wisdom

In the old days, the hiring manager was the person to know if you wanted to get a job. They would read your resume and compare it with the “bell curve” in their mind.  This bell curve contains a statistical sample of all similar situations that the manager has witnessed, the variables involved, and a range of outcomes observed across their long and illustrious career…Ohhhmmmmmm

We Call This Simulated Wisdom

Modern HR systems try to simulate this wisdom through a series of innovations such as key word search, structured interviews, personality tests, and employee incentives. Now we can use Google (an information company) to derive sort of a proxy for wisdom as we assess search results in our own image.  Facebook and Linkedin go a step further by providing us with another filter through which to pass judgement upon a future employee or partner.  The problem is that the more we look into these systems, the more they deliver back to us a reflection of ourselves…Ohhhmmmmm

The Data need to be Normalized

The world has become so strange, complex, technological, and interwoven, that no single person can possibly posses such a vast and broad set of experiences as to arrive at an optimized outcome every time.   Innovation favors strategic combination of diverse knowledge unlike the Industrial revolution which favored identical packets of similar knowledge.  The Innovation Economy will require a completely new approach to social value creation.

The Social Credit Score

Not unlike the FICO score, the knowledge inventory is a collection of potential knowledge events where the social network is a reporting agency that has a vested interest in meaningful knowledge events. Unlike FICO however, the variables for knowledge can be infinite (think of the Dewey Decimal System).  Also, a Social Credit Score would respond to positive events rather than a finite set of negative “hits”.

The Percentile Search Engine

Instead of just returning information, this new search engine must return probabilities from which an entrepreneur may test scenarios related to the likelihood of executing a particular business process at a known time, cost, proximity, ROI, etc.

Example

Innovation Economics

An entrepreneur may want to know if her team has enough knowledge to execute a business plan. Perhaps the team has too much knowledge and they should try something more valuable. Maybe the team does not have enough knowledge and they should attempt another opportunity or accumulate training.

Valuation of Knowledge  The search engine can look into a network and identify the supply and demand of a knowledge asset. If it is unavailable or too expensive, the search engine can adjust for price, risk, or options that may emerge at a later date.

Business Intelligence Organizations can scan each other’s knowledge inventory and decide to compete, cooperate, acquire, or evade.

Knowledge management If a key person retires, the entrepreneur would simulate the knowledge that is lost and reassign people strategically.

The Secret Sauce  Companies such as Disney and Boeing both use Engineers, each would have proprietary algorithm of knowledge that represents their “secret sauce” of success. These recipes can be adjusted and improved to reflect and preserve the wisdom of an organization. Over time, these algorithms will become far more valuable then the Patents and Trade Secrets created by them – this will allow technologies to be open sourced much more profitably and shared across more industries.

Eventually, we will learn to manufacture wisdom …OhhhhMmmmmGeeeee

Résumé: A French word for separating the body from the brain

We are entering a renewal in the work force. The global imperative is for the United States to become an innovation economy now. This is an entirely different animal than the Industrial revolution; I have long argued that the résumé system is by far the most archaic knowledge management “currency” of trade in use today.

The entire premise of the résumé is destitute, if not destructive, in the modern world. Words on a computer screen are a very low level ‘media form’ being used to describe a very high ‘media form’; social, creative, and intellectual capital. It’s like using crayons to design an aircraft.

If the key words are so important, why have any other words?

A manager always hires people that remind them of themselves. They estimate the future success of a candidate based on their own limited, and often static, past experiences. The world is moving so fast and has become so complex that no manager can possibly know enough to capitalize the future based on a viable statistical sample of past experiences – we’re all holding on for dear life in a hurricane of change. The problems and opportunities of the future are so huge, so important, and happening so amazingly fast yet the allocation of human resources is worse than random for a candidate pool.

Here are a few comments that I’ve picked off some recent Human Resources Community Blogs:

***

1. And our future goes with it:

“Most recruiting systems I’ve seen screen out innovators. Any résumé that is unique, different or convention-defying gets surreptitiously put in the junk pile.”

2. Start by looking in the junk pile:

“The Innovation Economy requires that the talent that creates the most value for an organization must rise to the top. Innovators are playing an increasing role in creating shareholder value – one might argue that they create the most shareholder value these days – and figuring out how to find and attract this very different breed of talent is one of the most critical initiatives you can launch within your organization.”

3. What part of “share holder value” are we having difficulty with?

“The most innovative people I have ever met don’t follow conventions in their experience or in their résumé. Or, they get bored very quickly when they can’t innovate or are forced to focus on operations, and efficiency. Most might look like (and even be) job hoppers”

4. Here is my favorite comment – I wish I could hug this person:

“I think it takes more than a résumé to screen an Innovator in or out. As blogs, blog posts, social networking, more powerful search tools, personal websites, the emergence of video on the web, talent platforms that offer CRM, etc. etc. etc. continue to become additional tools for an employer to consider in making a hiring decision, is the résumé still a currency for a candidate?”

***

We have an inventory and CAD model of every nut, rivet, and panel that goes on an airplane – why would we try to build anything without one?

So Please, let’s evolve out of the revolutionary times and develop a real community knowledge inventory. It must be computer enabled and based on a taxonomy that everyone knows and understands. It must be read, analyzed, sorted and vetted by social networks and communities of practice. It must integrate with knowledge assets from anywhere in the world.

A Troll is a member of a race of fearsome creatures from Norse mythology. Troll mythology is, in fact fairly complex but seems to resolve to common images of Neanderthal type people living under bridges who extort money from passersby, steal babies, and fear God.

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion [Wikipedia].

In the Intellectual Property world, a troll is an individual or business that holds patent or copyrights with no intention of developing the IP and every intention to enforce against infringement by those who do develop ideas.

Naturally, we seek to anticipate the future usage of the term Troll in a context of Social Capitalism. We can say that someone who was in a position to constrain Social Capitalism has the potential to engage in troll behavior.

The troll does benefit from the eventual success of traveler passing through the constraint; however, they create an unnecessary or non productive friction in a market. This can kill many business plans as troll fees and uncertainties need to be factored into the risks of doing business.

I am reminded of a legal system that facilitates litigation over education, negotiation, and cooperation. Social media has an inherent self-policing aspect that may threaten “regulators” in law and government who seek to hold exclusive vetting privilege over a social market.

I am reminded of advertisers who put lipstick on the pig by pretending to play up the whuffie, trust agent or engagement vibe, but instead lay Astroturf and buy up social media outlets. Spam is spam is spam.

