How to do a harmless business?
End results of doing many business activities not only cause economic loss to others but also have far-reaching implications of global consequences for Planet Earth as well.
Each and every of us need doing something to sustain life and Natural Scheme of things provides for ample resources for that matter. However, being fearful of scarcity we want to control others share of resources and this has necessitated fight among ourselves - today’s international war machine has become the biggest employer and also affords greatest business opportunities.
My American friend, Neirah Lothamer writes:
“During the last century,m worldwide, 167-175 million lives were deliberately extinguished by politically motivated carnage. War has cost United States alone an estimated 560 trillion dollars since the American Revolution.“
And he asks a very pertinen question, “If we are so much more advanced than we were one hundred years ago, why do we find ourselves cornered by environmental, ecological and economic emergencies that constantly threaten us?” (Dancing in the Shadow of Tyranny, pp 53-4 and 32).
Some of the most of recent important international political developments which will have good and bad consequence for Human Life and the Planet Earth are:
- USA-India nuclear Accord - The deal could open up a whopping 100 billion dollars in opportunities for American businesses, according to the US Chamber of Commerce: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070728/wl_sthasia_afp/usindianuclearweapons_070728054348
- 20 billion dollars arms deals for Saudia and Gulf Countries - http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070728/wl_mideast_afp/ussaudimilitarytradeweapons_070728060317
Yes, many will have opportunities for making millions through such deals; majority human population in the world, however, will suffer and case more degradation to our environment.
How do you appreciate your personal role within given circumstances?
Kindest regards Sadiq
Clarification added August 2, 2007:
I am grateful to all those who answered this question. I do realize that the question being loaded one need clarification in the light of answers received so far, hence:
1) War is a reality, generally wars are fought for socio-economic reasons but business is not always dependent on wars; business created through war always contribute to more wars and unrest in war/conflict trodden countries.
2) A noble principle in business is, ‘value for the money’. War oriented business activities also produce value but that goes against common interests of humanity at large hence is harmful.
3) The world already has stockpile of lethal arsenals sufficient to wipe out many countries from the world map. Why more? Business persons can contribute in making this world a safer place by discouraging war-oriented activities and through stifling funding for lethal R&D – where from hawkish think-tanks get money if not from national exchequers of the tax-payers or contributions from business?
4) Why not and how to promote green business?
5) Threats: War mentality thrives on threat perception while real threats can be handled through legal process. Today’s business people must be capable to enforce a break to Machiavellian rulers by reason, dialogue - non-violent means.
6) Islam: We Muslims belief that Islam is the panacea of all the ills in the world but most of ou own actions are contrary to the basic teaching of Islam which is a bacon of light for all the humanity and must NOT be allowed as a tool in the hands of pseudo-clergy and usurpers of power in Muslim and countries in the first place.
7) Islam promotes life within ‘limits’ and ‘limitation’ while ‘neo-con’-controlled west seek for their elite limitless freedom hence the conflicts and clashes. Why not both are not allowed a level playing field?
....... continued below:
Answers (17)
Bruno R
e-payments specialist
Best Answers in: Ethics (5), Using LinkedIn (5), Mentoring (4), Business Development (3), Software Development (3), Economics (2), Personnel Policies (2), Staffing and Recruiting (2), Offshoring and Outsourcing (2), Change Management (2), Organizational Development (2), Education and Schools (1), Occupational Training (1), Financial Regulation (1), Risk Management (1), Government Policy (1), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (1), Internet Marketing (1), Viral Marketing (1), Graphic Design (1), Public Relations (1), Sales Techniques (1), Writing and Editing (1), Planning (1), Equity Markets (1), Futures Markets (1), Philanthropy (1), Social Enterpreneurship (1), Project Management (1), Personal Investing (1), Wealth Management (1), Market Research and Definition (1), Product Design (1), Positioning (1), Small Business (1), Blogging (1), Computers and Software (1), Information Security (1), Web Development (1), Wireless (1)
Hi Sadiq,
Very interesting question, ... and very though as well. There would be so much to say about it, I can only give you a few "pointers" here :
* As to wars the business is going the following way, as far as I can see : there's an incentive for weapon manufacturers to put 2 or more nations of approx. the same power against each other, generating a climat of fear and terror, possibly by giving some incentive for frightening the opposite camp. Then sell both camp weapons for a fortune (escalation). Working hand in hand with multinational financial groups endebting heavily both camps. When there's nothing or nearly to destroy and most people got killed, then the nations need money to reconstruct, that they borrow from the same financial groups, which now literaly "own" the 2 countries. No question then about why these people don't want to stop their business !
