If at first the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it.
—Albert Einstein
Questions are my stock and trade when coaching executives or working as an organization development practitioner. “What if” questions are great for driving innovation and creativity and for jumping people out of their normal linear thinking and getting them to take a look at things from a different angle, opening up their mind to new ideas, absurd ideas, ridiculous notions that might, just might, be the answer and solution we were looking for all along.
In 2011, I was listening to a news broadcast and there was a feature on the Mountain of Mammon, referring to the continuous pursuit of wealth at all costs. At the time, it caught something in me and I wrote a blog pondering the question “What if organizations pursued something other than an economic agenda?” Now, as I write this in early 2017, I find the same references to the Mountain of Mammon appearing on the news. The continuing failure of the free market to stagnating wages has changed the world from neoliberal stability where globalism was seen as inevitable to one where populism is threatening the established order of Western democracies. Perhaps, today, this childlike innocent question is more pertinent than ever before.
The question is perhaps searching for a more constructive solution versus the populist reaction to the failings of the capitalist economic system that has seen the gap between rich and poor widen and globalism cause whole sections of society to be put out of work as jobs move abroad. As a gig worker I am part of the capitalist system, selling my services where there is demand, taking me across the UK, Europe, and the Middle East. In my organization development practice and as a lecturer on business courses I have encountered many executives and business leaders who believe quite passionately that economic forces should focus on profit and wealth creation and “everything else” such as poverty, inequality, health, wellbeing, environmental, ethical, and sustainability issues will magically solve themselves because of the “trickle-down effect.” Inequality is celebrated in capitalism since “efforts to create a more equal society are both counterproductive and morally corrosive. The market ensures that everyone gets what they deserve” (Montboit, 2016). Andrew Carnegie (1906) in his book The Gospel of Wealth argues that only capitalism is capable of creating positive economic conditions in which society can create wealth. He goes on to propose that the wealthy few is an inevitable consequence of capitalism, but it is beholden to those who possess great wealth to live modestly and help those less fortunate. I hear how society benefits from successful capitalists but can’t help wondering whether the inevitability of capitalism was true and that “this” was really all we could expect from our economic system: greed, self-interest, and crumbs from the table.
I say this as someone who enjoys the fruits of my labor, but who has also experienced a period in which, by Western standards, my family existed in poverty. We lived on the verge of losing it all, struggling to pay bills, wondering how to feed the kids, and my husband and I having to miss meals. Despite this, I was still able to work on an expensive laptop in a centrally heated house, listening to music on my iPod, while my children attended school. Even when we had tipped from just about managing to not managing by modern standards, we were still in the top 6 to 10 percent of wealthy in the world. So I guess the question that confronts me is “How much wealth is enough?”
I don’t believe it is wrong to have nice things. Material things do make our lives easier and more enjoyable. Nor do I think profit is a necessarily evil. But there are undeniable issues of proportionality, equality, effort, reward, responsibility, and basic human needs that should be considered. With climate change firmly on the agenda despite the denier’s best efforts, we can no longer ignore questions about who ends up bearing the consequences of the external costs of our activities. Growth and profit are an important part of the equation, but they should not be the answer; therefore, this leaves us with the question of “Important for what purpose?”
It cannot be claimed that the ideas explored in this book are any more new or different from the ideas expressed by many other writers both historically and in the present time. But my intention is to offer an alternative, positive approach to change, which perhaps contrasts with the current climate of angry destruction, opposition, and divisiveness. Rather than dismantling everything and reverting to tribalism I believe that there is a way we can together, as the human race, move toward a positive change, a change for good.
My interest in contributing to the debate on how to change the system comes from a simple desire to help every individual release their talent potential. I believe passionately that with the right environment and circumstances, people’s potential can be released not only for the benefit of the individual but for the benefit of the society at large. “Amartya Sen the economist-philosopher and Nobel Prize Laureate, [said] that poverty leads to an intolerable waste of talent. As he puts it, poverty is not just a lack of money; it is not having the capability to realize one’s full potential as a human being” (Banerjee and Duflo, 2012). My experience of developing people has led me to believe that we are all born for a purpose, everyone has something valuable to contribute, and any actions or circumstances that prevent individuals from being all that they are meant to be causes an incalculable loss. I also believe in the potential of the human race, that between us, we have the knowledge, skills, and capability to make the changes that are needed to achieve a better world for everyone.
This book isn’t intended to have all the answers, but to get you thinking about the idea that the capitalist profit agenda does not have to be the only agenda that organizations and society have to follow. Given today’s climate I don’t think suggesting a replacement for capitalism is perhaps as radical as it was even five years ago. Indeed Mason (2016) recently offered the term post-capitalism to explain the need for a strategic shift for both neoliberalism and capitalism. I offer a different perspective while recognizing the same problems. My approach stems from a desire for a more human approach to solving a global problem and a commitment to releasing talent potential for everyone. I can’t help feeling that there is a certain rightness to the idea that humans are socially conscious, deserve, and want better than being enslaved materialistic consumers and that the inequality of wealth in the world isn’t only unsustainable but also inevitable. I propose that rather than racing toward mutual destruction, nationalism, and deeper levels of selfishness, there is an alternative agenda of doing good, which sits under a framework I’ve labeled Temperatism.
So I ask, as you read through this book, you consider my proposals in the context of our world, which is on the edge of chaos, but with an eye on the equal worth of every individual in it. Be sure that as you read this, you are part of something bigger. You can #bethechange for no other reason than because you are part of the most amazing, inventive, innovative, and creative species on earth, the human race. And I believe that together we can change for good.
Best wishes
Carrie Foster