When the Internet first came out and people could find out bad stuff out about companies which news outlets could then latch onto and ignite a share price hollowing shitstorm, it felt like we might be on the cusp of a big leap in companies sorting out their impacts.

The response was classic corporate: a certification, standards and NGO partnership jamboree. A tightly controlled measurement, management and communications festival that, while adding depth to businesses abilities, didn’t have us dancing in the aisles.

But for companies, this worked. This type of approach is also part of the reason why they rule the roost and block the path to prosperity, thriving off the ‘fact’ that:

a) they have all the answers (e.g hiring all the PhD grads to deliver more eyeballs to advertisements).
b) they have no challengers (the fruits of a smattering of lobbying with a hint of recession fearmongering).
c) they have sufficiently neutered the rancour (the cool wet wipe of now long-in-the-tooth partnerships and exemplary tokenism).

Needless to say, this hasn’t been the most enlightening of experiences -for us or for them.

Chow down on decline

So here we are. Guests at the last banquet of the industrial age. Or should that be the hired help (or not, as the case may be) because we certainly don’t have a seat at the table. These days, for the most part, companies are doing fine when most people are not. And while the airwaves of bust advanced economies crackle with a looped chorus of predatory vs. responsible capitalism catcalls – a pseudo-debate not happening in new poles of economic dynamism  by the way – real answers are nowhere. We are boxed in by the unwavering mediocre ambitions of our exalted titans.

The thing is that despite a big business world that has turned its back on most people, our understanding of the power of networks combined with a global will to change things has never been greater, while, at the same time, the barriers to making things happen have never been lower. Hence, waiting for companies to catch up is utterly pointless and, with the tools we have at our disposal now, criminally negligent.

What if we could harness our collective abilities to radically transform these moribund beasts that block our prosperity and, in the process, ignite a whole new world of possibilities? Could we turn these hopeless experts at the humdrum art of the possible into a showcase for the truly exceptional, the utterly brilliant and the next, next level?

Potential case in point: Apple

What could we do for Apple? Of late, this cherished leader of our times has been under the microscope for its labour practices. This has led it to deploy the tried and tested certification and standards shield of which we spoke about before. Will this improve the situation? Sure, to a point.

But we all know that a credo of drip drip incrementalism can never create the types of outcomes we should truly aspire to. And though they may well be sitting on the pecuniary muscle to put out any labour issue bonfires, the burning will to totally transform themselves is somewhat lacking.

After all, if we were to look at the actual footprint of an iPhone – it’s life from birth to death –  we might conclude that it is quite a miserable product. Year on year the phone goes through another round of mining in Africa, assembly in Foxconn,  stampeding hoards lusting after its latest incarnation, further tightening of its enclosed software ecosystem, a flurry of patent skirmishes and its final disassembly somewhere far, far away.

For such a ubiquitous and seemingly miraculous product to have such a miserable footprint is surely a damning indictment of us and our times. I’d suggest that for Apple to cancel out the misery on its own could take a generation. Or maybe longer. I don’t want to wait that long.

Time to take the reins

So here is the challenge. Can we make the leap for them? And, in making this leap, can we advance our own causes –  laying the foundations of a better, more human, productive economy fit for the 21st century.

Can we build up a movement that doesn’t merely set out to apply pressure to this industrial age (albeit successful) relic in the tradition of campaigning gone by, but one that aims to totally transform it.

Can we rid this phone of its footprint replete with sadness and gift it one that is 100% about happiness? Can we deconstruct every misery-filled step and replace it with one that is all about true human excellence?

Step forward the the Happiness Footprint Hub. Think of it as a type of roving 21st century micro-institution.  A launch pad that aims to light the touch paper of a networked, creative, global citizenry ready to rid products and services of their miserable footprints. For this particular task, its role is to provide everyone around the world who wants to take part with the tools they need to deconstruct and solve every problem currently embedded in the iPhone footprint.

It might convene a series of pathbreaking seminars bringing together the world’s top experts to look at everything from labour practices to resource extraction; launch a thousand innovation prizes focused on modular design; organise global hack weekends exploring materials reuse; connect aspiring, passionate amateur developers with industry insiders to unearth unthought of applications; set up and promote the githubs and wikis where this new information is stored; get digital luminaries to chair groups to wrestle with patent legislation; or run pilot schemes from New York to Yokohama to actually come up with a way to remine landfill for precious metals.