* as to ecology, human kind is "walking on its head" : the financial capital subordinates the entrepreunrial capital (private companies) which in turn subordinate social capital ("the crowd" or "society") which in turn subordinates each indivivual, which subordinates the natural capital (that is : spending the capital instead of just the interest of the capital).
This is so, to the best of my knowledge, because humans have made of themselves "addicts" to consumption of what they desire rather than barely being happy having one's fundamental needs satisfied (cf. Maslow's theory)
We're not generating wealth anymore and products of mass consumption are created in a spirit very close to fabricating drugs with persuasion techniques to make you feel guilty for not being like others, generating the illusion that possession brings happiness, fear of missing out, etc ...
The 2 basics of those (less than 20% of us all) who control close to 90% of the planet and its resources are : maintenance of a climat of fear (it could always be worse, so you don't dare to change, just in case) and generation of an artificial scarcity (by kidnapping the exploitation and distribution of what can satisfy human needs)
Another important point to get well the big picture : have a look at the "tipping model" of Nobel prize of economics Pr. Claude Shelling. He explains the formation of getthos with a very simple model based on cellular automaton. When the preference of each individual (the "color" of its neighbour) makes him move next to more like-him peers : the net global result goes against the interest of the whole society and eventually against each individual because of the behaviour of "the crowd"
If you're interested in a systemic (holistic) view of our world, you may like to have a look at a research project on the net called "principia cybernetica" and to the writting of French scientist Joel De Rosnay.
Finally, regarding your question about personal contribution, I'd say I've became a "minimalist consumer" (e.g. I have no personal vehicule) and my profession is in the realm of de-materialization (I'll have an interview next week for a job that consist in settting up and operating a paperless ticketing & e-payment system for a big European railway company)
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Bruno.
Akhtar K
Co-Founder, Board Member, Chief Investment Affairs Manager at R.E.I.D. Intl.
Best Answers in: Accounting (3), Using LinkedIn (3), Mergers and Acquisitions (2), Government Policy (2), Commercial Real Estate (1), Mentoring (1), Auditing (1), Economics (1), Financial Regulation (1), Risk Management (1), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Exporting/Importing (1), Business Development (1), Currency Markets (1), Career Management (1), Professional Networking (1), Wireless (1)
Hello Sadiq,
Very interesting question. I believe that political exploitation can only be stopped by the UN. As individuals, we can only do so much. Let us do whatever we can, andd however we can.
All the best
Akhtar
Assalamalaikum Wa Rahamatullahi Wa Barakaatuhu (Peace be upon you) Sadiq bhai,
The answer is Islam. Islam stands for peace and not the contrary as is being portrayed today. InshaALLAH you can look some books on Islamic economics as to how go about doing business (harmless obviously!!!). JazakumALLAHU Khayran (May ALLAH reward you abundantly). ALLAH Hafeez.
Dr. Jameel Shaik, PhD
http://www.linkedin.com/in/drjameel
http://www.ryze.com/go/drjameel
Peter R. L
CEO at Allison Asset Management Consulting, Ltd.
Best Answers in: Venture Capital and Private Equity (1), Personal Investing (1), Wealth Management (1)
Hi there Sadiq,
Hope you are well!! Very difficult subject with many variables involved as well as a lot of politics and other economic drivers.
Personal opinion? Not good!!
Influence possible? Zero!!
Besides, tell me what you are doing at the moment...
