We’ve all heard about the Millennium Development Goals of the UN. It so happens, I’m not a big fan of institutions such as the UN. Especially not when, though it is a ‘voluntary’ organisation for countries to join, and establish somewhat of a ‘world-government’ type deal (or so is my interpretation), it’s regarded as a ‘second-choice’ in terms of political decision time. (remember the Iraq War?)

Anyway, the UN also has some good ideas. They have, in the years running up to 2000, decided to form a set of goals that are for the betterment of mankind in general (eradication of poverty / ensure environmental sustainability / achieve universal primary education / promote gender equality and empower women, for example). This, I find, is a ‘good’ thing, ‘we’ (Westerners) ought to break through the inequality we find in our world which is, for a good deal, maintained through Western behavioural patterns. So; 1-up for the UN.

Now, despite the good efforts, Ban-Ki-Moon, the tribal chief of the UN, has warned the people of the world that because of the economic crisis the goals are under pressure (see the full report here). Yeah. Right. The eradication of poverty for instance, in 15 years, can indeed be done, but the simple fact of the matter is that as long as western companies (and thus governments) still make money on this form of inequality, this will not be achieved easily (remember the ‘secondary choice’-thing). Same with the gender equality idea. This is not even achieved in ‘developed’ countries. Next to that there’s this counter movement of ‘new-feminism’ in which gender equality became some sort of chauvinistic idea, but I’ll leave that to your own judgment. In my opinion men and women are not equal, yet, should be given equal rights and men and women should be judged on their individual qualities when it comes to whatever it is you’d like to judge them on. Let’s be happy men and woman are not equal, it would be a monotonous world.

As it is, maybe we should look around and see what small initiatives are doing, and how you and I as individuals could support those initiatives. In this case, for instance, by supporting them in an effort to win an award where UN money is given away, in name of the Millennium Awards. (Because like it or not, the money will go somewhere anyway.) And I’ve got just the NGO to do that for!

As part of ‘doing my part’ I’ve joined Satara to assist in the further development of their strategy, communication and business-wise. Satara works on Ghandi’s philosophy “We need to be the change we wish to see.” We’re currently working on a spring/summer 2010 collection, produced in India, empowering women that are manufacturing the collection (by hand). We do this through paying honest wages, education and setting up a more secure social system. Satara’s profit is re-invested in a local education project in order to stimulate and enable local parents to send their kids to school instead of being forced to be dependent on their income to feed the family. (read the whole story here)

This is Moniek van Erven, telling you the story of Satara;

You can help out by voting for Satara both on- and offline;

Vote online via the following link.

Or via text-message;

Text ‘nhd satara’ to 4999 (in the Netherlands) (remember the single space between nhd & satara)

You can find more on the UN Millennium Awards here (Dutch) and here (English).

As it is, this was shameless self-promotion, but it’s for a good cause, hope you’ll help us out! Thanks in advance.

Love and Peace.

The idea of our wasteful behaviour was brought to my attention (once more) by a (new) friend of mine, who was talking about a documentary about how big corporations don’t wish to sell their products under a certain price, in order to maintain the year-long efforts in building up a reputation that would justify profits margins of 70-190%. It happens to be the case that I wrote a thesis on the relationship between a company’s reputation and it’s general ‘corporate social responsibility’. And I can’t help but feel the hope sink towards the bottom of my being, when big corporations such as Samsung (here/here examples of how they are ‘good citizens’) for instance, seem to think that throwing money around in a seemingly altruistic fashion will cover their ‘efforts to maintain a price worthy reputation’. (or something of that kind, I am not entirely sure how to name this kind of behaviour)

These efforts consist of systematically wasting brand new products that are not sold and thus dumped, dissembled and partially burned. We see DVD players, HD TV’s and MP3 players go down in price and most people get happy, as it is now available for a bigger public. Yet, for the corporations that manufacture these products (being ‘stock-market-companies’), these kind of ‘free-market’ dynamics create a problem. A reputation problem. The products that are sold under the general price-level of the company will give the brand a ‘bad name’ or so it the thought. But destroying the products, where we ‘the people’ don’t see or hear anything about it, will only show up in the books, somewhere deep and buried.

She also talked about fashion-labels ‘un-stitching’ their labels and shipping their clothing off to ‘development-countries’. This I see as somewhat of an attempt to do something about the unequal dynamics in our world, not too bad. But also, here we again, talk about a matter driven by the fear of ‘losing face’, but mostly, bad business-strategy. If, apparently your product is not good enough to sell your stock (or mis-priced, mis targetted or whatever), perhaps you should thing about what and how you produce, how you market it, and how you price it.

But I’m drifting off.

Apples.

Do you eat the center part of an apple? If not, why not? Have you ever tried, or do you simply don’t eat the center part of an apple because you were taught to do so? (when mum was still citting the apples for you and gave them to you in one of those brightly coloured bowls, yesh, we’ve all been there) Just think about it. Why would you not eat the center part of an apple, it’s tasty, it’s healthy, and ehm, it gives eating an apple yet ANOTHER dimension. It’s great.

