An idea whose time has come?

[Harvey]

Alright, I'm still here.

(Please see the second post below for a little clarification)

This is part of an email I'm going to be sending to various people over the next week or so. I need help to develope the ideas i'm refering to. All those who want to get involved, make yourselves known and i'll set up a post on my blog outlining the ideas, only those who sign up can read/write and get involved in the project discussion. Not least in refining the message below.

Maybe we'll have enough resources between us to breath life into the thing and we won't need to go anywhere else. I want to create a kind of giving plague, a new way of doing business.

By the way, the ideas are real, some i've been developing or at least mulling over for years, and with your help, they can be perfected. Once we get going on the blog all critiques must be constructive, and in the spirit of the thing. If you ain't got nothin good to add, you needn't sign up!

I know you have many constraints on your time, but I was hoping that we might have a short conversation at some point. It is important. I have some ideas which I believe, when taken together, represent a once in a lifetime opportunity to create a trend toward businesses which at their core, only work because everyone, the customer, the developers, and the owners, all profit together.

Community created enterprise which everyone can see benefiting them, as well as others.

The beauty of the idea is that most of what I have in mind works best when completely transparent and everyone profits.

I believe that this could help to kindle a new paradigm of service delivery and information ecology, where the big boys can no longer prosper simply by being big, they will have to prove the extra added value of their goods and services to consumers who can get better goods and services elsewhere for less, and feel good about the fact that they are helping others less fortunate. In short, a real stakeholder empire in which no single person can usurp power and which could initiate an ethical scramble in it's wake.

Not ambitious enough for you?



What I don't have are the contacts, infra-structure and investment, to make all this happen. But I've a feeling you might be able to bring a lot of that together with the platform you have.

I'd love to talk to you about it in more detail but in any case, thanks for reading if you made it this far!

Sorry to keep editing, but just to whet your appetite, the last project remotely like this that I was involved in made headlines in tech papers around the globe in 24 hours, perhaps less, there were only two of us involved then, and I sent out precisely 3 emails to try and publicise the thing. You can learn more about that when the discussion starts on my blog page.

[freemason9]

i don't get it

[Harvey]

i don't get it

That's understandable since I'm giving so little away at this point.

Alright, I can see I'm going to have to start the ball rolling here. The previous project that I alluded to wasn't similar in any way to this, I'll tell you a little about it, but this is something very different.

I was one of two people involved in an app called AntiPhormLite. I've mentioned it once before here. We developed it in response to an aggressive data mining company called Phorm, which used to be known as 121 media. They had developed an invasive technology which at the time Talk Talk, BT and Virgin had signed up to, with a number of Tory and Labour politicians on their board, if I remember correctly. See more about Phorm here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phorm

Phorm had worked with major US[16] and British ISPs—including BT Group (formerly British Telecom), Virgin Media, and TalkTalk (at the time owned by The Carphone Warehouse)—on a behavioral targeting advertisement service to monitor browsing habits and serve relevant advertisements to the end user. Phorm say these deals would have given them access to the surfing habits of 70% of British households with broadband.[1][17] The service, which uses deep packet inspection to check the content of requested web pages, has been compared to those of NebuAd and Front Porch.[18]

My partner figured out a simple low tech solution which we developed together (my contribution was mainly art but I was also involved in the conceptual side, how it would work etc) and which proved that their business model was flawed, apart from being a moral disgrace.

There were thousands of articles at the time about AntiPhormLite but some still remain in the news archives:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=antiph ... 27&bih=562

And on the web:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=antiph ... a=N&tab=nw


What I'm proposing in the OP is not remotely similar, but I think I have a number of very good business ideas which could do exactly what I'm describing there. Ideas which, like AntiPhormLite, will capture the imagination, but which unlike it, make very good business sense, but which do not operate like traditional businesses. The problem with them is that although they make money, the money doesn't flow to the top. Naturally, not a great investment opportunity for an investor. Anyway for obvious reasons, they need to be developed privately. But I can't do any of them alone. Plus, they need plenty of conceptual improvement.