Kindest...,
Peter
Charulatha S
Medical Devices Consultant and Contractor
Best Answers in: Mentoring (1), Internationalization and Localization (1), Employment and Labor Law (1)
The question can be answered well only by the parties involved in the business :-)
Teresa J
Corporate Financial Controller at Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation
A good question Sadiq. My simple answer is that I try to use the resources around me carefully, I try not to judge others too quickly especially those from other backgrounds and I look behind what politicians say to consider why they are saying it and what consequences there could be of whatever they are proposing. I am not a fan of war but sadly history teaches us that humans are jealous and warlike creatures and the weak do get trodden on both by folk in their country and from outside. In a utopian world there would be no need for the military but we are none of us perfect and a strong position/capability does act as a deterrent to some unscrupulous folk.
Gerald L
Gerry Lo 羅振業 Project Engineering 4470 contacts
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (26), Ethics (21), Career Management (19), Mentoring (13), Organizational Development (12), Change Management (11), Biotech (9), Staffing and Recruiting (8), Government Policy (7), Internationalization and Localization (6), Professional Networking (6), Personnel Policies (5), Engineering (5), Education and Schools (4), Government Services (3), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (3), Business Analytics (3), Planning (3), Manufacturing (3), Project Management (3), Market Research and Definition (3), Blogging (3), Job Search (2), Conference Venues (2), Advertising (2), Business Development (2), Public Relations (2), Sales Techniques (2), Corporate Governance (2), Supply Chain Management (2), Personal Real Estate (2), Wealth Management (2), Product Design (2), Professional Organizations (2), Green Business (2), Energy and Development (2), Computers and Software (2), Telecommunications (2), Commercial Real Estate (1), Car and Train Travel (1), Certification and Licenses (1), Occupational Training (1), Risk Management (1), Compensation and Benefits (1), International Law (1), Criminal Law (1), Corporate Law (1), Intellectual Property (1), Direct Marketing (1), Guerrilla Marketing (1), Writing and Editing (1), Labor Relations (1), Bond Markets (1), Personal Debt Management (1), Retirement and Estate Planning (1), Branding (1), Industrial Design (1), Professional Books and Resources (1), Software Development (1)
Peace to you, Sadiq
I feel that my role is to follow the wisdom of others, notably Professor George Santayana. He wrote, coincidentally in 1905, one century before Mr. Lothamar's 2005 work, 'Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.'
In 1905, Republican Theodore Roosevelt, in the immortal words of Marcus Alonzo Hanna, "that damned cowboy," had succeeded President McKinley, following the latter's assassination in 1901.
By 1905, one century ago, wolves had become extinct in Japan.
Our forest coverage in the continental United States would dramatically increase from 45% in 1905 to over 65% in 2005, thanks in large part to the conservationist policies created by President Roosevelt.
President Roosevelt would also at that time be contemplating what would become the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906. Our American population has grown considerably. Our life expectancies have increased by 64%, from 47 years to about 77 since 1905.
Althought the late lamented Soviet Union failed in its 69 year lifespan to ever match the agricultural output under the Tsars, I am not sure that people would trade their present system of government to return to the monarchy.
Were Bangladesh, India and Pakistan better off with more than four decades of the British Raj to follow?
Mohandas K Gandhi was in 1905 experiencing those events which would lead him to write twenty years later, "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest."
There are today, I believe, more of us living longer than ever before in the history of humanity.
That is not to imply that this world is perfect.
It is, however, the one I am in now. Of those available to me, I believe I will take my chances with this one.
I appreciate it, and am humbly grateful for its blessings.
Links:
Robert F
Podcaster at podcastGenealogy.com
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (151), Career Management (7), Customer Service (4), Web Development (4), Staffing and Recruiting (3), Education and Schools (2), Freelancing and Contracting (2), Job Search (2), Internet Marketing (2), Business Development (2), Change Management (2), Organizational Development (2), Planning (2), Engineering (2), Ethics (2), Professional Networking (2), Small Business (2), Blogging (2), Software Development (2), Facilities Management (1), Resume Writing (1), Corporate Debt (1), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (1), Employment and Labor Law (1), Advertising (1), Graphic Design (1), Customer Relationship Management (1), Sales Techniques (1), Writing and Editing (1), Non-profit Management (1), Manufacturing (1), Retirement and Estate Planning (1), Industrial Design (1), Product Design (1), Professional Organizations (1), E-Commerce (1), Enterprise Software (1), Computers and Software (1), Databases (1), Information Storage (1), Telecommunications (1)
My thinking here seems to be much simpler.
