Actics Blog

As web 2.0 demonstrates new media not only make information available but they also enhance social cooperation. The sorts of ethically relevant ties that used to be possible on a local scale are now possible on an extended, or even global scale. This enables the emergence of a new kind of ethical economy, where the production and distribution of wealth unfolds through other media than that of money (or trough different kinds of money). Ethical currencies like affect or respect can work just as well.

First out in our small survey of the institutional framework of this emerging ethical economy is givegetnation, a peer-to-peer gift system. The platform simply coordinates need with excess supply: as they claim, if it was possible to distribute rationally only 1 per cent of the surplus wealth that people have available a lot could be done to ameliorate poverty. And with surplus wealth they mean both the things that we make and want to give away, and the things we simply have lying around without using them, in closets and attics.

‘GiveGetNation is the world’s first free, post-scarcity, values-based, person-to-person economy. We organize the world’s surplus capacity and make it accessible to everyone for free.’

Their vision is that of an ethical economy: a mode of production and distribution primarily based on values:

‘We operate on a very simple principle: Values are the primary sources of human capital upon which all money is based. But what are values? There are thousands, really, but most people agree love, joy, freedom, creativity, growth, abundance, and personal fulfillment are key. And where do values live? Values live in you and your dynamic relationship with others. Think about it.’

I’ve just finished studying the recent Edelman report on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and the blogsphere. Both interesting and then not surprising at all. The blogsphere is still in its infancy when it comes to CSR. Few posts are specifically tagged with CSR terms while a lot actually covering CSR topics. That means that bloggers do not consider themselves active CSR agent. Moreover, the job of raising CSR issues and bringing new information to the table is still left to mainstream media. Bloggers mainly comment reactively on existing stories. But the report agrees with us that the imporatance of the blogsphere for CSR in general is growing. Main findings of the report:

• CSR issues are not among the main subjects in the blogsphere. Still there was over 3.5 Million post on CSR related subjects during 2006. That’s one post on CSR related matters every 10 second or app. 0,75% of all blog posts. And the number is growing.
• Posts specifically tagged with a CSR keyword were only 120.000 during 2006
• Environmental issues make up 75% of CSR related posts
• Blogs specifically tagging with CSR terms are professional blogs (like this) and typically not very influential.
• CSR topics are still identified, researched and published by mainstream media. Bloggers only reactively comment and sometimes provide perspective.
• NGO’s and CSR institutions are still bad at engaging bloggers by being still kept in an old school paradigm for one-way communication. Besides, the number suggests that bloggers have caught ‘activism fatigue’.
• The major CSR influencers are individuals, not institutionalized voices. The blogshere notoriously distrust institutionalized voices.

Actics is all about aiding the transition to civic CSR engagement for people and companies alike. We believe they need each other. To see our perspective on these matters, check out the paper in progress ‘CSR 2.0′ under the working paper section, I’ve just uploaded a new version.

FastCompany has launched its own ethical score card to evaluate publicly listed companies. (HIP = Human Impact + Profiit)  ‘Our goal: to look beyond good intentions and focus on concrete results–how human impact drives the bottom line–as a guide for investors seeking to generate compelling returns and benefit society.’

The score card builds on a survey of 100 different companies ‘who are queried about their strategic vision, performance metrics, financial returns, accountability, and decision-making systems that support sustainable performance. They also could articulate how that management approach drove human impact: namely, the health and wealth of customers and employees, environmental quality, and social equality.

These data are subsequently evaluated according to two dimensions.
‘HIP Practices, the state of management practices and the ability to quantify human impact; and HIP Revenue, the share of revenue that generated both positive human impact and profit.’

The HIP scorecard is (as far as I understand) a relatively static measurement. It is based on periodic surveys. It does not capture the real time dynamics of of public opinion in determining the standing of a company.
It is a top down measurement, the HIP scorecard builds on evaluation according to centrally elaborated parameters. it does no invite the public in setting standards for evaluation, and there is no feed back mechanism able to dynamically alter the standards themselves.