I am reminded of Internet service providers that purposely slow down a connection and charge for speed that costs them less to keep open than to slow down. I am reminded of the demise of unlimited data packages for mobile Internet – now that the user is an addict, pull back the dosing in exchange for compliance.

In short, a social capital troll is any person or organization that seeks to CHANGE the online behavior of an individual and their community rather than EMPOWER the individual and their community to do what they would have done in the absence of the troll.

Fell free to add more for future posts on this subject……..

The real estate market is trashed, money markets are unstable, commodities are in the tank, the banking system is corrupted to the core, inflation is looming around every corner, and the politicians are engorging themselves in a game of Cerebral Gridlock.

Literally, there is no safe place to put your money. Instead, people are investing their productivity in social media – social media is simply a storage device for knowledge assets. Soon it will become a stock exchange for knowledge assets. Investors should not take this lightly – the best place to store your money is in the real productivity of real people.

People are trading knowledge assets in social media. This exchange is denominated by a conversational currency. If we consider the structure of conversations and compare that to both the structure of social networks AND the structure of our financial system, we see a huge opportunity to develop an alternate financial system that can capitalize and securitize knowledge assets in social media.

Ingenesist.com

Music by Phil Felicia

Our culture organizes itself around winners and losers. Corporations reflect this competitive nature to the core of their Capitalist doctrine. Sports analogies abound across the enterprise straight through to the HR department always on the lookout for the most amount of superstar for the least amount of money.

Social media has every industry trying to understand the concept of community. Among the most difficult ideas to grasp is that knowledge assets in a community live on a bell curve, not in winner and loser columns. Everyone is an expert at something and nobody is an expert at everything. Someone who is not performing adequately is simply a misallocated asset, not flotsam subject to jettison at the next layoff or outsource “opportunity”.

Like most assets, there is a perfectly legitimate market for everyone in a community – nobody need be excluded, marginalized or laid off. Social Media is turning the tables on the hierarchy and old winners who don’t play by the new rules quickly become the new losers. Maybe we ought to run our economy like a community instead of losing so badly at trying to be a winner.

Any taxonomy that is used to classify information is a candidate for the classification of knowledge. This is because knowledge is related to information in a differential equation that also includes data and innovation (another blog post).

The trick is that everyone needs to be using the same taxonomy so that we can all access knowledge inventories of the people around us as easily as it is to access books on Amazon.com. This will lead to a trade in knowledge assets formally the sole domain of corporations through the process of industrialization (yet another blog post) .

Please enjoy these videos, use them as you wish and let us know what you think.

OK, the social media buzz is getting a little stale folks.

• Yes we know that social media is valuable.
• Yes we know that lots of folks are doing it.
• Yes we know that the predictive web is predicted.
• Yes we all know that all this activity will mysteriously “monetize”

Show me how everyone is related and I’ll show you a new economic paradigm. Here is how they are not related:

• They are not related by “earning” people’s trust today so you can shove your product down their throat tomorrow.
• They are not related to collecting thumbnails.
• They are not related to giving the g00gle alg00rithm an 00rgasm.
• They are not related by “The 6 Steps to [Fill in The Gap]”.

The next economic paradigm is related to transformation.

• People transform data into information
• People transform information into knowledge
• People transform knowledge into innovation
• People transform innovation into data

Under a set of fundamental assumptions that:

• All people are socially talented
• All people are intellectually talented
• All people are creatively talented
• All people are good at something
• Nobody is good at everything

This is how value is generated. This is where the mystery of monetization hides.

One must seriously ask, how exactly do political memoirs increase human productivity?

2009 marked the resurrection of the infamous “Book Deal” with lovely Ms. Palin and entourage leading the charge. However, books are not the actual product; it is the kindling (amazon pun intended) that they provide for endless fodder for the mainstream and new media.  It’s the money shot.

Entering a mid-term election year with the future of our country in the balance, the onslaught of meaningless dribble will be epic. The national pundits will go wild fueling local media coverage as the authors engage in their cross-country tours of duty performing the perfunctory act of accomplishment.

There will be a wide audience of Americans asking themselves the same question:

Should the past be used to predict the future?

Karl Rove

Former deputy White House chief of staff’s book Courage and Consequence will be published on 9 March by Simon and Schuster’s Threshold Editions, a conservative imprint. Deal reported by US media at $2m.

Donald Rumsfeld

To be published in the autumn by Sentinel, an imprint of Penguin. No advance for the former defense secretary, share of proceeds to go to charity.

George W Bush

Autobiography, tentatively titled Decision Points, is to be published by Crown. Deal estimated at $7m.

Laura Bush

Her memoir is due in the spring from Scribner. Laura’s deal may be worth more than her husband’s. US media put it at $8m.

Dick Cheney

Scheduled for spring 2011, the former vice-president shares publisher with Rove. His deal is estimated at $2m.

What if this conversation has no currency?

What if we are reaching a tipping point? What if nobody cares anymore? What if none of this makes any sense to anyone? What if we can more accurately use the future to predict what really happened in the past?

Visionaries Ho!

There are no shortage of intelligent and visionary social media celebrities.  They write great books about markets, social media tools, strategies, and on-line reputation for the benefit of the millions of people stuck on any part of the slippery social media learning curve.  They are infinitely generous with their knowledge and share it freely at countless conferences, blog posts, and syndicated articles.

There is, however, one thing that most of these Guru’s have in common – they consult to and are paid by large corporations. I could be considered part of this crowd for whatever my influence is worth.  So the question about causation is due – will social media develop as a function of corporate interaction with it?

If so, then it is not social media – it is corporate media.

This is no surprise, nor should there be any apparent concern, after all, everyone has to make a living and it is better that the corporations pay people to create content that benefits me.   The practice is conducted quite ethically too -most readily disclose where their financial support comes from and we all benefit from free information that helps us keep the playing field as level as it can be.

But at the end of the day, it’s all about eye-balls and bullhorns.  In order to produce eyeballs and bullhorns, people must be sitting at a computer or, at least, staring at a handset.  The longer you can keep people interacting with the brand instead of interacting with each other, the better off everyone is, right?

Social Media Consumer Advocate

A consumer advocate is someone who helps look after the best interest of the consumer for product safety and false advertising.  Social media is pushing the envelope of the corporate interaction with consumers.  “Advertising” no longer lends itself to the objective review of a billboard, commercial, or public statement.  Social Media Marketing is increasingly sophisticated and manipulative.  The vulnerable people; children and elders are no less vulnerable on social media, and may be more.

Social anomalies?

