Update: For further discussion see this post and following.
Continuing from this post, in Klein's and Robertson's conversation there was a point on discerning an organization's purpose as different from what the individuals want it to be as their property
(around 24:00). And yet that is exactly what capitalism is about,
private property (including capital) governing the means of production,
and that governed by top-down leaders (governors). Robertson realizes
that the organizational structure of this type of governance is the
problem, but he doesn't contextualize it to the broader socio-economic
structure of capitalism, which is based on private property. Per the
first statement above he understands that the organization is not the
property of the founders or board members, yet still believes in an
idealistic notion of 'free market' capitalism as a societal
organizational structure.
At around 26:00 Robertson discusses how our ego assumptions and
projections are made transparent by holacracy and thus allows for us to
overcome them. I'm suggesting that capitalism is one of those
assumptions and projections that is not at all transparent. Or overcome.
If he see into this more deeply he'd see, like Chomsky, that Adam
Smith's vision was far more like libertarian socialism, as is what
Robertson describes as holacracy. He's acknowledge the 'tension' I'm
describing and process it via prescribed holacratic principles and come
to see that holding on to some remnant of capitalism is unconsciously
reinforcing some of the very principles he claims to overcome with
holacracy.
At around 46:00 Klein asks about how holacracy relates to conscious
capitalism. Robertson notes that the conscious aspect is the best one
can do to create better leaders in the corporate structure. But the
organizational structure itself makes it difficult to impossible to
implement the holacratic kinds of change necessary. The structure itself
must change which is what holacracy is.
But at 53:00 he reiterates something from the previous post, that the free market
structure liberates us per Mackey's statements. He reiterates this again at the end (around 1:11:00).
Again not realizing that it is the evolution of capitalism (or perhaps
devolution per Chomsky's Smith) that creates the exact type of corporate structure
holacracy seeks to overcome. I find it rather amazing that this tension has not even been consciously recognized in holacracy, let alone processed.
Of course this would create another very real 'tension' in that one
of his biggest sponsors, Mackey's Conscious Capitalism, won't like this
and will fight it tooth and nail. And perhaps even because holacracy
unconsciously assumes capitalism is the best economic system it will
remain unseen, as it serves as the 'market' to sell its products.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.