And what happens to the outcomes? Eventually, what’s created is nothing less than a working order blueprint for an iPhone with a happy footprint. Which we then gift it to Apple. And we also gift it to everyone else. It is out there for all to see, reuse and remix. And so an industry (and maybe more) transforms.

Balance shifts

And in the process we create a network of ideas, people, thinking, passion and purpose that is unlike anything a company, however exalted, could ever come up with.

This is the type of radical transformation that is totally within our (not their) grasp. It shows up current political debates and business approaches to problems as mere marginal improvements on a road to nowhere. And because of this, it shifts the balance of attention and power away from vested interests and their slovenly crew because, in comparison, they just can’t offer such a transformational and mindbendingly productive approach to our most pressing challenges.

In the end, the Happiness Footprint Hub is just one of a set of mini innovations we are going to need if we want to escape this ‘managed decline’ mantra and kickstart a new era of prosperity. I think it’s gonna be fun.

Tweet
Follow @jimmygreer

                 ok, they’re making mayo not iphones but…

Perhaps you are still partying like its 1997 ‘in praise of cheap labour‘.  Maybe you see making more stuff as the only route out of this decades-long employment funk for the US and others. On the other hand, you might not actually mind paying a bit more for your gadgets. Or, it could be you think we should just leave Apple to do what Apple does best. Whatever your thoughts we would like to know. 

Over the course of this week, I will post a couple of pieces looking at all of this in greater detail. Hopefully, with the help of the poll results and your comments below, we can tease out some ideas about the tensions and potential steps forwards for the likes of Apple and their ilk. And before you ask, we have chosen Apple because these days, where it leads…                                                   

Tweet

This WEF global risks grid compiled from survey respondent answers seems, at first, to be a pretty good stab at the issues on the table.  Now, try and take another look without slipping into a heavily comatose state.  These terms, familiar to us thanks to the daily grind of ‘very serious information,’ is the apex of mechanistic, non-sentient language, not far removed from what you might find in an IKEA shelving unit assembly manual. Impossible to decipher and skull-crushingly dull, both destined to go straight in the bin for most normal people.

It might be that we need to think about other ways to fix this planet that is on the verge of a nervous breakdown. After all, 4 years into this pile-up, haven’t we been talking about these things for ages with minimal progress? Where are the answers? The blindingly obvious truth is that the frames of reference for those snuggled up under their goose feather quilts in Davos are hopelessly inadequate for dealing with the task at hand. The required reboot is going to take a long time, a lot of muscle and a massive dose of heart. And to make it happen we are going to need to get as far away from the self-serving, nacolepsy inducing ‘serious talk’ as possible to create a groundswell that is engaged in creating a better future.

And make no mistake, the type of capitalism plugged by snowshoe-clad industry leaders is somewhat different to the one you may have read about, as this startling exchange demonstrates:

So, not much chance of anything happening there. In an attempt to go beyond the standard go-to risk soundbiteology, I thought I might make a wee risks chart that could actually resonate with peoples lives. While i don’t think it is that hot in term of language, I do hope it scratches at what might be behind the impasse we are at as well as think about some of the areas that need more attention. For although ‘serious talk’ never goes near most of the issues i’m talking about – and even less so during a CRISIS – it might be that they are precisely what’s holding us back. Anyway, here it is:

Tweet

Follow @jimmygreer

The leak/release of the  Rio+20 draft agenda has set of many discussions about outcomes for this anniversary summit (read the agenda all here). Of course there will be a lot of head bashing, technical work done by delegates. Fine. That is their job. But the real route to effectiveness is going to be around global narratives, rekindling the notion of the planet for normal people, perception and all that. I have a nightmare in my head that the ‘Our Common Future’ definition of sustainability of:

“…development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

will be heard ad infinitum in the media etcetc, gaining traction and becoming the go-to narrative setting piece.

This (pathbreaking at its time) definition which began life incomplete, morphed to become a welcome tool for mediocre boardrooms to trot out in their unending pursuit of incremental non-gains…leading on to weak action, wanton destruction in the pursuit of near-term profits, the endless talk about embedding sustainability into business and a fatal erosion of trust between business and society – instead of the start of a  radical restructuring of our how we create wealth  and get out of the mess we are in (exhibit a-z: destroyed societies across the world , sclerotic politics, fatter fat cats, insert your favourite example of declinism here__________).