Some of the emerging research related to social media is surprising with increased instances of what can be considered social anomalies:

- Infantilism; adults doing childish things like playing silly games in ‘public’
- Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder; constantly checking for updates and new photos,
- Depression and loneliness; preference of social media over real live interaction
- Narcissism; The excessive love or admiration of one’s image of their self.

Is it social because it is media or is it media because it is social?

We need to ask ourselves what is the difference between computer enabled reality and computer simulated reality.   If we lose “causation” the entire body of analysis can be called into the question: is social media or is it corporate media?

(Editor’s note: some ideas adapted from writings of Peter T. Leeson and introduces the idea of IOUs trading as a proxy for production.  The monetization of social media will likely evolve from such an idea)

No sane blogger would post an article suggesting that anarchy is superior to government as a means of producing widespread cooperation…or would they?

As Milton Friedman put it, “government is essential both as a forum for determining the ‘rules of the game’ and as an umpire to interpret and enforce the rules decided upon.” Most great anarchist theories are duly faulted for significant problems coping with cheating and violence.

Nonetheless, large swaths or anarchy exist today.  For example, there is no World Court to enforce World Law, if such laws existed.  Nor is there a Global commercial law to enforce contracts between Global traders. Even at a local level there is no guarantee that the government will protect your property or enforce your contracts.

A common objection to anarchy is that without government the strong will plunder the weak because the weak have an inherent inability to protect themselves. How can self-governance alone protect the weak?

Social Piracy?

Pirates, for example, tended to be substantially stronger than producers and could steal from them by force. So the producers devised an institutional solution to the problem that allowed them to trade with bandits – they devised a system of credits (IOUs). In essence, one cannot steal goods that aren’t yet produced, but one can trade a representation of such productivity.

After getting plundered a few times, producers would not produce anything but would instead wait for pirates to arrive looking for goods to plunder. With nothing available to steal, the pirates had two options: return to the coast empty-handed after having made a long and expensive trip, or make an agreement with producers to supply the goods they required on the basis of an IOU.  Given the cost of the trip, pirates often negotiated for IOUs.  They could then trade the IOUs as money backed by future productivity.

First, this enabled the weak to avoid being plundered, (which would have been the same as not producing anything at all). Second, it transformed producers in the eyes of pirates from targets into valuable assets they had an interest in protecting. If pirates wanted to be repaid, they needed to ensure that their debtors remained alive and well enough to produce. This meant abstaining from violence against producers and protecting producers against the predation of others.

Anarchy, like all political-economic organizations, is riddled with problems. The question is whether these problems are more severe than those that plague governments.  Where the government cannot provide law, order, or the institutions required to produce goods and services, private institutions emerge to perform these roles instead.

Today, social media is lawless.  There is no ’social media government’. As with the example of the pillaging pirates, it is in everyone’s best interest to help others in the hope that they will be successful in the future and pay back an IOU.  It is in the best interest of others to accept an IOU because the alternative is to be plundered and lose any incentive to produce anything in a fundamentally anarchistic environment.  Since social media is a closed loop, it is in everyone’s best interest to protect each other against the predation of others.  Suppose now that people were to “trade” IOUs as money in social media?

It’s not difficult to see how trade can in many cases prevent cheating even where government enforcement is not an option. So far, the result has been phenomenally successful in social media and therefore demonstrates that anarchy may in fact work better than government.

Editor’s note: I found this copyrighted piece from all the way back in 1995.  I find such history enlightening.  As a researcher it allows me to eliminate certain variables such as Social Media, 9/11, TARP, GWB, BHO, Global Warming, and a host of other firebrand influences on public opinion and action.  That said, the clarity is remarkable. Take strong note of the intention of fulfilling social priorities.  Today, as our corporations and government (federal, state, and local) continue to cut social programs in order to service interest on debt, the void on social programs will induce an inevitable condition; Community Conversational Currency.

by Paul Glover

Originally published in IN CONTEXT #41, Summer 1995, Page 30
Copyright (c)1995, 1997 by Context Institute

Many communities are giving up waiting on large corporations or government to invest or provide jobs, and are instead building on their own strengths and resources.

The people of Ithaca have done so by issuing their own paper currency, called Ithaca HOURS. Residents list the goods or services they have to offer in a large catalog – and then use the HOURS they earn to purchase goods and services from others. For some, this barter system provides a crucial margin of financial support. For others, it’s a great way to meet people and build a sense of community. All find their spending habits redirected locally.

Here in Ithaca, New York, we’ve begun to gain control of the social and environmental effects of commerce by issuing over $50,000 of our own local paper money, to over 950 participants, since 1991. Thousands of purchases and many new friendships have been made with this cash, and about $500,000 of local trade has been added to the Grassroots National Product.

We printed our own money because we watched Federal dollars come to town, shake a few hands, then leave to buy rainforest lumber and to fight wars. Ithaca HOURS, by contrast, stay in our region to help us hire each other. While dollars make us increasingly dependent on multinational corporations and bankers, HOURS reinforce community trade and expand commerce that is more responsive to our concern for ecology and social justice.

Here’s how it works….

The Ithaca HOUR is Ithaca’s $10 bill, because $10 per hour is the average of wages/salaries in Tompkins County. These HOUR notes, in four denominations, buy plumbing, carpentry, electrical work, roofing, nursing, chiropractic care, child care, car and bike repair, food, eyeglasses, firewood, gifts, and thousands of other goods and services. Our credit union accepts them for mortgage and loan fees. People pay rent with HOURS. The best restaurants in town take them, as do movie theaters, bowling alleys, health clubs, two large locally-owned grocery stores, and 30 farmers’ market vendors. Anyone may use HOURS, and hundreds have done so.

Ithaca’s new HOURly minimum wage, enforced by general consent, lifts the lowest pay up without knocking down higher wages. For example, several of Ithaca’s organic farmers are paying the highest farm labor wages in the Western Hemisphere: $10 of spending power per hour. These farmers benefit by the HOUR’s loyalty to local agriculture. On the other hand, dentists, massage therapists and lawyers charging more than the $10 average per hour are permitted to collect several HOURS hourly, although we hear increasingly of professional services provided for our equitable wage.

Everyone who agrees to accept HOURS is paid two HOURS (worth $20) for being listed in our newsletter Ithaca Money. Every eight months they may apply to be paid an additional two HOURS, as reward for continuing participation. This is how we gradually and carefully increase the per capita supply of our money.

Ithaca’s printed currency honors local features we respect, like native flowers, powerful waterfalls, crafts, farms, and our children. The multi-colored HOURS – some printed on locally-made watermarked cattail (marsh reed) paper, all with serial numbers – are harder to counterfeit than US dollars.

