3. CSW October 2018 | 3 | horizonstate.com
TRUST IN RETROSPECT
Source: 2018 Edelman Trust Barometer Global Report
If we don’t act now, it will quickly get much, MUCH worse.
4. CSW October 2018 | 4 | horizonstate.com
#1 - TRANSPARENCY IS NOT ENOUGH | CODIFYING TRUST
CURRENT STATE HORIZON STATE
Class 1: I’m Sick
Class 2: Chronic disease
Class 3: …
Class 4: …
Class 5: Raw medical data
My Information, on my terms:
Access based security
Class level meta data
Time based and expiry
Auditable
Progressive
My consent is required
Implied trust via process
No ability to verify
My data is not mine to hold or access
Minimal interoperability
Costly exchange of information
A Doctor
Health Insurance
Me!
The
Government
Complete diagnosis
Class 2
Request
Class 3
Request
8/10
6/10
Trust is coded into the protocol
Trust is earned and measured
6. Significant economies of scale
Command and control
Infrequent
Long lasting | strategic
Frequent
Time critical
Decision close to local information
Requires local information
Responsible autonomy
Psychological ownership
Requires practice, and more practice!
DECENTRALISED LEADERSHIP | SPECIAL FORCES
7. CSW October 2018 | 7 | horizonstate.com
DIGITAL AGE | NEW PROBLEMS
Common law
Emotions & believes
Volunteers
Policies, Procedures & Rules
Rational and Logic
Employees
Efficiency Wellbeing
Continuous Dialogue
Take
Action!
Volunteer! Participate! Voice UP!Refine Listen Learn
9. CSW October 2018 | 9 | horizonstate.com
#1 – ARE YOU REALLY WRONG?
10. CSW October 2018 | 10 | horizonstate.com
“Whatever you can do or dream you
can, begin it.
Boldness has genius, power and
magic in it. Begin it now.”
― Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
#2 - CAN CROWD INNOVATION REALLY EXIST?
11. CSW October 2018 | 11 | horizonstate.com
#3 - CROWD THINKING – SHOULD WE REALLY ASK?
13. CSW October 2018 | 13 | horizonstate.com
Political and logical decentralisation @ Blockchain
- No single point of failure
- Consensus and validation protocols
Blockchain = Predictable set of protocols enforced by smart contracts.
Organisations = Unpredictable set of behaviours enforced by the collective sum of individual
value.
In blockchain – agreement is by consensus
In business – …mostly not.
Decentralisation in business:
- Does not mean absence of governance
- Each decentralised ‘node’ is its own brand
- Does not always require consensus, but must require validation.
DECENTRALISATION OF DECISION-MAKING
14. CSW October 2018 | 14 | horizonstate.com
MISSING: A SELF-GOVERNANCE MODEL
Leadership in a decentralised environments requires packaging
Decentralized
Leadership
Trust
High
Low HighCompliance
Command & Control
Controlled
Autonomy
TransparencyVisibility
• Defined autonomy
• Defined boundaries
• Defined accountability
• % transparency / visibility
• Defined set of skills
- Unified rules of engagement
- Trust
- A level of discipline
15. • Take on risks only if you can manage them.
• Measure the outcome, be guided by outputs
• Don’t be afraid to break some rules
• Apply an engaged state of mind
• Adapt, on your terms; or be forced to.
• Freedom & responsibility | Handle your package
with care |
• Local strategy requires consensus, but validation
needs to happen at top level.
• Preserve your local culture, but be compliant.
• Act with urgency when needed.
• Manage the loud voices
• Manage your package like a brand
• Deliver packages safely to its stakeholders
• Horizontal visibility, upwards transparency.
PRINCIPLES OF ENGAGEMENT| DECENTRALISED LEADERSHIP
Civic law
Common Law
Validation Strategic Consensus
Brand
Transparency Operational Visibility
Community
City
A business
16. Tech Pioneers 2018
#1 Transparency is not enough, codify your trust
#2 - Emotional code is more bug tolerant
#3 - Define your package, and master its delivery
18. Web: www.horizonstate.com
Industry: Blockchain, SaaS, IT. Govt,
Civic Engagement
Founded: October 2017
Incorporated: State of Victoria, Australia
Key Locations:
Melbourne, Australia,
Wellington, New Zealand.
Vancouver, Canada
Contact:
Name: Oren Alazraki
Email: Oren.Alazraki@horizonstate.com
Phone: +61 405 334 896
Editor's Notes
* Introduce myself
* Introduce Horizon State
* It is about engagement
* Engagement quality of decentralized leadership
* Share key insights
I live in NZ, one of the most trusted places in the world.
Car keys - unlocked
It’s so safe, bugler for dinner.
People say and believe are different
And when trust exists – we feel safe and secure, enough to speak truth.
But not all places or institutions are like that
* I would like to ask you a question – looking at all the leaders around
* How much do you trust your government?
* By show of hands – VOTE, IRS, Census
* Decentralisation requires | Consensus, verification and transparency
* Yet most of us can’t trust the CVT in VOTING IRS
last year Australia run the same sex marriage referrunum, | aside from $120m – lack of trust and issues.