To illustrate what you could do to stop the wastefulness of our Western being. I don’t want to ask people to simply start ignoring red-lights when you think it to be safe you see. It’s in the little things, and starts with yourself. Anyway, I’m off eating an apple.

Love and peace.

A bit opportunistic perhaps, but I felt like writing something on the subject of my thesis, so I did. The thesis is in its final stages and consists of a range of interviews with; David Fellah, Herbert van Hoogdalem, Dan Germain, Mikal Hallstrup and last, but surely not least, Sir Richard Branson. Also, a survey with 150 respondents, loads of literature review and the text here would, I think, be classified as my conclusions without the sources. Hope you enjoy it.

Throughout the process of compiling the thesis I came across several often returning ‘tag-words’ if you wish. One of them; ethics, others; transparency, genuine behaviour and long-term strategy. These four ‘drivers’ so to say, are very important in implementing a CSR strategy. In my personal opinion, Dan Germain put it very well, CSR is not a strategy, it is part of the DNA of a company. Yet, I would like to say, it is not the DNA of the company, it is the DNA of the people behind the company.

The most important part, when it comes to social behaviour, is that it needs to be true, the truthfulness, of CSR, no matter what it’s business or communication consequences, is vital in even considering implementing a strategy as such. Although currently CSR is becoming somewhat of a ‘trendy thing to be in’ and a popular thing to implement, in the base, it should be a feeling of people who control the larger sums of money in this world, to do ‘something good’. This, in times of declining world economies, based on unclear, confusing financial constructs, leaving, hardworking, honest people bankrupt, job- and homeless, is a message received with a heartfelt cheer by activists, political left and right-wingers, consumers and non-consumers.

This, as touched upon earlier (in the thesis that is), is also the risk. In times of superficial entertainment, de-humanised wars (on the Western side of the equation), increased negative outlooks on world economy, the return of ‘pirates’ in our daily news and the continued callings of the ruling western spiritual leader- the Pope, to not use condoms in Africa, news, which is ‘true, ‘good’ or ‘positive’ is received with great enthusiasm and appreciation, without looking much further into the matter.

Companies have a responsibility to, if they choose to, be truthful, transparent and ‘in for the long run’, when it comes to Corporate Social Responsibility. The interesting conclusion I came to, through talking to the ‘business-leaders’ for this thesis, is that most of them claimed companies have more ‘power’ to instigate change than governments do. This, I personally believe to be true, it is also interesting to see the response coming back in the questionnaire, in which the respondents show an obvious ‘pro’ corporate responsibility and are willing to pay more, with money being the ruling paradigm in our world, I find this a very interesting development. This also indicates, I believe, a system change, in which companies are going to be ‘platform creators’ in which civilians are to participate, thereby, together, creating a world of which one can be proud.

The ‘change in the system’ cannot be ‘announced’ with any light concern to the ruling ideas that are here now, and therefore, I found a nice and ‘simple’ illustration to accompany it, I believe (based upon the 6 product-phases Eger has once proposed).

When we look at the process of becoming who we are today we, as a species, have had a long journey (and still a long way to go?). When we first got up on our two hind legs (homo erectus), we had to start evolving ourselves in several ways, in a physical way, which lead to the emergence of the species of homo sapiens (Performance). After that we started to optimise our bodily functions that lead to increasing mental development (Optimisation). Through that optimisation we began to develop skills other homo sapiens had not (itemisation). Through that we were lead to segmentation by the skills we had attained, worker class, bourgeoisie and royal (segmentation). When this wasn’t enough anymore we started to individualise which lead to the last couple of decades of the self (individualisation). Which brings us to where we are now. Awareness.

As such, I believe, we humans are increasingly ‘aware’ of what is happening around us, mind me, we are merely at the beginning of this stage, but as seen in (and enabled by) the increase of communication means we have at our disposal, internet ‘activism’, for instance, is an increasingly important mean to people who wish to ‘change the world’ and, even in mainstream news gathering, becoming a force to be reckoned with.

If a company or brand chooses to indulge itself into a strategy that addresses social behaviour of the company itself, it needs to be heartfelt, I would even say, they should not even want to communicate it. Although this, especially coming from a communication student, is perhaps not the most ‘financially profitable’ way of going about it, surely would indicate it’s sincerity.

The core beliefs of wanting to be a ‘Good Global Citizen’ should come from within a company, otherwise they cannot be lived, and therefore they will, most likely at some point, fail to be responsible, resulting in a massive spanking. Corporate Social Responsibility can be a very useful and profitable addition to a company strategy, what is vital it to realise how much you will lose if you do not treat a strategy as such with honesty, sincerity and loyalty, it is a long-term, costly and hard process and one not to be taken lightly.

What’s new? Met some cool people, got disappointed in some others and will start the initial build of the website for Cradle of Design.