[norton ash]

Maybe getting a little start-up venture capital from a progressive anti-authoritarian with money (e.g. Monty Python funding Holy Grail with Pink Floyd, Beatle and Led Zeppelin $$-- they described them as the ideal 'do what you like, do what you have to' type of investors/producers) and then building a strong network of partners sharing the means of production, distribution, marketing.

Could be one of your contacts is only a degree away from a star or a shit-disturbing black sheep aristocrat who'd do it for the cause or the lulz.

[Harvey]

You know what, that's not such a bad idea. Thanks! I can think of one or two people immediately.



I'd still appreciate help from some of the clever bods around here in terms of developing strategies and honing the ideas to a finer point but you've given me a direction which I hadn't even considered.

[stefano]

I like the idea. Harvey I punted a book called Beyond the Corporation: Humanity Working by David Erdal on the libertarian left thread - it is so the idea whose time has come, like fucking blindingly so, and Erdal sets it out beautifully. I finished his book over the weekend and it's a must-read: I've read a few theoretical books about employee ownership of production and his book is by far the best, telling you how the successful ones have worked it but not losing the passion and anger at injustice that is going to drive this whole thing. And very clearly and tidily refuting the economic dogma of rational choice theory that justifies the obscenities we live with. And he put his money where his mouth is, inherited part of a paper mill and organised an employee buyout. Outstanding, please read it.

I'm all energised about this, I wish I'd written his book but as it's too late I'll try and get involved with this kind of scheme where I can.

[Occult Means Hidden]

The way to ensure money stays with the workers/populous and not siphoned off as profit to investors is to ensure worker control. Are u familiar with this subject? In particular Michael Albert's "worker complexes". I don't care for that term much but the idea is outlined in his books into what he calls participatory economics. I prefer the phrase Economic Democracy because it is far more inclusive and has a "progressive" history as well. Unions were set up to strive for the ultimate goal of worker ownership. Of course this was abandoned as an implied goal. Now unions are dependency organizations that operate as hierarchies with no plan, other than to assimilate by recruiting members and support it's hierarchy. This is far too static and I'm not in the least suprised to see unions lose what they have over the last several decades.

Another phrase I like is " united workplaces" but it isn't merely always trying to strive to be completely united, as in unionized workplaces. Instead a united workplace is a worker owned workplace. There is no pretense or goal never reached. "worker complexes" are a democratic revolving of work tasks among equals employed for their common enrichment. I would start off with a simple business such as a sandwich shop. An initial loan is made with a max cap of 6% return plus the investment. Once the sandwich shop makes enough to pay it's investor, full instead of merely functional control falls to the workers. Hired to be prospective propriotors with similar education, "complexes" rotate daily duties and backroom responsibilities among the proprietory workers. This ensures workers commitment and investment into something they feel that they own. Each task is different and interesting and engaging,- even humbling the lowliest of tasks are rotated. Work policy conducted by votes in a kind of agreed to charter that governs how they hire (accept sharing propriotors) or fire (independent and blind reviews of peer performance, third party oversight) or other business concerns.

Imagine working at a sandwhich shop as an owner for a full time career in constitution with others for a profit that far exceeds the average pay of a slave worker in Subway. If this is what you are thinking Harvey, PM me with an idea of the resources at your disposal. Thx.

[Occult Means Hidden]

(excuse the misspellings above as I'm typing from a mobile device)

I'd add that a percentage of worker profit would go to investment of similarily themed business. The sandwich workers would therefore take part (and profit by) the rise of other dynamic United Workplaces. As people hear of the success of such a setup, word would spread.

I'm not a believer of the church of competition. I think revolved tasks or "complexes" can work efficiently. Even in the framework of our competing Quasi-capitalist environment. Maybe instead of complexes, "task ownership" might be a better label. Participatory ownership. Revolved Tasks. I don't know. Just thinking out load. Marketing in catch-easy and straight forward phrases are important. Whatever you do, don't say communist...