We regard Ithaca HOURS as real money, backed by real people, real time, real skills and tools. Dollars, by contrast, are funny money, backed no longer by gold or silver but by less than nothing: $4.8 trillion of national debt.

Ithaca Money’s 1,200 listings, rivaling the Yellow Pages, are a portrait of our community’s capability, bringing into the marketplace time and skills not employed by the conventional market. Residents are proud of income earned by doing work they enjoy.

At the same time Ithaca’s locally-owned stores, which help keep wealth local, make sales and get spending power they otherwise would not have. And over $4,000 of local currency has been donated to 22 community organizations so far by our wide-open governing body.

As we discover new ways to provide for each other, we replace dependence on imports. Yet our greater self-reliance, rather than isolating Ithaca, gives us more potential to reach outward with ecological export industry. We can provide the capital for new businesses with loans of our own cash. HOUR loans are made without interest charges.

We encounter each other as fellow Ithacans, rather than as winners and losers scrambling for dollars. As we do so, we help relieve the social desperation which has led to compulsive shopping, wasted resources, and homelessness and hunger. We’re making a community while making a living.

Paul Glover, who created the HOUR system, is a community economist and ecological urban designer with a degree in city management. For contact information, see Toolbox below.

Community-Based Currency

People use Ithaca HOURS for everything from goat cheese to tax consulting. Here are just a few of their stories.

Thomas found work by calling those who had listed a need for computer help. And when he read that Ithaca Rape Crisis received an HOUR grant, he did computer programming for them. His HOURS were spent for food, credit union membership, and dressmaking for his wife: “Our goal is to have money with value not tied to the dollar and not subject to the whims of the global market.”

Judy has earned many HOURS selling Jim’s hand-painted T-shirts, and spends them right away: “Ithaca has so much expertise in so many areas. … We’re like puzzle pieces that need to be put into a picture.”

Elson, who retired in 1972, earns HOURS doing heating and air conditioning consulting: “This HOUR system takes me back 20 years and makes me feel constructive again. My wife and I spend HOURS at the Farmers’ Market, where we browse and chat with old friends. I was very pleased last winter to hire two girls with HOURS to shovel heavy snow. They used the HOURS for rent.”

Bill, works for The Alternatives Federal Credit Union: “Because Ithaca HOURS can be part of the purchase of a house, they can help people who do not have enough dollars buy a home.”

Marty has earned HOURS from mortgage payments, massage, and hand-painted silk scarves: “”The first thing I ever bought with HOURS was goat cheese. Richard at the Farmers’ Market had never accepted any, and I had never spent any. Since the note says an HOUR, he described an hour of his work. People gathered around as he explained how he made goat cheese.”

Nancy has done tax returns and investment planning for HOURS and trades: “There’s a lot of anger about how work by women is undervalued. An HOUR being an hour’s work is a nice way around that.”

Jim has swapped plumbing for drywalling: “With the Ithaca Money list we can depend on each other as a community, rather than on faceless corporations beyond our control. Trading creates a tremendous feeling of good will and self-esteem amongst all involved.”

Sara grows organic strawberries and knits angora hats. She’s just received a large loan of HOURS from a carpenter friend who has earned a lot of them. Needing money before berry sales begin, she’ll use HOURS for child care and to hire farm labor.

Steve sells notecards and T-shirts for HOURS, most spent for meals and employees: “Local currency makes local self-sufficiency more possible. It helps protect our local environment and resource base so that economic activity doesn’t damage the ecological base of the region.”

Craig & Stephanie sell water filters, biodegradable soaps, and unbleached cotton clothing. Their HOURS have gone to restaurant meals, advertising, and construction of display racks. Craig says: “When we have a community that is cash poor, like Ithaca, barter allows people to spend money and live a better quality of life.”

Douglas Rushkoff has an interesting post, indirectly on how local currency can spur social capital.  As more corporate and governmental institutions fail to meet the needs of society, people will need a currency that they can trade among each other. If the dollar fails, the need will be dire.

The difficulties that will ultimately limit such enterprise is the inability to capitalize and securitize a social currency.  Conversational Currency solves this problem by demonstrating how social media, if organized correctly, can simulate many of the functions of corporations and government.  As such, people will ultimately trade the currency they trust most.

I like Douglas Rushkoff’s work.  I suppose the ultimate test of concept would be if he finds this post and contacts us to integrate The Ingenesist Project and Conversational Currency into his thought leadership.  Thanks Douglas!!

By Douglas Rushkoff

“A great, tiny organic cafe in my town, Comfort, decided to expand to a second, larger location last year. The owner, John Halko, has been renovating the new space for a year, and – thanks to the credit crisis – has been unable to raise the cash required to finish and finally open. With currency unavailable from traditional, centralized money-lending banks, Halko has turned instead to his community – to us – for support.

Granted, this is a small town. Pretty much everybody goes to Comfort – the only restaurant of its kind on the small strip – and we all have a stake in its success. Any extension of Comfort would bring more activity, vitality, and commerce to a tiny downtown (commercially devastated in the 1970s by the chain stores and strip malls of automobile-friendly Central Avenue).

So Halko’s idea is to sell VIP cards. For every dollar a customer spends on a card, they receive the equivalent of $1.20 worth of credit at either restaurant. If I buy a thousand dollar card, I get twelve hundred dollars worth of food: a 20% rate of return on the investment of dollars. Halko gets the cash infusion he needs to build the new restaurant – and since he’s paying for it in 20% tab adjustments, it just comes out of profits. He gets the money a lot cheaper than if he were borrowing it from the bank, paying back in cash over time.

Meanwhile, customers get more food for less money. But wait, there’s more: the entire scheme refocuses a community’s energy and cash on itself. Because our money goes further at our own restaurant than a restaurant somewhere else, we are biased towards eating locally. Since we have a stake in the success (and the non-failure) of the restaurant in whose food we have invested, we’ll also be more likely to promote it to our friends. And since we have already spent a big chunk of money on Comfort’s food, we’re more likely go get food there than dish out more cash for a meal somewhere else. When it gets really interesting is when other businesses begin to accept Comfort’s VIP card and dollars for their services as well. But even in its current, limited incarnation, it’s easy to see how the math of an extremely simple alternative currency works, why its existence gets cheaper money into the hands of people who need it, and how it circumvents centralized control over commerce.”

How big is this opportunity?