Disappointment, good start for a story, as I’ll always look for improvement, came from my day today at the Dutch Entrepreneur Week opening. You hear a lot about the weird kind of people entrepreneurs are, might be true, might not be, probably depends from who’s side you’re looking at it. But the thing is, especially when you look at young entrepreneurs, is that it’s not too easy to get your funding, administrational guidance, government policy introduction when you are ‘fast paced’ (or have a short-attention span ).

The thing is; (here comes the disappointment) who do you look for? I’d go for governmental guidance or semi-governmental guidance as a first guess. But.. Except for the Dutch KVK, there’s little to be found. Google gives you shit-loads of companies who will be happy as to help you out, against a price or some kind of other endorsement in the form of (profitable) business. There are some initiatives around the world for young over-energised tornado’s like myself (Sprout Challengerday or TwentyTwenty), but I mean, the fact that 2020 doesn’t even have an explanatory website already shows how much they are connected to the world of experience of the average 20-something year old.

So I wonder, when the director of Enterprise of the Ministry of Economic Affairs (Drs. Kinke Zonneveld) starts talking about guiding young ‘star’ entrepreneurs to foreign organisations (I believe he was talking about the Kauffman Institute), helping them further into the business world, why he thinks they would need the governments’ help in such an undertaking.

His answer was as followed: “I’ve been hearing this today a couple of times today from you young people, and I think I should tell you that if you think you don’t need help, you are not a real entrepreneur. You can find everything you need to know with 3 clicks on Google.” (RESULT OF THAT TEST in Dutch; Starting Entrepreneur HELP, there’s no governmental institution saying, ey come on over here and get your unbiased, non-profit kind of information) He continued his answer but I stopped listening seeing the fact that this was the 5th time I heard governmental officials referring to young entrepreneurs as “young guys, the kid with an idea etc. My point is; Where the fuck do these people think they are contributing to promoting young entrepreneurship with this kind of stigmatising, de-motivational and authoritarian kind of approach?!

There seems to be no, non-what-so-ever link between what these people think and what the future of our country (and thus their pension in this case), want, need or look for to start their own company.

The world’s changing, so should these kind of organisations and the people that work for them.

Funny thing is, I was talking to this guy afterwards (young entrepreneur) who after my little blaze said, “I’d never knock on the government’s door if I’d be in need of help.” Which is exactly the problem the government would like to solve (or so they say). So maybe, just MAYBE, they should open up to suggestions from youth, which is even kind enough of saying, hey, you know, maybe this is an idea, free of charge and all.

I’m happy I’ve got my own little group of people around me. =) (Herbert, Dick, Hans) Thanks for saving me the endless frustration of having to work with government institutions or officials. =)

Let’s go kick some institutional ass.

May you all be in love and peace.

Len

Anyway just to say that today as well, 30-90 Afghan civilians were killed by an american airstrike . Of course he’s not in office yet, but, still it shows how much change the world needs, coming from Mr. Obama. The point is that NOW is actually the time to press subjects that need change upon the US and the only way this will happen is through our voice.

You can do so at Mr. Obama’s website for change where you can write your thoughts and ideas. Also through organisations such as Avaaz.org ‘The world in Action’, an independent organisation for social change that has set up a ‘Wall of Change’ in the centre of Washington DC, which has the messages of people calling out for change from allover the world. You can send your message here

But enough on politics for today.

Yesterday I was invited by Herbert to join him to the Sprout Challenger Day. A day organised by the Dutch entrepreneur magazine Sprout. I met some interesting people and even got to do an interview for an Internet TV-channel. The channel is Talk & Do TV run by Edo van Santen. Edo is a friend of Herbert and was willing to give me a shot at talking about Cradle of Design for which I am very thankful.

Besides that I also ran into the guy that organises the Dutch Entrepreneur Week; Tristan and he invited me to all sorts of cool events in a week or 2, sweet as and more on that later on this month! =)

On top of all that I had the pleasure to meet the mother and daughter running the country’s smallest Wellness Centre; Sauna Hotstones who invited me to come and stay there for a night so I will soon go and check out together with Elisa. Besides that I might help think out their concept a bit more which is always fun to do, especially for people who have heart for their job!

All and all a great day, which got even better with the last keynote speaker Dan Germain (Innocent Drinks) who had a very refreshing presentation after being in and out of concentration due to trails of thought of all sorts and lack of external stimulation, Dan, together with Ruud Koornstra were the two highlights for me during this day. Dan had a great talk on how to say; ‘I’ll do it my way, just by saying, yes we can’ type of approach, which always appeals to me.

I hope to get in contact with him in the future (I’ll find you Dan! =)) and see whether there are possibilities to be part of a cewl brand as Innocent (or it’s foundation Innocent Foundation which is granted 10% of Innocent’s profit a year) in whatever way possible.

That’s it for today, I’d like to thank Herbert for his invite and the opportunity to put myself in the middle of his network.

Love & Peace.

Len