I do not think that there is a way to run a business that is completely fair to all parties and the environment, etc. Someone always gets the "better end of the deal."
I do see the value in business that is not military oriented, but one of the best companies I worked for developed manuals, most of them for the military or companies that did work for the military ... a fact of life.
Sometimes all a business can do is to impact where they have influence the best they can ... and we as individuals should be thinking the same. How can I operate within a business doing the best that I can.
Hi,
I suggest watching the documentary "The Power of Nightmares", made by the BBC and available in full on Google Video. It raises interesting points about the commonality between the neo-con movement and those extremists who choose to misinterpret Islam for their own needs. Another good documentary is "Why we fight" which contains a chilling account of the power of the military industrial complex
Links:
What an interesting question, and string of responses! To add my $.02...
With respect to the most recent post - it may be that "someone gets the "better end of the deal"" - but it isn't *always* true. Most exchanges involve both parties exchanging something that they consider surplus - or at least, of lesser importance - for something that they value more highly. Weighed against other, similar exchanges, one can argue that one party or the other got "a good deal" - but that isn't always relevant in context (for example, if you are both rich and hungry, you don't necessarily "lose" if the price that you pay for a meal is greater than that paid by someone else). Now, this logic breaks down in exchanges where one party receives scant/no value; but then, we tend to catagorize that as "fraud" (or at least, "shady dealing") rather than as "legitimate business".
I'm not sure that this isn't a little bit beside the point, anyway. I believe that we would categorize our businesses as "harmless" - or better than harmless! - if we provide workers with the means to support their families, while engaging in activities that the worker considers to be dignified and appropriately challenging. I use the phrase "the worker considers" because there is no absolute standard here: doctors and hairdressers may each be challenged and satisfied in their own positions, and might not consider a swap of roles to meet either criterion...
With respect to green - this is definitely coming as a leading force in the economy. Ultimately, it will require both the will of consumers (to put in the work needed to identify green practices and suppliers, to pay the premiums associated with environmentally responsible practices), and the involvement of government (to ensure that those who are not responsible don't profit from their approaches). It is likely that this movement will take root most visibly in established economies first; I'm hopeful that emerging economies will view this as a positive trend, and not as an attempt by the "old world" to reign in their economic development.
With respect to the Islamist above - many religions preach responsible action. I admire those who act responsibly, whatever their affiliation. Merely proclaiming adherence to a specific faith doesn't necessarily engender personal responsibility, though; I'm sure a scholar of any religion can find examples of both moral (or "harmless") and immoral ("harmful")activity attributable to individuals who claimed allegiance to the same system of beliefs.
Finally, I think that a detailed explanation of how any of us "appreciate (our) personal role(s)" is beyond the constraints of a posted response. However, I believe that you'd find the notion of personal responsibility - to engaging in fair exchanges of value as both suppliers and consumers; to building an understanding of ethical and environmentally-responsible practices, and engaging with those who are ethical and environmentally-responsible; to being aware of and responsible for our own actions with regards to the environment; to seeking our own moral balances, ones that are respectful of all of our fellow global citizens; and to loving and supporting our families - would be common to the much deeper and broader responses that could be gathered from all of those you touch (through LinkedIn, and in all other aspects of life).
I hope that helps you, and helps to advance this very interesting discussion!
This is a very interesting question, especially since I've dedicated my time and my life to living the answer to it at the moment. My partner and I have started a company, ENKI (http://www.enkiconsulting.net) which is founded on heart-centered principles, which can be summarized as always operating in equality: no power-over is either used or allowed in any relationships, and all relationships must be win-win. This means that one has to do rather counterintuitive and counter-capitalistic things like turning manipulative clients/customers away. The business was created using the power of intention, from a document we wrote that clearly defined how the heart-centered approach would work. Business in general minimizes the power of intention, placing it below competition, planning, and control. However, intention is the "secret sauce" that makes the most successful people and companies that way. The issue is to set intentions that do no harm. Or, I prefer to simply set the intention to operate from the Heart, which does not need power-over to succeed, since do no harm immediately throws people into measuring everything against the good-bad polarity, which is completely relative (my harm might not be your harm, etc.)