The other day, when reading a paper by Ken Arrow and Partha Dasgupta on measuring stocks of national wealth (have a sneak, it is rather immense PDF) for a short note on why the fears of a low growth couple of years might be a time to rethink the GDP-chase madness, I came across their well laid out critique of said definition. Here is what they say:

As sustainable development must refer to a path of development that sustains (prevents the diminishing of) something, our first requirement is to state what that “something” should be.  In a landmark report, the Brundtland Commission (World Commission, 1987: p.70) defined  sustainable development as “… development that meets the needs of the present without  compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

Note that the definition makes no mention of human well-being. Relatedly, it makes relatively weak demands on intergenerational justice. In the Commission’s view, sustainable  development requires that future generations have no less of the means to meet their needs than  we do currently; it requires nothing more. As needs are the austere component of well-being,  economic development could be sustainable in the Commission’s sense without having much to  show for it.

 Note also that the Commission’s definition is directed at sustaining the factors that go to meet needs. In their view “sustainable development” requires that relative to their populations  each generation should bequeath to its successor at least as large a quantity of what may be  called an economy’s “productive base” as it had itself inherited from its predecessor. That raises another problem with the Commission’s reasoning: it does not explain how the productive base should be measured. 

We take the view that economic development should be evaluated in terms of its contribution to intergenerational well-being. Specifically, we identify sustainable development  with economic paths along which intergenerational well-being does not decline.

Gets to the nub of a few of the holes in the phrase but of course it would probably have sent Donald Draper into a gin soaked rage. Do we need better definitions and communications? Yes. But, more critically, the world has moved on. The corporate age is having its final swansong. New business models, an understanding of what wealth is all about and a world confronted by a myriad of impossible tasks call for the emergence of a new compact. Rio+20  can either be remembered for Punxsutawney Phil seen-it-all-before irrelevance or it could be the focal point for a gathering swell of new ways of doing things that are bubbling everywhere. We have a choice. We sit back and curse newscasters prefixing Brundtland to their Groundhog summit coverage or,  we can seize the Rio+20 coat tails and use it as a launchpad. Time to get out of the bunker, leave the silo, ditch the obtuse language and get cracking.
Tweet
Follow @jimmygreer

November 2001: The first iPod launches and detonates the cosy 4-way music industry love-in forever.
October 2011: iPod’s original designer Dani Fadell launches a thermostat.

Bit of a step back? Sure, if you think shoving another n billion iPod like devices into peoples palms is a divine calling that must be quenched.

That Dani Fadell has come up with a ‘thing’ that takes Apple’s design and function aesthetic and crammed it into a seemingly undisruptable everyday household object is a screaming sign of our times. In many spheres, against the odds (that we have built up against ourselves), we are slowly dragging ourselves away from the pyre of obsolescent, credit fuelled, asset backed stuff that has brought advanced economies and societies to their knees, and we are limping towards a fitter future.

What is doubly interesting is the attention/press it has garnered. Appetite for ‘things’ with a bit more bite is on the rise. Hacking, personalising your life is becoming more commonplace. In fact, if you wanted to, you could probably make a D-I-Y version of this thermostat with some sensors, a Pachube-like data pipe (i think that is the right vernacular, please don’t crucify me if it isn’t) and minimal programming skills. But critically, it is the addition of a little Apple gold dust transforms this into a crossover hit.

A path from the smouldering wreckage

So perhaps these cues point us towards a path away from the smoldering wreckage. Despite what the vested interests may tell you, in today’s world, stuff from the edge, done right, for the right intentions (ie not to heap more misery on us) can truly thrive.

Stuff from the edge, done right, for the right intentions (ie not to heap more misery on us) can truly thrive.

Sadly for the big dogs this is not a painless process. Look at Philips desperately trying to sell its TV division, cutting thousands of jobs to make it ‘more lean, agile and entrepreneurial’. At the same time it is all guns blazing in transforming itself into a company focused on delivering wellbeing and improving people lives. And while the ‘entrepreneur’ drive is somewhat chilling, to their great credit, they twigged that flatscreens probably can’t deliver the type of wellbeing they want to be all about.

And no, ‘fatscreens’ wont do it either.

So while the giants across many industries hurtle headlong at maximum 20th century velocity into the pile-up, the rest of us are a bit screwed right? Well, maybe not. Thermostat guy just did something smart. Sure, it took guile, determination, expertise and hard work but what doesn’t? For many reasons, the lumbering giants ceased to be wealth creators a long time ago. Their one-track obsessions at pushing pointless innovation on us is a legacy we can break free from. What’s more, as the big dogs search for inspiration, their hopes lie in opening their doors (and wallets )to the many radical innovators out there and respectfully looking on as they show them how to flourish.