Roughly 10% of the US gross Domestic Product can be attributed directly to the process of evaluating or examining transactions.  This represents a 1.4 Trillion Dollar of value in a system that may be better organized, captured, and preserved through social networks and the conversations that they produce.

Social vetting on a scale that would allow social networks to monetize would require that communities organize their knowledge assets specifically for deployment to a market.  All that an entrepreneur needs to do is fill this need.

What happens if they don’t?

The true cost of vetting may be calculated by what happens in the absence of oversight, transparency, and disclosure. When the vetting process fails, so too does the industry.  The continuing financial crisis of 2008 was fueled by a failure to regulate mortgage backed securities.  The financial Crisis of 2002 arose from a failed accounting (CPA) profession.

The losses due to the absence of vetting mechanism exceeds by many times the cost of having a system in place.  The financial crises of 2002 and 2008 have together wiped out nearly 20 Trillion dollars of value and incurred high volatility to financial systems due to failed vetting mechanisms.   The people who held the knowledge about the impending doom had no effective medium to share.

Who vets KNOWLEDGE assets?

The flow of money lives and dies by the vetting mechanism.  CarFax, Experian, Ebay, Google owe their existence to the ability to vet information – However, they do not vet knowledge.  The ability to deliver the right knowledge asset to the right place, at the right time for the right price is tantamount to being able to “manufacturing innovation”, that is, to print money.  Inversely, the ability to foresee the result of specific knowledge assets deployed to specific business conditions is the Holy Grail of entrepreneurs.

Social networks can carry out this very important function of the Innovation economy; organize, locate, and develop knowledge assets in a form which can emulate a financial instrument.

How are things changing?

Emerging ideas such as conversational currency, relationship economics, innovation economics,. nd new ways to value intangibles are appearing in research blogs across the web.  Disruptions to Global finance, environmental policy, and the emergence of global currencies are setting the stage for a huge transformation in how society organizes itself.  Traditional industries such as print media, advertising, and banking are failing. Nothing is sacred except change.

Where are these communities, and what do they want?

Many communities exist today in a variety of forms and functions such as communities of practice, fellowships, service organizations, professional societies, trades groups, affinity groups, etc.  Increasingly they are moving to Social Media such as Facebook groups, Linkedin groups, Affinity groups, aggregation groups, and political action groups.  Communities are using social media technology to engage the knowledge domain contained within them.

As such, they will soon have ability to foresee the result of specific knowledge assets deployed to specific business conditions.  This is the Holy Grail of modern civilization.

The Social Media Production System

Social Media has demonstrated in many ways capable of meeting or exceeding the deliverable output of many traditional industries such as advertising, marketing, journalism, human resources, design, community organizing, education, and social vetting.

We have also seen social media form communities that increase productivity in manufacturing processes, software development, and project management.  We have seen people self manage in social media to segregate and elevate good information away from bad information.  We have seen communities act with logic, tact, and precision previously thought to be the province of top management guidance.

In short, we have seen social media replace or duplicate almost every structural element of the traditional corporation outside of the construct of corporations.  Can social media provide a corporate structure in and among itself?

General Accounting Practices:

Corporations have an internal accounting system, internal processes, internal procedures, and often their own lexicon and unique job descriptions relative to their product.  This is how a corporation stores knowledge and trades value internally and defends itself from external influence.  The common thread is that each department is accounted, assessed, and compared in terms of money.  Standard balance sheets are compared by banks and investors.

Social media uses the exchange of information, knowledge and new ideas to store value.  Processes, procedures, job descriptions, and accounting are done in a public lexicon that everyone develops collectively.  People share, trade, and exchange information, knowledge, and new ideas like tangible property; and they trade options on futures in the same.  Increasingly, access to the community knowledge inventory is becoming a means be which people can convert productivity to money.

Standard Balance Sheet for Social Media

Most elements of a corporation can be duplicated in social media.  For those parts that cannot, the entrepreneur will soon figure out how they can.   The entrepreneur does not worry about money, they worry about productivity and the money always follows.  The next paradigm of economic development will reside almost entirely on a statistical game of managing risk and return, matching surplus to deficit, and increasing human productivity in the operating system of Social Media.  Every Newspaper that falls to Social Media is simply transferring its value to the new paradigm.  That value is still in play.  This trend will continue until a new currency representing that value is introduced.

Business Plans of the Future:

As you witness the progression of Social Media unfold, look for innovations that contain incentives for people to reorganize themselves.  Look for similarities between new social media developments and traditional corporate departments.  Look for businesses and institutions that support social vetting mechanisms, knowledge exchanges, and groups bringing together strategic combination of diverse knowledge assets, not just similar knowledge assets.  Most importantly; look for the “Last Mile of Social Media”; diverse groups of 5-10 people living within a few miles of each other forming new enterprise.

Threats:

Finally, look for the threats that can corrupt an innovation economy.  Social Media is currently responsible for trillions of dollars of productivity gains – all this money is still on the table for social entrepreneurs to monetize once the integration reaches a tipping point.  Be watchful for attempts at censorship, attempts to monopolize information nodes, and the corporatizations of social networks.   Wall Street was corrupted when the value of the currency became divorced from human productivity.  Don’t let the same happen to Social Media.

The New Game in Town:

We have specified a structure for a new economic paradigm by simply integrating the the knowledge economy into the same structure as the financial system.  The result is a completely new way for entrepreneurs to create wealth.

Primordial soup:

A. We specified that Information is the currency that is convertible to knowledge assets and innovation assets through a mathematical relationship.

B. The decimal classification and logic system provides a machine-enabled accounting and inventory system for knowledge assets.

C. The factors of production for the new economy are: social capital, creative capital, and intellectual capital.

D. Social Networks provide vetting, perfect information, and self-regulation.

These ingredients allow the spark of entrepreneurship to illuminate the supply and the demand for knowledge assets outside the construct of traditional corporations, government, or academia; instead catalyzing innovation enterprise within and among social networks.

An economy is born:

Entrepreneurs now have all the information that they need for matching surplus knowledge assets to deficit knowledge assets as a means of increasing productivity of these assets in a highly predictable manner.  Advances in Social Media will keep the game organized, localized, transparent, self-regulating, and fair.  The Unit Business transaction can be assembled in infinite combinations to support countless ‘new-to-this-world’ innovation enterprise.

Show me the money.

Monetization is the process transforming a product or service into a universal tangible currency; specifically, a Dollar, a Euro, Yen, etc.  Very few people fully understand how money is created in the first place. The following video series gives an excellent overview of this process. It is highly advised that the reader invest 40 minutes in viewing this documentary:

Money represents future productivity:

In short, money is created from debt.  Banks are given the authority by a government through the fractional reserve system to literally scribe money into existence.  This money is not backed by gold or silver, rather, money is backed by the promise of the borrower to pay it back in the future.