Yes, I know, this is a blurring between business and spiritual practice! A number of respondents have mentioned running the business according to the rules of a religion. Unfortunately, today's religions confuse spirituality with the power-over structures inherent in a group enterprise that doesn't operate from a heart-centered intention. This is why people have so much trouble reconciling the principles behind religion and the endless conflicts, wars, and abuse that are done in its name. So, basing a business on religion is less likely to contribute positively to the world and follow your intention of doing no harm than to start from the Heart - which is at the core of every major religion's teachings anyway. If you follow a religion, inevitably you get snarled up with the rules the religion has developed to propagate itself and protect itself, which are still rules of the system of power-over, not equality. I think you've pointed this out in your own way in item 6.
Finally I wanted to say what an incredible and delightful adventure it is to be part of this Heart-centered business. Nothing works out the way I was trained to have it work, but instead the mystery of creation is revealed each day as the business finds ways to succeed that I never thought of. Examples include:
- Every customer we have so far is also turning into a vendor or even an angel. They love us, so they have something to give us, either for money, or for free.
- When something unexpected happens, I'm learning to not think of it as something going "wrong" but rather "how does this event fit into the intention document we created, and how can I see how it will benefit me and the company?"
- People, companies, opportunities, and money show up when they're needed to move the intention documents business planning aspects forward, without great amounts of "sweat of the brow."
- When you are in equality with everything, being Green happens automatically. Being non-Green is a way to take advantage of the environment for your benefit. If you give up that thought process, opportunities to "be Green" just happen naturally. You don't have to walk around all day asking "am I Green enough?" In our case, we found software and hardware that worked together to allow us to deliver computing at a fraction of the power utilization that we expected!
- A community of people who either appreciate or want to participate in Heart-centered interactions and relationships forms around your business. They start to interact with each other from the Heart. Possibilities explode.
Eventually, this experience will turn into a book, but for now I have my hands full just being available to what is unfolding.
There is no harm in doing any sort of business whether it is evil or good. Whatever you triumph, so will you get the reward, bad or good. The whole universe and nature is too big and too much resourceful than the mere power of a human being to destroy it. Let everyone do his/her part in destroying or building something which is one day going to fall as per words of Allah (swt) in Quran. Instead of spending this much time on creating a question and getting answers, which I used to do on Yahoo Answers and found nothing but pure crap intelligentia around us. I resorted to the Message of God in various religions and found far more explanatory and correct answers than the erronous nature of a human's mind.
Links:
Karen S
CONNECTING > COMMUNICATING > CATALYZING > Bringing to life bold visions for a more sustainable world.
Best Answers in: Business Development (2), Economics (1), Government Policy (1), Organizational Development (1), Planning (1), Non-profit Management (1), Career Management (1), Business Plans (1), Small Business (1)
Sadiq -
War is the greatest environmental destruction/pollution generator of them all. You are definitely correct.
In answer to the question, “If we are so much more advanced than we were one hundred years ago, why do we find ourselves cornered by environmental, ecological and economic emergencies that constantly threaten us?”
I would say that we got ourselves in this connundrum because the industrial revolution occurred during a time when resources were perceived to be abundant and people were the limiting factor. Throughout most of the industrial revolution, processes were optimized to make the most use of limited HUMAN capital. But now, humans are adundant and resources are scarce. Yet, we are just in the beginning stages of really optimizing for resource productivity. For more on this topic, I would suggest you take a look at the book Natural Capitalism and also the Factor 10 Institute.
...and personally, I think there would be fewer wars if more women were in positions of political and corporate power. Not because I necessarily believe that women are more kind, compassionate, etc. But because I believe that casualties in a war are one thing, but the number of civilians who's lives are uprooted, destroyed, etc. are far greater...and I think that women are more likely to take such extraneous factors into consideration before starting a fight in the sandbox.
