Our statistical analysis of the 2,500 responses to our survey shows a significant correlation amongst these five relationships, p
The reporting of very similar levels of experience in all five relationships was not expected. The focus of most social-economic theories is on one of the five relationships – they might focus on individual liberty, fairness with the other, group solidarity, nature’s balance, or spiritual transcendence. We find that most groups are designed with organizing principles based on one of these, to the exclusion of the rest (Barkley Rosser & Rosser, 2004; Daly & Farley, 2004; Kornai, 2000; Marx, 1990; Mawd?d?, 2011; Neuberger, 1994; Ritchie-Dunham, 2014; Schumacher, 1973; Smith, 1976). We summarize our findings from the survey and field in Figure 1, representing three concentric rings of similar levels of vibrancy in all five relationships, with the inner ring representing very low vibrancy.
Figure 1. Three Levels of Vibrancy
Starting in 2010, we have tested this survey-based finding in our field research with 93 groups in 9 countries. We find that what differentiates groups is their foundational set of agreements. We define agreements as mutual understandings that guide how they interact. The agreements are the implicit and explicit rules and principles of the game, at the base of their relationships. Sociological research suggests that these implicit, socially embedded rules are based in economic, political, cultural, and social questions (Granovetter, 1985). We can rephrase these four questions into commonsense language:
How much is there? The economic question about the resources available for production and consumption
Who decides and enforces how to allocate the resources? The political decision mechanism for resource allocation and enforcement
What criteria are used to decide? The cultural values used to determine how to allocate the resources
What are the rules of interaction? The social organizing principles, structures and processes
Strategies for Extraordinary Success Every Day
Our statistical analysis of the 2,500 responses to our survey shows a significant correlation amongst these five relationships, p
The reporting of very similar levels of experience in all five relationships was not expected. The focus of most social-economic theories is on one of the five relationships – they might focus on individual liberty, fairness with the other, group solidarity, nature’s balance, or spiritual transcendence. We find that most groups are designed with organizing principles based on one of these, to the exclusion of the rest (Barkley Rosser & Rosser, 2004; Daly & Farley, 2004; Kornai, 2000; Marx, 1990; Mawd?d?, 2011; Neuberger, 1994; Ritchie-Dunham, 2014; Schumacher, 1973; Smith, 1976). We summarize our findings from the survey and field in Figure 1, representing three concentric rings of similar levels of vibrancy in all five relationships, with the inner ring representing very low vibrancy.
Figure 1. Three Levels of Vibrancy
Starting in 2010, we have tested this survey-based finding in our field research with 93 groups in 9 countries. We find that what differentiates groups is their foundational set of agreements. We define agreements as mutual understandings that guide how they interact. The agreements are the implicit and explicit rules and principles of the game, at the base of their relationships. Sociological research suggests that these implicit, socially embedded rules are based in economic, political, cultural, and social questions (Granovetter, 1985). We can rephrase these four questions into commonsense language: