Comments for Global Peter Drucker Forum BLOG

Comment on A Framework for the Collaboration Economy by Rick Goings by Ernest Evans

Ernest Evans — Tue, 13 Sep 2016 09:04:01 +0000

Very good overview, Mr. Goings!
An entrepreneurial mindset requires a strong sense of purpose and vision. People need leadership that shows them “how to” discover their compelling purpose and create a compelling vision that inspires them to move forward towards a “future-self” that contributes to community and makes a difference. What do you think it will take to double our entrepreneurial activity and our productivity? People must be able to articulate a clear vision of a better “future-self,” of contributing, having fun and making money. Otherwise they are not going to be confident in overcoming the challenges that come with being an entrepreneur.
The thinking that brought the world to where it is today is not going to be the thinking that creates a stronger, more vibrant world economy. What has to happen to look at our markets with fresh ears, eyes and minds? How do we begin again more intelligently? What is working in today’s marketplace now, three to five years from now and beyond? What has changed? What are we going to do about that?

Comment on Brexit: Crisis and Opportunity – Nothing Lasts Unless Incessantly Renewed by David Hurst by José Antonio Vanderhorst Silverio, Ph.D.

José Antonio Vanderhorst Silverio, Ph.D. — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 23:55:58 +0000

Can we say there is a “Waning Narrative of the G-20” 4-5 September 2016 meeting outcome?
• strengthening the G20 growth agenda
• pursuing innovative growth concepts and policies
• building an open world economy
• ensuring that economic growth benefits all countries and people

Some economists are now writing that Margaret Thatcher’s story about There Is No Alternative (TINA) to neoliberalism is wrong. It seems they want to keep over-expanding the industrial civilization.

I have reinterpreted W. Edwards Deming concept about (discrete) broken systems as being not systems but (a continuum) anti-systems. From that a story emerges the following:

Restricting ourselves to what Deming suggested about anti-systems in his book “The New Economics: for industry, government, education,” we will learn that a system has a future. Then Margaret Thatcher story is wrong by being is the source to soaring inequality under Cartesian incremental innovation transition approaches. TINA as the shared story of our times that has led to widespread anti-systems based on the Old Economics. A new shared story that enable systemic radical innovations transformation approaches might be TIAF — There Is A Future – in the Systemic Civilization (please Google it).

Comment on Entrepreneurial seed – a new perspective on natural and human networks by Guido Bosbach by Harsh Chaturvedi

Harsh Chaturvedi — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 16:03:01 +0000

A refreshing model, worth exploring further. I would like to know more about the details of large corprorations fostering entrepreneurs, both success and failure cases.

Comment on Why the new entrepreneurial citizen must learn from the past to account for an uncertain world by Paolo Quattrone by Harsh Chaturvedi

Harsh Chaturvedi — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 15:47:31 +0000

Big data analyses past to project the future probabilities. Rapidly accelerating change in all spheres raises serious doubts on our capabilities to rationalise, as discussed. Entrepreneurs have to be aware of fast chaging equations of proportionality between various stakeholders and devise solutions which address each. The key here would be to prioritise instead of proportionalise.

Comment on Why the new entrepreneurial citizen must learn from the past to account for an uncertain world by Paolo Quattrone by Anders (Nilsson) Hersinger

Anders (Nilsson) Hersinger — Fri, 26 Aug 2016 18:11:12 +0000

Learning from the past facilitates using analogy to supplement some of the algorithms.

Comment on How Disruptive Can China Be? by Bill Fischer & Denis Simon by Geoff

Geoff — Fri, 22 Jul 2016 00:06:50 +0000

An interesting read, but I have my doubts about your starting points. I think there has been very deep and ongoing disruption at foundational levels.
China’s (and therefore Asia’s) disruption over the last few decades has stemmed from an inability of established economies to enter and dominate the market place, bringing their own culture and rules to the business game and changing the foundations of successful business in various local regions to suit themselves. This was standard operating procedure and worked for some time in smaller Asian regions.
China is strong enough globally and economically to resist this, which is highly disruptive as traditional business models have not been adaptive or dynamic.The impact may have mainly been seen in displacement, but the whole foundation of economic and business success has been disrupted by the new cultural approaches and consequent different rules that China and Asia are now bringing into the world. Established economy business has never been able to grasp or handle the fundamentally different culture and ground rules that apply, and have always analysed the major impact in their own terms, such as “low cost” or “cheap labour” – and they have limited answers because they can only work within their own established rules – the only way to beat cheap is to be cheaper, an terrible approach..
The Global Peter Drucker Forum has been examining the urgent need to change traditional business models, bring adaptive and dynamic models to the fore. To a large extent, this has been driven by the success of the Asian approach to business which has changed the ground rules, with a focus on values, trust and relationships.
So I have no doubt that China has been enormously disruptive, and it may be your frameworks that have been defining the outcomes as displacement.

Comment on Take This Job and Automate It by Julia Kirby and Thomas H. Davenport by Paul Lefrere

Paul Lefrere — Thu, 30 Jun 2016 10:55:52 +0000

This excellent article reminds me of the pioneering 1970s study COSERS. The difference is that today there are affordable ways not only to automate graduate-level jobs (tactical unemployment, one job at a time) but also to do without entire cohorts of fresh graduates (structural unemployment). Eg, in principle entrepreneurs can test their ideas, then scale the successful ones fast and cheaply, using bots and cloud services.

Classic reference: “What Can Be Automated?” (1980, MIT Press), The Computer Science and Engineering Research Study (COSERS). Available here: http://priorart.ip.com/IPCOM/000128748/

Comment on Disruptive Entrepreneurship vs. Survival Entrepreneurship: Only one of these can catapult Africa from poverty to prosperity by Efosa Ojomo by kennedy

kennedy — Thu, 16 Jun 2016 15:09:14 +0000

Good and Yes. These are far better examples of Disruptive ideas or Entrepreneurship if you like, in Africa than the indomie business or the Nollywood movies: http://blogs.worldbank.org/africacan/disruptive-innovation-the-most-viable-strategy-for-economic-development-in-africa

I endorse!