Enterprisology

The current paradigm will stipulate that growth is good and necessary.  At least that has been the buzz in my neck of the woods for as long as I can remember.  Even thoughts like "Limits to Growth" start from the assumption that growth is good, and it will be too bad to have to limit it.

Maybe that's the wrong meme.  What if we adopt a meme such as "intensification"?  Not so much "more, more, more" but rather "deeper, deeper, deeper".

This thought is underpinned or undermined by which of several concepts of wealth is held in mind.  My money supplies and streams are not experiencing a lot of growth, but I have a deeper relationship with dogs (just as an example).  

An editorial by Tom Friedman highlights some features of a power architecture, and the relationship to results and accomplishments.  In his case he is talking about the "enterprise" of a nation state (USA in this case).  However, it is easy to see how this line of thought extends to commercial and public enterprises at all levels.  Friedman focuses on how the ability to get things done feeds on itself.  This goes beyond power that derives from hype, and power that derives from brute force.

David Brooks, the columnist for the New York Times, has a column on "protocols", and the nature of an economy built on protocols rather than products.  This is a spin on the information economy, as discussed by Hal Varian and others.  It makes the point that protocols are more and more pervasive, in the form of computer programs that manage aspects of business, to the procedures followed to have a franchise operation conform to the parent standards.

This post is inspired by some interactions I’ve been having with the enterprise architect community, primarily at this LinkedIn group . There are ongoing debates about how to define what it is that enterprise architects do, what the purpose of enterprise architecture is, and how to explain it to decision-makers.
 

I've been engaging recently in a renewed conversation with the members of Metaphorum, a loose-knit confederation of thinkers who generally follow and preserve the work of Stafford Beer, one of the pioneers of cybernetics, systems thinking, and the application to business. 
 

That title denotes something that I always do.  Wherever I go, for instance the VSM thought framework is like an tool on a heads-up display for me -- always available as a device to peer through at each new interesting social organization that I stumble upon.

When we say bailout these days, I wonder what image people have in their minds.  I can think of two.
 

Over the weekend i had an experience that made me think about longevity of organizations.  I attended a parade and ceremony to mark the 199th anniversary of the Boy Scouts of America.
 
I have been involved with several 100-year organizations during my time on the planet.
 

There are people who think building an enterprise is JUST LIKE building a house or aircraft.  This is false.  This is misleading in a profound and pernicious way. I won't name names, because this seems to be the dominant view in some quarters.
 
Anyone who has tried to start or maintain and grow an enterprise can attest that there is no shop manual.  This is much more a matter of nurture than construction. 
 

The word of the day is "nurture".  Maria Shriver said it tody, but I have been thinking about this.  It came up, as I recall, in the conversation about creation of jobs, and it reminded me that it is important to think of nurturing a lot of things -- like jobs, like companies, like the health care system, like the economy.  And it came up in the context of Shriver and her team releasing a major report on the situation of women in the U.S. of 2009.