[Occult Means Hidden]

Nobody wants to scrub the floor or clean the bathroom. Why make one person do it? When I've been in supervisor roles in the past, my method was to do those who I supervise work's, with them. I was not afraid to "lower" myself. Mutual appreciation is naturally gained, I learned. Meanwhile they talked shit about the managers who managed apart from the common worker. I did tOo when I was in their position.

Can one clean the toilets then balance the cashbooks? I know I can. Why can't we all?

[justdrew]

Perhaps PROUT deserves a thread of it's own, but anyway, maybe these folks have some ideas...

There's still a large active group in India that seeks to implement these ideas, and an active contingent in Australia and elsewhere...

Progressive Utilization Theory or PROUT is a socio-economic theory first mentioned in 1959 and fully outlined in 1962 by Indian philosopher and spiritual leader Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar (1921–1990). PROUT is a social system that overcomes the limitations of both capitalism and communism. Among other things, "progressive utilization" would optimize the use of natural, industrial and human resources, based on cooperative coordination on a wide basis, ranging from local communities to larger regions and nations, and between the people of diverse geographical areas.

PROUT seeks the welfare and happiness of all. The theory is not concerned solely with economics but encompasses the whole of individual and collective existence - physical, educational, social, political, mental, cultural and spiritual - not just for human beings but for all beings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROUT

on edit... that PROUT stuff though is linked to some questionable things over the last several decades though, maybe there's something in the idea, but it is also linked with an allegedly "cult-like" organization of questionable merit, and some nasty things in it's past, whether the whole org is "bad" or not, I can't tell yet. Surely they've been attacked a lot too. Don't know where things stand today. Anyway, probably reasonable to skip it, as... if there are good ideas in it, they can be recreated independently if need be, and probably improved on.

[Harvey]

Thanks guys, I'm really encouraged by the response, and I can see that I have a lot of homework to do.

Some initial thoughts.

Everyone else please feel free to jump in, enlarge, change course, correct, clarify, give examples or contradict!

I'm more convinced than I have ever been that the time is now. If we don't make a change here and now, who else is going to? Sure, all of us know that we have to take responsibility for our own actions, and for our children, but we also have to start taking some responsibility for our neighbours, our neighbourhoods, our countries, our world.

My strong feeling is that the time is now for a new way of doing things. From the ground up. We know that traditional power structures are not working, from local government and policing, through to how we buy goods and services.

If power corrupts in public office, so greed corrupts in business.

The obvious solution as the posts above indicate, is grassroots, successful, democratic, worker owned business. It's a design problem. Same reason why some software is easier and more intuitive to learn and use than others. It's either designed better, or it's designed worse, in which case you have to fight with it, to get it to do what you need.

It's perfectly possible to design greed out of the equation, greed can still occur, but you design a model in which greed can never become the dominant factor, which is why all big enterprise ultimately fails. It becomes too big, unfocussed, too ambitious, unresponsive and ultimately less useful to everyone, over time.

[freemason9]

Wait, are we talking about employee control of the means of production? I've been pondering the practical aspects of that structure for a long time.

[Nordic]

in "capitalism, a love story," michael moore points out a few successful employee owned and operated businesses. one (iirc) was a bread company, the other some kind of engineering firm. you could look those up to use as models i suppose. just an idea.

[Bruce Dazzling]

Harvey,

This whole thing sounds really vague to me.

It seems like you're proposing a worker-owned business that creates a s/w tool that masks browsing habits, but at the same time, it seems like you're trying to say a lot more.

How about if you pretend that you've finally managed to get into Gordon Gekko's office to pitch your idea, but you know that he's going to kick you right the hell out if you don't tell him exactly what your idea is in clear, concise terms.

Like in one short paragraph.

Best,

B.D.

[norton ash]

I imagine Harvey may not wish to let the golden goose wander in the midst of lurking foxes.