Perhaps we need to ask ourselves why contemplative people rarely rise to the top of the ranks? Why do we more often reward people who "take action" by fighting instead of those who bring diverse populations together (heck - it seems that the latter are all to commonly assassinated)? How is it that war somehow turned into a giant money-making machine?
Ronald W
Currently retiring for one year (Open Networker, 12K+)
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (3), Professional Networking (2), Organizational Development (1), Career Management (1)
Dear friend, i believe you have yourself answered your question, by pointing at fear of scarcity as a driver for war. Let us for a moment define fear as the belief in our inability to deal with a situation. Fear of scarcity thus becomes the prisoner's dilemma. Game theory has a way out of this dilemma : "The incentive to defect is overcome by the threat of punishment, leading to the possibility of a cooperative outcome." (source: wikipedia).
I think a more straightforward approach is delivered by those who teach us how to manage our own set of beliefs. When we can choose what to believe, we can also choose to have fear yes or no. By that time, fear becomes something to experiment with rather than to suffer from.
Warm regards,
Ron
Wassim H
Qatar Area Manager at CONSER Consulting Engineers
Best Answers in: Internationalization and Localization (1), Green Business (1)
I will not attempt to even scratch the surface of answering your question, rahter I will pose another for contemplation.
The might of military through the ages has pushed the develpopment of many technologies, one is the Internet, without which this forum could not happen.
Man in his geneticaly encoded ambitious drive (aka greed when not checked) is driven to investigate all (good and bad) and the results are therefore both.
Philosophically, I think we cannot appreciate one without the other (good without bad etc..)
Religions, tend to put a finite end to the bad by leading towards an infinite goal of goodness, and I think many of us in the here and now have forgotten that "Balance" variable in the equation, and are seeking only the here and now balance sheet.
Myself I am a believer in knowledge (through R&D) and that eventually that knowledge through construction or destruction will help us to understand better what we are prepared to humbly accept as satisfaction in the here and now. When, I dont know...
Christine K
Software Developer at Twitli
Best Answers in: Government Contracts (1), Government Policy (1), Computers and Software (1), Software Development (1), Web Development (1)
Sorry, couldn't resist this one.
Read the Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy, and see that you're all set. It's mostly harmless.
Josh C
General Manager at Web Industries; Itinerant Writer; and Decent Little League Coach
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (44), Job Search (14), Staffing and Recruiting (10), Business Development (10), Organizational Development (9), Economics (7), Career Management (7), Business Analytics (6), Personnel Policies (5), Public Relations (5), Small Business (5), Starting Up (5), Accounting (4), Government Policy (4), Sales Techniques (4), Change Management (4), Planning (4), Equity Markets (4), Occupational Training (3), Budgeting (3), Internet Marketing (3), Search Marketing (3), Manufacturing (3), Project Management (3), Quality Management and Standards (3), Product Design (3), Ethics (3), Professional Networking (3), Blogging (3), Software Development (3), Web Development (3), Customer Service (2), Purchasing (2), Education and Schools (2), Mentoring (2), Compensation and Benefits (2), Writing and Editing (2), Philanthropy (2), Supply Chain Management (2), Energy and Development (2), Biotech (2), E-Commerce (2), Computers and Software (2), Regulation and Compliance (1), Hotels (1), Certification and Licenses (1), Event Marketing and Promotions (1), Conference Planning (1), Corporate Debt (1), Government Services (1), Exporting/Importing (1), Intellectual Property (1), Employment and Labor Law (1), Property Law (1), Advertising (1), Customer Relationship Management (1), Non-profit Fundraising (1), Non-profit Management (1), Personal Debt Management (1), Personal Real Estate (1), Wealth Management (1), Distribution (1), Industrial Design (1), Professional Books and Resources (1), Business Plans (1), Green Products (1), Enterprise Software (1), Information Security (1)
Hi Sadiq,
We'd all do well to remember one of the lines of the physicians' Socratic oath: "First, do no harm".
Josh.