Many people relate transparency to trust, although it is true, it is not the only major factor.
The top 5 software giants are controlling a vast amount of our data, and our privacy.
Media least trusted institution in the world
44% of Americans consume their news via Facebook
The average person does not know how to tell good journalism from rumour or falsehoods
In some countries Facebook is banned, and not by the country, but by many and families
We realised that something needed to change, we wanted to create a system of trust
The importance of trust
Provide example of codifying trust
Challenging topics in decentralised world:
The right to express my opinion
Enforcement of trust via code
Progressive identification
Governance of process, by the user and for the people.
Co-existence | Autonomy vs Interoperability
The right to be forgotten
The second important thing we learned is that … emotional code is the new economy.
Winning the hearts and minds of users with code
Writing code that generates the right level of emotion by the user
Users act on their own terms, and they want to engage.
This is not a new concept.
* Concept implemented 20 years ago from special forces units.
Requires discipline,
unquestionable trust
alignment in goals and values.
On the ground – close to details = feeling it
Centralised Leadership | Significant economies of scale | Command and control | Infrequent | Long lasting | strategic
Decentralised Leadership | Frequent | Time critical | Decision close to local information | Requires local information | Responsible autonomy | Psychological ownership | Requires practice, and more practice!
How do you motivate 5 million people who do not work for you?
WWF example
Goal 1m active users to 2m active users, instead of 11% to 50%.
11% active participation
Does 11% represent the loudest voice?
Employee vs volunteers
Difference in leadership styles between the two.
When I donate, do I know how my donation was used? Do I trust the process? the organisation? The leadership?
2nd example:
When we research our requirements for a pacific country, we quickly realised that the country was led by 1 government and 350 local leaders (chiefs), each with his/her own local responsibilities and mostly driven by values and not process or administration.
When asked by one of the local person for financial assistance, the Chief took some money of out his own pocket, no paper form filled and no process followed.
Sometimes there are no easy answers, and when might even create more confusion by seeking internal clarity
Some stakeholders will confuse expressions of opinions (an advice) from a collective decision.
Be clear about the intentions, and focus the attention of the stakeholders on the intent.
Let me give you 3 quick examples:
(+) during our crowdfunding we got stack and decided to ask, - the result – 50% funds in the last 24 hours; some of the advisors became employees.
(-) but how many times have you faced a situation where you asked a question, and decided to a different course of action?
50 people saying no, does not make you wrong. | Definition of entrepreneurship
In this case, are you representing the brilliant entrepreneur? Or the irresponsible leader?
80,000 managers
1,000,000 employees
400 companies
The largest study of its kind –
A consensus has been reached – that the best managers need to break some rules.
Asking us to… break the rules?
“Move fast and break things;
Unless you are breaking things – you are not moving fast enough” Mark Zuckerberg
BREAK the rules – as long as you comply with the policy!
What happens if everyone breaks the rules?
What happens if we don’t experiment?
How is allowed to experiment?
Who makes decisions for the greater good?
What voices should be heard, which of them should we count, and which are simply too loud.
By show of hands – how many of you bele
Over 50% of our funds were raised in the last 24 hours of our crowdfunding, immediately from the moment we asked the community for advice.
Quote from Steve Jobs – It’s not the customer’s job to know what they want
Quote from Henry Ford –if I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses
General Patton said – if everyone is thinking alike – then somebody isn’t thining.
3 outstanding leaders each in their domain, suggesting we should not ask?
But should we ask every time? Should we ask the customer?
If you ask 50 people, and they all say no, are you really wrong? If so, then what is the true definition of entrepreneurship if not making the impossible, possible?
As a leader, operating among other leaders in a decentralised environment, should I brake the rules?
Should I consult? Should I take the advice?
Decisions are based on a defined set ‘packages’
* What package are we delegating,
* What are the boundries of such delegated responsibility
* how far down the organisation are we delegating,
* is it consistent to other delegations
* What is the risk in delegating to the wrong ‘node’
Existing agile governance model is not perfect
We have seen this working in high discipline professional environments … like the Military
Working for a large decentralized company no so long ago – hundreds of small business, each different yet the same.
Questions? Who is accountable?
Who owns the risk? And outcome?
How do we handle culture?
Mobility?
HS suggestion is to work backwards – from people, to leaders, to organizations, back to governments.
Moving from A to B | from centralised C&C to self-governering businesses
Requires rules of engagement
Centralised governance, decentralised leadership.
If everyone are independent and taking risks, who has priority and governance?
If everyone looks after their own, who guarantees a collective outcome?
Each package might have different processes, and set of principles
Now, replace the term ‘business packages’ with ‘communities’
Rules that apply to everyone involved:
The model a significant amount of training and coaching
No back seat views, i.e. passive participation, at all levels
Take the high moral ground, and manage behaviours
The top 5 software giants are controlling a vast amount of our data, and our privacy.
Media least trusted institution in the world
44% of Americans consume their news via Facebook
The average person can’t tell good journalism from false news.
The average person does not know how to tell good journalism from rumour or falsehoods