Ultimately, the value of money is a social agreement; a promise based on an estimation of future productivity.  When those promises cannot be kept, the value of economy diminishes. When the promise is exceeded, the value of economy appreciates.

Blood brothers or distant cousins?

Debt and innovation have one very important feature in common; both are a proxy for future productivity. Therefore if debt can be used as a basis for a national currency, so can innovation.  Everyone should be willing to honor the social agreement because the currency would not change, only the basis of the currency.

The only way to sustainably create more money is to increase human productivity.  The only way to increase human productivity is to innovate.

The Risk Factor:

Our financial system has developed over 400 years a variety of systems, methods and analysis tools to manage risk in monetary transactions.  Innovation economics has applied the same system to the  management of risk for transactions of knowledge assets. The correlation is as follows:

The Financial Bank: the entrepreneur assumes that they have the knowledge to execute a business plan and then they go to the financial bank to borrow the money.  The remaining risks are knowledge related.

The Innovation Bank: the entrepreneur assumes that they have the money to execute a business plan and they go to the innovation bank to search for the knowledge. The remaining risk is finance related.

They hedge each other.

The Virtuous Circle:

The more knowledge you can assemble, the more money you can borrow.  The more money you can assemble, the more knowledge you can borrow. With both banks acting together – the risks cancel each other out and an economy of risk free innovation emerges.

Amalgamation of predicted cash flows:

With a computer readable knowledge inventory, diverse communities of practice, a percentile search engine, and the virtuous circle of finance; cash flows associated with innovation enterprise can be predicted much more accurately and with far lower risk than any current innovation system.

Were risk is predictable, a portfolio of innovations can be diversifies so if one innovation fails there is an equal chance that another will succeed and the risks cancel each other out.  The predicted combined cash flow of all the innovation enterprises can be depicted as a single large steady cash flow with low volatility.

Call Street:

Much like today’s companies do to raise money for expansion, the innovation bank can issue bonds on the open market.  A bond is a debt based on future innovation and will act as the transitional instrument to monetize innovation economy. Options can be sold on futures of innovation enterprise.

For example: a bond can issued by a bank or a government with coupon price of 1000 dollars paying a risk adjusted interest rate and redeemable in 8 years.  The proceeds can now be used to fund innovation enterprise which, by definition, are qualified and quantified on the basis of increased human productivity. Investors can buy options on promising algorithms for knowledge assets.

This system is exactly how mortgages are financed through global networks of bonds, options, and hedge funds. The current economic crisis happened because estimations of future human productivity failed to support the estimated value of the assets being represented.

The Innovation Economy is the hedge against financial crisis and consumption capitalism -  now and in the future.

The New Gold Rush:

Innovation Enterprise can easily exceed the 7-12% return that is normally expected on Wall Street.  Venture Capitalists only entertain innovation expected to return 1000%-5000% return.  There is a huge market of innovation enterprise in the regime between 12%-1000% that is currently uncapitalized.  If innovation bonds and associated options return only 25% consistently, the flow of global capital will be intense and our nation will be transformed far beyond any current expectation.  The opportunity is, however, even much greater than that; Innovation will reflect social priorities rather than Wall Street priorities.

The epiphany.

The epiphany of innovation economics is that technological change must always precede economic growth.  Humanity has been going about the process of globalization as if economic growth can precede technological change.  This has been the singular flaw in modern market economics that has created the unsustainable system that we have today.  The financial instrument of the innovation bond reverses this flaw and will open the next economic paradigm to extraordinary human progress.

Future modules in this series will discuss the implication and specific embodiments of an innovation economy.

The epiphany:

Something very interesting happened when Facebook changed their terms of service.   People who use the Facebook platform (for free) organized themselves using the (free) platform to threaten the core validity of the same (free) platform.  This could not happen in any other industry.

Saving face?

Ownership is largely characterized by the ability of one party to restrict the access of another party.  Judging by the results of this uprising, it seems that for all practical purposes, the users own their content and their impressions no matter what the TOS says.  This is a very strong argument for the tangibility of social, creative, and intellectual capital.

Ownership Economics:

The fact that people own and care for their content is what makes Facebook work.  Ownership is an extremely powerful force that drives intense participation and  innovation.  People will attend to their property, improve it, make it valuable, and create value for themselves and those around them.  Really, when was the last time you washed a rented car?

Historical perspective:

Most history books present the Homestead Act of 1862 as the product of a wise and benevolent government seeking to reward worthy citizens of a great young nation for populating the vast Western territories.  But that is not really true. Most of the land was already occupied by squatters who arrived disheveled, found a nice spot, built their small cabin, and farmed or hunted to sustain themselves.   They could not be evicted or charged with trespassing because a “jury of their peers” was also composed of squatters.

Problems arose when squatters could not borrow money to improve the land because they did not hold a title to it.  Legitimate landowners could not value their property if the land next door was untitled.  Border disputes resulted in gun battles.  Stealing was rampant. The children of squatters could not inherit the land without proper title. There was little incentive to produce anything beyond sustenance. When services and capital projects were required to support the increasing population, there was no tax base.  Not unlike Facebook, this new frontier could not be monetized.

Wisdom in Government; not always an oxymoron:

Perhaps the greatest moment in government came with the realization that it is impossible to change the behavior of people, rather, the best strategy would be to accommodate what they are going to do anyway.  So they legalized the squatters and gave them deed to their land. The occupants could sell or capitalize as they wished.  Investment capital flooded the region and entrepreneurs improved the land and created enterprises.  The government could then collect taxes proportional to the productivity of the citizens. The result was the development of the Western States as economic powerhouse that we know today.

Use it or lose it:

A very similar opportunity is presenting itself to Facebook and now the road to monetization should be crystal clear.  They should go out of their way to create terms of service that protects the rights of each and every member to own and control their content in its entirety, forever.

Next, Facebook should develop applications that allow advertisers to bid for impressions directly with the users compensating them for their time.  Users will build profiles that attract those seeking opinion, knowledge, feedback, wisdom AND SALES related to their products.  Users should be able to control every aspect of their content including any means that they can dream up to legally create revenue from their social capital, creative capital, and intellectual capital.  Facebook should develop a knowledge inventory of what users know and make it available to others like a “Public Library or knowledge assets”.  Then they should develop applications to match knowledge surplus to knowledge deficit, etc. Let the trading begin.

