Home Pages of Emotional Intelligence ........ EU Intangibles Net.......Chris Macrae, valuetrue

---

Wonderful perspective from Nordika: Managing the Intellectual Capital thus becomes a matter of creating and supporting connectivity between all sets of expertise and experience inside and outside the company. see the nordika net and eg this pdf report of sample articles overviewing IC in practice.

---

Commercial Publications-Skyrme Report, May 03...Jnl of IC...Best Sellers: Thomas Stewart

---

I propose that EU Angels vote for the world's top contributors to understanding of Intellectual Capital/intangibles based on open access to ideas and changing the way that organisational value and performance measuremnts are made to honor the working spirit of humans:

• Verna Allee
• 
  Karl Erik Sveiby1,,2,,3,,4
• 
  Leif Edvinsson1,,2,,3
• 
  Clark Eustace
• Verna Allee

PRIMARY IC BOOKMARKS AT K'BOARD 1.Bibliography...2.Discussion-03.1...3. Case of IC of Arab Nations (pdf) MISSING GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS Corporates 1...Society 1...Value of Trust...Daum on Sweden/Denmark/Germany,,Danish IC Guidelines

EU's Prism research into Intangibles 1...2...3

How to play & value this grid. Scan down columns - do the terms link? Scan across rows, do the value drivers multiply? Start to connect patterns across and down in contextual clusters matching facilitation of knowledge-sharing and doing insanely great or serving relentlessly consistent stuff. Edit the terms but not the grid structure as way of navigating metadisciplinary connections that leaders should be systemising to ensure everyone withing the compamy's core gravity values most. Develop context-specific metrics for unique progress and prioritise over one-fits all reporting metrics (eg global accounting numbers that everyone complies with and nobody can see any unique human context through). Always detect change and openly integrate knowledge/communications channels so as to keep the communal map simple and true so everyone feels able to participate in achieving a greater future that every human being involved with the organisation or excellence network or society wants.Any Questions?

CAPITALS	HUMAN Capital	SOCIAL Capital	INTELLECTUAL Capital	BWEB network capital	IC of Nations & Democratic Capitals
KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTIVITIES multipliers	K1 Knowledge Worker	K2 - network of K-worker	K3 Licensed Organisation	K4 Network of partnering organisations	K5 Democratically Governed infrastructures
VALUE DEMANDS Demand & Relationship TRUST Multipliers	Employee Valued Trusts	Customer Valued Trusts	Owner Valued Trusts	Bweb Valued Trusts	Global/Local Society Valued Trusts
HUMAN FLOWS	Joy of learning to make a difference	Courage-flow	time-flow	trust-flow	Open (Deep Democracy)

. There is one perfect way to devalue any knowledge-working capital: closing its flow off from other k-w capitals.

Your Golden Quotes on Knowledge Workers

*=*Ken Alvares, head of worldwide HR at Sun Microsystems says his goal "is to keep people so busy having fun everyday, that they won't even listen when the headhunters call." Bill Jensen, Simplicity Benchmarker: Two of the 4 top demands voted for ny knwledge workers are: Great Place to Work Universal Basics: Trust, Fairness, Accountability, Clear Goals, Great Leadership, Great Communication,Lots of Recognition, etc. Wow Experience "Taken together, my entire work portfolio is filled w/ as many great experiences as possible." "'Career track' to me is my portfolio of experiences. And I need to be able to manage that portfolio."

I am experimenting with a format (improvement comments to me)

PART 1 some questions.
If an idea occurs to you at any time on these questions, why not post in the thread ideally labelling the title of your post with the question reference number.
Question 0 – What most marked the TIMELINE of Knowledge, Networks and IC
PLEASE POST ANY ANSWERS OR CLUES ON THESE QUESTIONS

• 
  Questions 1 & 2- 1) WHO NEEDS Intellectual Capital (IC) and 2) do you have a QUOTE that nails a specific "context of need"?
• 
  Question 3 - Can you list a CONTEXT that is currently MISSING from communal understanding that IC can provide an answer or at least a conversational space around which people can integrate perspectives?

A footnote below, sketchs some mind-opening answers which we may need anticipate these questions will prompt

PART 2 some people expressing deep interest in IC and ready to explore which contexts Angels wish to tread .
I am very briefly listing people who have talked to me about their interests in Intellectual Capital since January when I became one of the temporary moderators for the Angel RTD11 on IC.

