The document discusses how future business models and organizations may differ from current models. It suggests future organizations will have: - Multiple metrics of success beyond just financials, with long-term purpose and legacy as key drivers. - Circular models where value is shared openly in networks rather than owned. Access will be more important than possession. - Fluid, dynamic structures resembling living networks more than static entities, with a focus on dynamic stability over individual stability. - Purpose at their core to engage a new generation that values post-materialism and positive social impact in their work.

1. Purpose+ Internal Research Project
NON-­CONFIDENTIAL AND NON-­PROPRIETARY, ENTIRELY SHAREABLE
Purpose+, Amstel 95, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Antifragile Organisation Design

2. Future business models will be different than those we see today
Source: Jonker et al., 2016;Purpose+ team brainstorm
• Singular metrics of business success,
often financial parameters (profit, revenues).
Short term cost/benefit analysis crucial.
• Linear realisation of the value proposition,
distribution and use. Market price.
• Shareholders ‘own’ the business and
decide who’s in charge. Quarterly profits
driver.
• Value chains that are limited to a specific
owner of the business.
• Transactions primarily based on money;;
producer vs consument.
• Organisation design as the main challenge
to keep people engaged and work effective.
• Multiple metrics of success, Purpose+Profit
logic embedded in all dashboards. Long term
legacy as key driver behind decisions.
• Circular realisation of both material and
social value. ‘Real price’.
• Access trumps possession. Shareholders
who care long term are essential. Long term
value and legacies as driver.
• Value networks where open sharing is key.
Growth of philosophy is essential.
• Transactions possible on other value points
(time spend, network utilized etc.).
• Orchestrating the community as the main
challenge.
Principles
Economy
Ownership
Collaboration
Transaction
Organisation
Traditional business models Future business models

3. Future models will be build primarily through the minds of a new
generation: the Millennials…
05
15
19 19
20 19
19
17
15
12
08
04
02
01
00
05
10
15
20
25
16-­19 20-­24 25-­29 30-­34 35-­39 40-­44 45-­49 50-­54 55-­59 60-­64 65-­69 70-­74 75-­79 80+
Source: US Departmentof Labor
44% of all employees will
be Millennials
Generation Z
Millennials
Generation X
Boomers

4. …which is a generation that has grown up with the power of
connectedness and meritocracy
0
500000000
1E+09
1.5E+09
2E+09
2.5E+09
3E+09
3.5E+09
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Third billion
users in 2014!
Internet only
for the elite
We are used to being constantly connected through internet…
Number of people on internet over time
Source: www.internetlivestats.com; Pew Research on social media (accessible online)
70%
49%
36%
17%
13%
17%
24%
24%
29%
25%
12%
26%
40%
52%
61%
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
Pinterest
LinkedIn
Daily Weekly Less often
…and much of that time we spend in social networks
% of people on social media sites
The younger generation (18-­29) use social media sites almost
twice as much as the older (65+ generation): 90% vs 46% in 2013.
Everyone can post!

5. Companies will move to resemble fluid networks more than static
entities; utilizing exponential impact and cost reduction…
Source: The Network Always Wins, (Hinsen, 2015); Antifragile (Taleb, 2012), Purpose+ team
‘Static’ companies ‘Fluid’ companies
• Linear career path
• Contract
• Loyalty
• Employee
• Org chart
• ‘Work for’ mindset
• Robust yet Fragile (RYF)
• High costs
• Single entity stability
• Computer as analogy
• Projects
• Assignment
• Relevance
• Contributor in network
• Node in network
• ‘Engaged with’ mindset
• Antifragile
• Low costs
• Dynamic kinetic stability
• Life itself as analogy
From… …To

6. …and life itself will be it’s analogy – where a focus on dynamic kinetic
stability is more important than individual part stability
Source: What is Life? How Chemistry Becomes Biology (2012);; Chance and Necessity (Monod, 1970)
Dynamic Kinetic Stability (DKS)
‘Animate matter’ (LIFE)
Essence:
• Overcoming the second law of
thermodynamics by striving for
dynamic and kinetic fitness in
networks or populations.
Elements:
• Often auto-­catalytic, exponential
chemical reactions;; product and
catalyst are the same (e.g. DNA, RNA).
• Focused on divergence to ensure
stable populations over time.
• Creates ‘sustainable high energy
ripples’ that we call life.
• Same molecules as inanimate matter.
Individual part stability
‘Inanimate matter’
Essence:
• Movement towards the most stable
form – the lowest energy point -­ in the
thermodynamic sink for molecules. Aim
to maintain equilibrium.
Elements:
• Mostly linear catalytic reactions
where reactions need external catalysts
and/or energy to create the reaction.
• Focused on convergence to lowest
energy point: the thermodynamic sink.
• Creates the matter that we call ‘death’
or ‘inanimate matter’.
• Same molecules as animate matter.

7. Future networks will be bound by purpose – with a new generation that
demands post-materialistic values in their work
38%
19%
34%
31%
14%
28%
14%
22%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
1970 2000
Pure Postmaterialists
Mixed Postmaterials
Mixed Materialists
Pure materialists
Source: Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence,
Inglehart & Welzel (2005)
Materialistic employee value: concerned with material needs, physical and economic safety.
Non-materialistic employee values: concerned with self-actualisation, belonging, intellectual work and aesthetics.

8. In a network positive impact can come through anyone, regardless of
hierarchy
Consistent contributor (in team)
Conditional contributor
Non contributor
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
0,75 MCPR** 0,30 MCPR**
Individual group members
that contribute
consistently…
…can trigger changes in
group norms in the entire
group for the better…
...and influence the outcome for everybody*
* Based on study done on university students. MCPR: marginal per capita return for the group, as a
return on initial spending by group participants.
Source: Weber, Murnighan (2008), Suckers or Saviors? Consistent Contributors in Social Dilemmas

9. The future ‘rich’ will be the people with the most – and strongest –
connections
Source: Hinsen (2015), The Network Always Wins;; Naim (2013), The End of Power
Low power, low influence
High power, high influence
Connection between individuals

10. hello@purposeplus.com