In short it is not a participatory system…

read more at FastCompany.

I was suddenly thrown into a meeting yesterday with a coming up online community focused on facilitating business development in Africa members’ investment. C4 aims to ‘Eradicate Poverty through Business’ in support of the UN 2015 millennium developmental goals and it has already been featured in influential trend spotting sites and Danish media. It’s a very interesting concept and one of the better business models I’ve seen for web 2.0 ventures. I’ve signed up as a ‘MyC4 builder’ to test and help develop the service and there’s still a few vacant spots left for you to do the same. Welcome C4 and best of luck!

The US has decided to file two cases at the WTO over intellectual property. The cases are against China where the enforcement of of IP protection is notoriously lax., in particular regarding consumer brands, music and dvds, for which there is a massive cottage boot-legging industry. And they really have no reason to behave differently: most of this intellectual property belongs to countries like the US, and IP protection means little more than protecting the right of (mostly) US IP owners to siphon off excess profits form China’s booming middle class consumer market. Indeed, the fact that these objects are so frequently copied implies that, for most people in the world today, they are not perceived as particularly ‘american’ or even ‘western’, but as a common cultural property. Nike shoes is the natural aspiration of everybody , everywhere. This is of course the source of the value of the Nike brand, that people all over the world lets t matter to their everyday life, and gives it value in making it a signifier of hipness, ‘in status’, belonging to particular groups, or what have you. But if the value of Nike is something co-produced by everybody (or virtually everybody) then maybe the right to benefit form this diffuse production process should also be redefined. Why not let Nike, Coca cola, Disney be the property of UNESCO? That way brand revenues (currently billions of $ annually could be used for the general benefit of mankind, who produced these values in the first place.

Zygmunt Bauman, one of the most prolific and influential contemporary thinkers on ethics has, it seems, a stain on his past. After the war, Bauman was an enthusiastic officer in the Stalinist secret police, enjoying a stellar career in pursuing ‘anti-communist elements’ with unethical methods, to say the least.

from Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 20.03.2007

Polish historian Bogdan Musial has discovered a dark stain on the Zygmunt Bauman’s jacket – and uncovers the Stalinist past of the world famous sociologist. “The fact is that Bauman was deeply involved with the violent communist regime in Poland for more than 20 years, fighting real and supposed enemies of Stalinism with a weapon in his hand, shooting them in the back. His activities can hardly be passed off as the youthful transgressions of an intellectual seduced and led astray by communist ideology. And it is astonishing that Bauman, who so loves to point the finger, does not reflect on his own deeds.”
Does this disqualify Bauman from speaking about post-modern ethics? Or is his nostalgia for a pre-post-modern time when fixed moral principles were to be had to be seen as a last residue of his youthful stalinism? Maybe he should get himself an actics widget…
more in english, and danish

A new report from McKinsey documents the growing corporate interest in harnessing Web 2.0 tools. Most companies already deploying Wiki’s, blogs and social networking are overall satisfied with the investments and keen on exploring Web 2.0 tools further. However, no revolution is underway. First, interest is careful. Second, the report documents preference for the ‘technological’ over the ’social’ aspects of Web 2.0 with ‘web services’ being a clear number one. In fact, one could argue that web services defined as “software systems that make it easier for different systems to communicate with one another automatically in order to pass information or conduct transactions” is only a marginal aspect of what Web 2.0 is.

There are no explosive results in the report but a couple of interesting findings:

• Blogs are not prominent in the findings although corporate blogging has been much talked about.
• Early adapters are generally more satisfied with investments than followers. No explanations are provided but one could speculate that first movers are also the most engaged and providing for the organizational changes necessary.
• India is most enthusiastic about Web 2.0 with other regions following evenly.

All in all the report mirrors the moderate optimism of the recent Forrester report concluding that companies want Web 2.0 tools but rather as full suites and from big vendors. Again, not very true to the underlying currents of Web 2.0. But all changes take time.