• Debra Amidon (web) - The author of the KM curriculum linking collaboration and innovation architectures of companies capable of profiting from the networking age. Simplifier of visions for the necessary resystemisation towards win-win governance. Coordinator of the E100 network whose experts represent over 50 countries, and a cross-section of navigational areas of KM and all of whom subscribe to the dynamic valuation permission that IC governance permits in ways that contextless numbers only accounting cannot
• Chris Reddish (web, email) : Centre of a UK practice network for IC - next live meeting London May 6: goals include to be a forum and market 'plain English IC'
• Lilly Evans: One of the UK coordinates of the global E100 network with particular interests in integrating the human conscience and local responsibilities of global living systems; systemic auditor of whether the governing culture promotes open leadership human flows such as courage
• Michael Kelleher (web, email) - coordinates of the E100 network with particular interests in clarifying the Intellectual Capital of Wales and with EU-funded experience of hosting knowledge markets which facilitate integration between researchers and practitioners
• Richard Walters - commercialiser and curriculum designer for customised training boutiques designed for high-level understanding of knowledge workers and structural inventories including agency for the Dr Ann Hylton KM Alumni network
• John Caswell - for 20 years the unique boardroom provider of maps for seeing a global organisation's processes through simple blueprints of a company's people relationships and activity architectures

I will be asking each person listed to help me edit the entry (this is work in progress both in terms of how much detail people want to index and because when 20 people talk to me about a subject as big as IC my brain can't remember the best of what each person said, even though I feel privileged to have heard so many wonderful insights). Being on this listing does not imply any specific Angel roll- and indeed many people have mentioned that being many years into their own network events and frameworks of IC, they are not sure whether Angels is the best use of their time. I am trying to iterate towards a format in which it could be- I would like to believe that it is within the communal capabilities of knowledgeboard to become recognised as a world excellence centre for helping people navigate initial questions in IC so that they link to something they need that would have taken them a lot longer to find if we hadn't existed. Again if you want to be added to this listing please say. Over time I would like to try to form a sort of travel guide to different people's contributions to IC perhaps a bit like a Michelin Guide. Perhaps there are some people we can all vote as ***, experientially clarifying breadth of perspectives on how IC is pushing the envelop on understanding how to develop more productive organisations, networks or communal spaces, and open agencies for lifelong capable knowledge working and training. Other people may not even want to be seen as an expert in IC except in a very specific chosen context. Others playing the Angels integration role may want to be connectors rather than originators, and this could also be a great student role if we could respect the idea that communities need a whole range of facilitators including those who provide the challenging questions as much as those who are seen to currently have some of the best answers.

---

Footnote

Open ANSWERS?

Answers? 0 TIMELINE
From the 1970s, Drucker heroised the idea that increasingly most organisational value –economic in the corporate world and including social in the democratic realms of governance - would depend on freeing knowledge workers’ powers to make a difference within a deeply- human and system-dynamic context. From the early 1980s, Futurists predicted that computing would change the world’s system – in every imaginable sense, and ultimately with as much revolutionary dynamics in societal evolution as the invention of the steam engine that begot the industrial age - once networks connected people as global as well as local beings. Infrastructures with huge collaborative networking potential emerged including the Internet, The Worldwide Web and other open platforms through which people’s productivities can circulate without any of the traditional costs of geography or copyrighted media. From the late 80s Leif Edvinnson and the Nordica school pioneered intellectual capital as Knowledge’s keyword for integrating what accountants had deemed to be too intangible to appear on their books. From the late 90s, networks such as E100 helped Brookings and the EU to clarify that living systems require a shared governance in which accountants should get back to cashflow and knowledge workers human flows such as trust, time and the courage to detect and resolve relationship conflicts require a systematically different kind of knowledge presence to be embedded in every audit cycle. Alternatively, IC can be used to make democracy’s case that the organisation’s structure is only the middle of 5 knowledge productivities looping through knowledge worker to policy/democratic capitals. Those organisations that open their value collaborations will facilitate compound growth for all whilst those that remain closed to the rights of workers and democracies to participate in value creation will wither self-destruct or destroy social fabrics webbed around them. KM will always have pockets of technical depth without IC but it is IC that puts KM on meta-disciplinary map connecting what no other profession established before the internet can humanly know.

Q1 WHO NEEDS IC?
In a sense everyone needs IC.

Organisations (both businesses and governments) do as Alan Greenspan's missing governance quote indicates. Remember too that the organisation that positioned itself as most knowledgeable accountant for the new economy has its licence to operate removed because it was found to be in breach of rule 1 of relationship capital - perpetrate one really bad relationship and it can destroy the communal value of all your stakeholder relationships. To be blunt, economics and all its policy advice doesn't work in network age contexts until it integrates IC, and the IC it needs is as yet emerging

Societies do as the Dee Hock quote indicates. Moreover social trust at all levels has been plummeting - go and look at the World Economic Forum for one global survey or tell us other surveys to look at. At a policy level one of the greatest reasons for exploring the young fields of Social Capital and Human Capital is precisely that - they are young full of more questions on how can we integrate human perspectives than they have answers. We can see, for example, continuation of huge digital divides - and all the human breakdowns and terrors that apartheids cause - unless everyone in the future is guided towards their own learning and productivity plans. OECD research shows not just that the internet means everyone becomes a knowledge person but those who traditionally have had least access to education systems are the ones who will most need support in progressing the training they need to make a difference. We are talking about progressive apprenticeships and practical things not Ivory Tower theories. We are talking about redefining the 12 year old’s school curriculum to enhance human capabilities to imagine how they will be able to create futures of different richnesses of openly interacting value than were achievable by mastering the past’s relatively static (and diversity-poor) learning flows. We are talking about social justice, and ultimately what futurists since the 1980s saw as one of the first challenges of the network age - do we dare resolve the greatest poor world demands using our new worldwide connectivity?