One key lesson. Thermostat guy made an impression because of the traction his release garnered. For the radical innovators out there, it is about taking your fantastic ‘thing’, sprinkling in some gold dust and nailing the narrative, so that heads are turned, synapses are nourished and momentum builds.

TweetFollow @jimmygreer

A mini plug. This thurs @ 6pm October 27th I’m running a little session with Ed Gillespie (@frucool) at the Hub Westminster Changemaker Fayre titled: Design a high street as if the world mattered. Do come on down will be fun and we could use you help! The fayre look has loads of stuff going on take a look or check out #changefest on twitter

'Which way to Occupy Apple?, Oh...I see'

Two big hits in a world that seems to hang on big numbers:

• 4 million new model iphones sold by Apple over its launch weekend.
• 7 billion people expected to be sharing this planet on October 31st.

Will this new person be a future iphone owner?

When visionary über-chef Ferran Adrià pulled the shutters down on his restaurant nestling in the Catalan coastal town of Roses for the last time, he was saying goodbye to a 27-year-old restaurant that had become the world’s most fabled eating institution. A restaurant, only open for 6 months at a time, that 2 million people a year tried to get a table at (and that only served up 8, 000 covers). His mindblowing, unreal creations (tapioca Iberian ham anyone? Consommé tagliatelle carbonara?) were the types of things never before conceived of in the history of food. He is a genius. And his restaurant was rightly feted with godly praise, the phrases diners used to describe their trip to Roses were unlike anything ever used to describe a meal before. This guy had raised the bar in a once-thought impossible way.

So why on earth would you mess with this formula? Probably the most successful restaurant of all time. Head and shoulders above its peers. The reference point for a generation of chefs. It made serious cash. It was a place that had transcended conventional high expectations to reach an unscaled pinnacle. Perhaps this genius had suffered the same fate of other tormented greats that have left an indelible mark on this planet with their excellence and he had cracked. Maybe his cheese had slipped off his cracker?

A bit bonkers?

Well actually, no. Ferran Adrià has bigger fish to fry. His restaurant is to be transformed into an academy of learning and creativity. It is set to become a beacon of El Bulli inspired excellence that will nurture and cultivate future food pioneers. Carved out of the rock below the site of the former restaurant it will be an organic temple of deep culinary thought and fantasy flavours. A bit bonkers? Well, maybe. But also totally visionary. This is someone who at the top of his profession decided to say: ‘Sod it, i’m forgoing the glory of having the most stunning, over-subscribed to restaurant the planet has ever seen and I’m going to totally reinvent this and take it to another level. And then, I will really blow people’s minds.’

What we have here is a visionary, letting excellence guide him to new, unexplored terrain that probably only his establishment can explore as it has reached virgin, never-before-breached heights.

Last product launch

So here is the plan. The new iPhone launch today will be its last new product launch for the foreseeable future. Tim Cook will tell the ranks of the world’s press that it is time to move on. He will explain to them that its model, while hyper efficient, is Dickensian in design and totally not Apple. Endless mining of minerals from conflict prone regions, minimal recycling and incessant low cost manufacturing where misery inducing employment is just ‘one of those things’ are to be consigned to the past.

Apple would commit to never selling another product (as we know them). Sure, it would still have a hand in making them, but it would draw up some serious new strands to its business:

1. It would devise a modular, closed loop system that would mine old gadgets for the raw materials needed to upgrade your stuff. Zero new materials as standard.

2. It would share this system (along with its once zealously guarded patents) across industries and create a new set of industry standards (metaphorically) overnight that would see us through for the next 100 years.

3. Remember all those times when people would ask: what if Apple designed our trains, planes, stations or airports? Well it would now be doing that, taking its design ethic and using it out there in the real world to collaborate on user experiences, making our lives better, more serene and more enjoyable.

4. Apple’s stores – already the standout reference point in a retail environment that has become tawdry low margin ride to nowhere – would truly become hubs of creativity, experiences, collaboration and learning (find out more on this at retailreset.com). A global network of go-to beacons taking the philosophy of Apple out of gadgetland and into our lives. The company would nurture our thinking, ideas and actions to help us hack the hulking civic, social, environmental and economic challenges we face. In-store workshops, amphitheatres and makerspaces would encourage us to be turned from lobotomised, debt addled consumers into active doers, makers and thinkers.