The answer in their face:

If smart people can make money using Facebook just by doing what they are going to do anyway, they will flood the system with the most tangible forces in nature; social capital, creative capital, and intellectual capital. If Facebook can’t figure out how to monetize the asset staring them in their face, they will soon encounter a more powerful competitor – their own users.

Résumé: A French word for separating the body from the brain

We are entering a renewal in the work force.  The global imperative is for the United States to become an innovation economy now.  This is an entirely different animal than the Industrial revolution; I have long argued that the résumé system is by far the most archaic knowledge management “currency” of trade in use today.

The entire premise of the résumé is destitute, if not destructive, in the modern world.  Words on a computer screen are a very low level ‘media form’ being used to describe a very high ‘media form’; social, creative, and intellectual capital.  It’s like using crayons to design an aircraft.

If the key words are so important, why have any other words?

A manager always hires people that remind them of themselves.  They estimate the future success of a candidate based on their own limited, and often static, past experiences.  The world is moving so fast and has become so complex that no manager can possibly know enough to capitalize the future based on a viable statistical sample of past experiences – we’re all holding on for dear life in a hurricane of change.   The problems and opportunities of the future are so huge, so important, and happening so amazingly fast yet the allocation of human resources is worse than random for a candidate pool.

While the Ingenesist Project discusses a solution at great length, I’ll just stop complaining and share a few comments (self titled) that I’ve picked off some recent Human Resources Blogs:

***

1. And our future goes with it:

“Most recruiting systems I’ve seen screen out innovators. Any résumé that is unique, different or convention-defying gets surreptitiously put in the junk pile.”

2. Start by looking in the junk pile:

“The Innovation Economy requires that the talent that creates the most value for an organization must rise to the top.  Innovators are playing an increasing role in creating shareholder value – one might argue that they create the most shareholder value these days – and figuring out how to find and attract this very different breed of talent is one of the most critical initiatives you can launch within your organization.”

3. What part of “share holder value” are we having difficulty with?

“The most innovative people I have ever met don’t follow conventions in their experience or in their résumé.  Or, they get bored very quickly when they can’t innovate or are forced to focus on operations, and efficiency.  Most might look like (and even be) job hoppers”

4. Here is my favorite comment – I wish I could hug this person:

“I think it takes more than a résumé to screen an Innovator in or out. As blogs, blog posts, social networking, more powerful search tools, personal websites, the emergence of video on the web, talent platforms that offer CRM, etc. etc. etc. continue to become additional tools for an employer to consider in making a hiring decision, is the résumé still a currency for a candidate?”

***

We have an inventory and CAD model of every nut, rivet, and panel that goes on an airplane – why would we try to build anything without one?

So Please, let’s evolve out of the revolutionary times and develop a real community knowledge inventory.  It must be computer enabled and based on a taxonomy that everyone knows and understands.  It must be read, analyzed, sorted and vetted by social networks and communities of practice. It must integrate with  knowledge assets from anywhere in the world.   A self-perfecting algorithm must be developed for a predictive percentile search engine in a pull system that seeks, matches, and deploys the ‘secret sauce’ of success, specific to any application, anywhere, any time – and fast.

The opportunity for America reminds me of the elephant that is convinced since birth that the slender rope tying him to the fence post is stronger than he.  When the elephant grows up, he still believes the rope is stronger even though the elephant now has gained the strength to pull the whole building down.  Americans are the 8000 pound elephant in the middle of the room.  The question on everyone’s mind is: what will the elephant do next?

Throughout history, economists have determined the structure of business, enterprise, and commerce and wisely the government complies.  With remarkable success over the last 150 years,  corporations had been the source of most innovation sufficient to support the value of a currency.  Fortunately, the corporation had become the center of economic policy while the knowledge inventory within them have been fenced inside the accounting term: “intangible assets”.  Unfortunately, our corporations can no longer innovate efficiently enough to support the debt. Witnessing GM facing up to this very question, while the government manufactures money like taffy, seems a lot like feeding sugar calories to an elephant that is too big to fit out the door, dead or alive.

What the economists and many of the great visionaries of out time do not anticipate is the emergence of computer enabled society and the tangibility of knowledge outside the corporate structure through developments of social media.  Web 3.0 is supposed to bring us a semantic web – a computer program will be able to read the elephant story above and determine whether it is about education, zoology, macramé, Interior decorating, taxidermy, building demolition, or cliché old business metaphors.   Perhaps this is our little rope tied to the post as we wait for Mother Corpora to provide solutions.  Get a grip, the only computer that can read, classify, and extract a thousand words for any photograph is between our collective big floppy ears.  Web 3.0 will be semantic alright, except by the integration and capitalization of human knowledge through social media.

We spend billions on a human genome project to inventory our DNA, but nothing to inventory the knowledge as it exists naturally in society.  We will build statistical models to forecast weather, elections, click-throughs, insurance, demographics, and mortgage risk; but nothing to predict the value of various combination of social capital, creative capital, and intellectual capital in society.  We have search engines that match most worthy blog to most worthy keyword, but little to match most worthy mentor to most worthy apprentice.  The top reasons why start-ups, businesses, innovations, and markets fail are due to the wrong knowledge in the wrong place at the wrong time. It seems that if we solve the knowledge inventory problem, then we can solve the innovation risk problem.  That, in turn, will solve the money problem which solves the elephant problem.  We need to release the great “intangible asset” into the wild world of tangibility and trust that it knows where to go.

Sometimes it just takes someone to give us permission to do things differently.  So here I go: human knowledge is the most perfect, predictable, flexible, and valuable capital asset in our world.  Knowledge can become far more tangible than anyone could have ever imagined. Information, knowledge, and innovation are profoundly related – separated they are useless, integrated they are wisdom.  Everyone on earth innovates every day, period. The vast majority of people will do the right thing given the right incentives.  With the next development of the Internet, we will have the tools to organize ourselves in a far more efficient manner than the command and control structure of a traditional corporation.  Management can be outsourced too. Corporations respond to corporate priorities, social networks respond to social priorities.  Which one sounds like a business case to curb global warming?

The Ingenesist Project specifies three web applications which if developed and deployed to social media will allow social capital, creative capital, and intellectual capital to become tangible outside the construct of the traditional corporation and inside social networks.  Just because people have never organized themselves in an open sourced innovation economy before, does not mean that they never will.  But once they do, well, let’s just say that an elephant never forgets.