Daring is a tepid word for the kind of system change that the next few years requires us to collaborate/innovate if we are to turn the corner on how the poor world's lot has got increasingly worse these last 20 years in spite of all the new technology. Think locally too of some basic systemic things. Has the healthy service most people you know can afford got more productive as a human service? Is education of your children getting consistently more relevant for their futures? Do you feel safer? Do most people feel happier and trust each other more? Do we have more time to care for our families or whatever is your defining make a difference inheritance that people will say he or she will be remembered for?

Do we understand the tipping points that are around us? Do we understand that the challenge of the internet is that we have a different future to shape or no true future at all (only one that repeats all the past's errors?)

Ambitious yes, butIC can help frame a conversation launching any of these sorts of explorations into deepest human purpose...if we seek to integrate dialogues of deep human worth (which in a broad sense of the word is what knowledge's locus is) then we all can. By openly interacting added perspective, anyone who is expert in some aspect of IC becomes a gateway to either a deep contextual challenge (some cited above) or to a whole track of human disciplinary practice. Examples are risk, organisational design, learning organisation system, anthropology and cultural behaviours, co-creation facilitation and visualisation maps to name but five huge practice areas desperately seeking to be integrated into the systemic change that networking connectivity can facilitate. We can do this through modes of shared human determination that previous generations could only dream about as sci-fi. Every knowledge worker is global as well as local (in at least part of what they need to learn or serve). Every knowledge worker needs to connect through virtual modes to test drive their network's relevance, as well as deeply real relationships the human race pratices. We all need to travel through the diversity of local cultures creatively respecting all of humanity we bump into even if we believe we're moving on a higher way. Complete certainty that anyone knows more about measuring than another person is learning's major stumbling block. Living System Dynamics is always more contextual than governance by a one fits all spreasdsheet; human relationships are always more dynamic; conflict resolution should be the beginning of every audit cycle not ignored until the system has compounded into crisis or the need for something they call a complexity guru. One fits all accounting became a tragic mistake as Leif Edvinsson has said at the moment that most value creation went beyond production of lifeless things to include the service or knowledge differences that humans multiply. Multiplication is not a zero-sum game, but a compound one with more Opportunities and Threats than static numbers permit any manager to see. There are more patterns to living systems than any one profession will ever know and that is why an increasing number of researchers and grassroots reporters believe that professions worthy of a future must be open to each other – meta-disciplinary in what they produce as well as having their own depth.

And so, to move beyond what one trust expert has called Herculean Micromanagement, is our critical trial – at our emerging congregational space testing the openness of our declared Angels' values to the limits of our own truths. This is behaviourally where any exploration of IC begins by enabling communities to visualise more through IC pictures than they can by numbers governance alone. When you look at some of the people registered below as potential tour guides- consider their interest in deep contexts before their interest in generalities. This is a validation permission that IC frameworks can bring. It is also a permission that almost every human discipline is searching for, often in a language that 90% mirrors IC. So we have many translation jobs to do, and a mother of all benchmarking movements to facilitate if we are to move safely from the isolated “powers that were” before the internet and its global&local dynamics evolved, to the communal integrities that must constantly earn their power in the very midst of those who value, them rather than assume any future right to command over people.

Some people may always prefer KM to be a very small and technical pond. For others, who seek to touch all of humanity with the liberating freedoms of knowledge, IC is a ticket to ride. One that may not create exactly paradise on earth but a place where any human being can meet another with respect and by learning to feel something good for each other's knowhow. Wherever IC is empowering, it is people who create societies and economies; not the old one-fit all economic rules that confine people.

Answers 2 QUOTES
Quotes to come from Greenspan, Edvinnson, Hock, Owen, Angels Value, EU commissioner of Employment

Answers 3 MISSING CONTEXTS:
Some contexts

---

A further note for System Change Movements:

Today my personal orientation assumes that IC is practised at less than 10% of maturity in most areas where it is most greatly needed because since my first (co-authored) book in 1984 I have taken the view that the networking and knowledge age is a journey of tipping points and change the world possibilities. According to our timeline, 2000-2010 was the decade of responsibility in which everything when terrifyingly wrong or wonderfully right for many generations to come. That’s what changes in systems and infrastructures do, and for example anyone who believes that networks don’t change the very meaning of governments doesn’t see the diversity of human cultures in a way that has a chance of uniting the common law of the world’s great religions “relationship reciprocity” can mean that we all gain form each others’ presence if we so care to do. If you are a parent, capture the moment your first child was born and make sure that every lifelong day you apply some of that god-given humanity with as much conviction as any man made accounting of numbers.

Think of one thing that seriously troubles you in the world today- to what extent could be there more a more knowledgeable or better networked solution - in some way IC likely provides a language in which that challenge could be framed so that the powers that could be help resolve the challenge start to understand that there is human demand for action which will mobilise as a network until they trustworthily take the lead in responding to the demand or explain who else should.