In the end, what we would see before us would be a visionary leader responding to the demands of what they and us are going to need to take on the 21st Century.  A landscape where consumption (as we know it) means nothing and human potential means everything. How is it going to make money? Well, I’ve alluded to four ways this transformation might take place. In my puny mind, all four are big bulging opportunities (alongside many others I’m sure). And here is the thing, these fields are already being explored by 21st Century pioneers. Companies like Worn Again are creating closed loop systems for household names like Virgin and Eurostar. Others like Nike and New Balance are sharing patents at The Green Xchange. Radical innovators are taking their smartphones and turning them into stethescopes. Maker and hack spaces are gaining traction as people look to get enriched and experienced by getting their hands dirty. These small steps forward are laying the groundwork for a reconsidered way of doing things that looks at what we have got and says ‘no thanks, gonna do better.’… All Apple needs to do is jump in.

‘One last thing’

Again, why do this when its making money hand over fist, sitting on billions of dollars and rightly feted as the best thing going for us right now? Well, we simply haven’t got any room left for humdrum, fifth rate, 50, 60, 70 year old thinking if we want to truly prosper in the 21st century. We need the very best to exploit their excellence and take us places only they can reach and re-found prosperity with their brilliance, excellence and pioneering verve. Ok, it might be crazy. But just imagine if that famous, Colombo-esque ‘one last thing’ in today’s yawnfest of a new product launch was an outline of a blueprint for taking things to the next level. It would be earth shatteringly disruptive. It would also transform Apple not just into a truly awe-inspiring institution in its own right, but would also secure its future for a long time to come. 

Hope to update with audio later…

Here’s a small chunk from a longer article on what we think the future of retail is all about:

It’s not that hard to imagine Oxford Street as a hub of mass collaboration where people descend in droves not as 20th century shoppers but as 21st century citizens, ready to be inspired, exposed to new ideas, to learn and participate in something they are passionate about, and connect with others.
Being a responsible retailer in a new economic reality isn’t just about watertight sourcing, me-too environmental 
credentials, some taxes and a few jobs. Those are in fact bare minimum requirements for existence. It’s about aspiring to give your customers more and actually taking a a role in wider economic fortunes. If you want my money, you are going to have to prove to me that you are worth it. These days I can now spend my (even harder) earned pennies on something unique that also gives me a personal connection, is beautifully crafted or locally made, rather than see my cash pay for your chief executive’s hired help at his winter sun bolthole in in the Seychelles. I want you to use your considerable heft to bring together totally amazing experiences, possibilities and opportunities that inspire me and help me achieve my dreams. Please, try harder or you will never see me again. I have enough options to keep me busy for five lifetimes so make it memorable.
So with this in mind, where are the amphitheatres in Topshop with round the clock lectures from fashion industry players teaching me about how to get my foot in the door? Or the social enterprise upcycling concessions in Primark that show me how to transform last season’s jacket into this summer’s must-have item. Why can’t I take part in an Ikea hack workshop (turning my old Ikea purchase into something new) when I’m actually at Ikea?
When I pick up a shiny gadget why am I not suddenly be immersed in an augmented reality world that takes me on a journey across the globe to witness the raw materials being sourced in Bolivia, to the factory where it was put together in Shenzen, then on to the innovation lab in Bangalore and to the marketing gurus on Madison Avenue? Why can’t I take out my phone and find out where I can connect with people meeting up in real world makerspaces up and down the high street who are into the same things I am and forge new bonds, friendships and alliances. If I’m going to by my food an Iceland (shop not country) why can’t I find out how to make the most nutritional meal possible for my family dinner that night at a hands-on micro seminar in-store?

We have been doing some research about town, talking to people about how they think things could be improved etc which has convinced us more than ever that this change is wanted. Take a look at a short interview with some good folk sitting outside Westfield:

We plan to bring our vision to life to show you what retail that has undergone intense reset therapy could look like. If you want to find out more do get in touch and we will explain what we mean in greater detail. In the meantime follow the highs and lows on www.retailreset.com and/or on twitter and if you are keen, join us on our next research/subterfuge/hack day somewhere in London.

For a bit of further reading do check this article on markerspaces over at Shareable which talks about Retail Reset  Maker-Spaces: Three Englishmen Forging A New Form of Capitalism