Hey Kids, It’s 3D:

The objective of this article is to discuss the Great Convergence of computer enabled society. Social media must not be allowed to converge to a single apex – rather, it must converge to 3 distinct and tangible dimensions.

The factors of production for the industrial economy are land, labor, and capital.  If you lose one, you can’t use the other two to build an SUV, for example.  The factors of production for an innovation economy are social capital, creative capital, and intellectual capital. All production in the new economic paradigm will result from the allocation of a “secret sauce” of social capital, creative capital, and intellectual capital.  Again, if you lose one, you can’t use the other two to build anything meaningful.

The congregation of congregations:

In order to find The Great Convergence, we simply need to examine Social Media to discover where social capital, creative capital, and intellectual capital tend to congregate.

One of the more obvious illustrations appears to be playing out between LinkedIn, Facebook, and Myspace.  Many people use Linkedin for professional contacts (intellectual Capital), other people use Facebook for friends, family and more diverse associations (Social Capital), while many others use MySpace to post videos of their rock band, Artwork, or to discover the latest Mash up (Creative Capital).  Of course there are many more social networks, lots of cross talk, different demographics, rants and raves, etc.  I intentionally leave this analysis sparse as these conditions simply reflect the nature of The Great Convergence.

The Next Economic Paradigm:

We need to watch The Great Convergence with laser focus and deep personal interest because it will be extremely important for the development of what comes after the knowledge economy.   Whatever form this next economic paradigm takes, globally and locally, will depend upon The Great Convergence.  The Innovation Economy is the only wrench left in the toolbox for resolving the vast global problems that we face today.

The Innovation Economy must end global warming, restore financial accountability, enact sustainable enterprise, and institute renewable energy – or not.  This is a huge burden to ask of the next “greatest generation”.  It is clearly in everyone’s best interest to identify, encourage, and support The Great Convergence to form in 3D, before the old single-apex game “resets” and starts all over again, perhaps for the last time.

[The Ingenesist Project discusses this concept at length and identified various predictions, methods, and scenarios, including specifications for an Innovation Economy.]

[In earlier post we identified the 5 essential elements of a market economy. What would be the currency of an innovation economy? Currency is anything that serves as a medium of exchange, a stored value, and a standard of value. Basically we are asking; What are those things that people are out in the World trading among each other today?]

Today, innovation is repeatedly cited as the only thing that can get us out of the financial/environmental/sustainability conditions that find our ourselves in, yet the most common definitions for this term are deeply and tragically flawed.

Like the 1500’s A.D. definition of the Sun revolving around the Earth, an unusable definition can completely block our ability to see the truth about the phenomena that surrounds us.  Let me explain:

Most definitions for innovation boil down to: “a new idea introduced that has an economic outcome” or “something new that is useful”. While these definitions match some observations, they are reflective and “You know it when you see it”. As such, there is little to define innovation before it happens or to make more of it from this definition.  It is like defining “Art” as the thing that people stare at.  Unfortunately, this is just the beginning of our troubles.

“Innovation is a new idea introduced that has an economic outcome” is impossible.

This definition defines one unknown quantity (innovation) with four other unknown quantities: what is new; what is an idea; what constitutes “introduced”; and what is an economic outcome?  From High School Algebra we know that you cannot solve one equation with two unknowns – let alone four.  There is little that you, I or anyone else can do to satisfy this definition.  Therefore, it is not useful.

Granted, this definition sells plenty of ad copy as the guru of the week wax-poetic over those four pesky unknown thingies.  I found one consultant who claims that innovation has 51 variables and only he can solve that matrix – for a price.

What is the truth about the phenomenon of Innovation?

A useful definition must clarify the subject in a manner that is repeatable and measurable.

If we look at history we know that economic “benefit” and innovation are mutually dependent – you can’t have one without the other.  Wealth has been created by increasing human productivity through innovation in agriculture, manufacturing, computers, etc.

Next, we observe that information, knowledge and innovation are also mutually dependent – you cannot have one without the other two.  Wealth is created by integrating information, knowledge and innovation.

Next; look at our society; everywhere we turn, people are collecting information from each other, building their knowledge, and innovating together, i.e., coming up with better ways to do things. All of these little exchanges obviously add up to something because things like IPods and Airplanes get built and lots of stuff rolls off assembly lines.

Innovation is anything that increases human productivity

Next we can say that information, knowledge and innovation can be related as follows:

• Information is defined as facts and data

This should not surprise anyone.

• Knowledge is proportional to the rate of change of information (facts and data) over time.

This is a little trickier to grasp. But any good teacher knows that information must be introduced in a certain order and at a certain speed before the information can become knowledge – this is called learning. Learning is a mental process for turning information from a book, a lecture, or personal experience into knowledge that can be used later.  Therefore, knowledge is proportional to the rate of change of information and can only exist inside a person’s head.

• Innovation is proportional to the rate of change of knowledge over time

trickier still, but for example; everyone has had an ‘Ah-Ha!’ moment during a brainstorming session, some incredible event that we witness, or even after some real bad mistake that we made. The Ah-Ha moment is a spike in our knowledge that happens in a very short period of time. Innovation is related to this high rate of change of knowledge.  Then we blurt it out, or write it down, or make a sketch, give a lecture, in the form of information, etc.

Definition of Innovation:

a. Innovation is anything that increasing human productivity.
b. Innovation is proportional to the rate of change of knowledge and information.

Admittedly, not as sexy in the sound bite but this definition does include all conversations, sketches, dreams, and ideas of all people on Earth and allows them to combine with the sketches, dreams, ideas, of all people on Earth to become designs, methods, and processes which further combine to become products, systems, and institutions, etc.

Let entrepreneurs worry about the economic outcome

Since innovation can be difficult to observe directly. Our new definition allows us to use a proxy that is easier for entrepreneurs to see. For example; if you want to identify innovation as it is happening, simply look for high rates of change of knowledge in a community. If you want to create innovation, do things that create high rates of change of knowledge. Likewise, if you want to identify knowledge, look for high rates of change of information.  If you want to create knowledge, do things that create high rates of change of information.

We need to give the entrepreneur a game they can win. The key is that everyone must be included in the game. This is a definition that can be used by anyone and everyone, in fact, it already is.

notes:

[Anyone familiar with differential Calculus can see an equation forming where Innovation is the derivative of knowledge and knowledge is the derivative of information. Calculus is the study of change like geometry is the study of space. Since the mathematics is beyond the scope of this article, I'll finish with the following analogy for defining information, knowledge, and innovation more intuitively: “Information is to knowledge is to innovation what distance is to velocity is to acceleration”]