-1 Between left and right values \u200b\u200b(5 minutes of good reading)
Marcos Aguinis
To THE NATION For over two centuries, tends to give a political connotation as opposed to the left and right. We know that comes from casual seating in the hectic days of the French Revolution. On the left were the Jacobins who were the most rebellious, demanding, idealistic and determined to impose radical changes to the old regime. With the passing of time, that distinction went through an arc of variations that at times seemed extreme, others small and confused or inverted.
Ortega y Gasset in 1937, wrote to electrical insolence: "Being Left is right as being one of the countless ways that man can choose to be an idiot: both, in effect, are forms of moral hemiplegia. Moreover, the persistence of these descriptions helps to further falsify the reality of this, as evidenced by the fact that today the right and left promising revolutions proposed tyrannies. "Was written during the English Civil War and continues today.
It is amazing that there is overlap between a positive force as from the beginning has tried to present the left with the word accident. The sinister thrills and scares. Freud has unraveled their mental somersault, because it means the return of what is aims to keep suppressed. But the clarification of their research has not taken off like it has with the diabolical and disturbing. The left, along with their qualities and mysteries, says something annoying. Values \u200b\u200bthat reside there shaking and unconscious awareness, values \u200b\u200bthat tend to be circumvented, or deform, despite its qualities. The left appealing in its rebellion, transgression and dissonance. So, engage young people and also those who are not young, but have a vital and sensitive spirit.
Maybe early leaders of the wonderful values \u200b\u200bthat form the core of the left were the prophets of Israel. Formed a series of strung personalities for conduct clean and altruistic preaching. Sprang up almost by magic in difficult times. Switched voice and boundless courage, questioned the powers of his time, are kings, priests and families of rank. Denouncing injustice, abuse, lack of solidarity, hypocrisy and lack of mercy. The people of Israel were no better nor worse than other peoples, but had the privilege of generating these eloquent and fearless individuals whose actions left a huge mark of universal significance. With them, "said Alfredo Palacios, unforgettable first socialist deputy in Argentina," social justice began.
In the Bible mandates and examples stand for freedom, justice and human brotherhood. Also the respect due to animals and all nature.
Certainly there were demonstrations of that tenor in China, India and elsewhere in the world. Then came utopian ideas intended to keep alive the old message, but often tinged with fanaticism catastrophic. Flourished in the seventeenth century accelerated progress of science began to limit the powers of the monarch and increased production of wealth. The Glorious Revolution in Britain and then the French Revolution marked milestones.
But even if the shop to identify, leading to different ports. Lacked the English epic guillotine and fanfare, but it was consolidating democracy increasingly solid, with a growing respect for individual rights, the French Revolution caused more noise and seduction, but tangled paths of democracy and inspired through various links, totalitarianism right and left. While in Britain there were no new coups or hesitation legal system in France several republics alternated with kingdoms and empires.
is interesting to note that the right-wing totalitarianism has strong similarities with its apparent opposite, the left. Same as left, fascism claimed to be revolutionary, creating the "new man" and also down from socialism, to the point of using that word in its own name (National Socialism in Germany). How is it possible to identify left-wing totalitarianism in the right? Does the left from their original values, not abhors tyranny? Yes, the abomination of lip service, but has continued to impose when it gets radical. On evidence.
We are used to denigrate Fascism, Nazism, and various right-wing dictatorships. But there is resistance to insult forms, called socialist or leftist, imposing the label of progressive, but they betray the values \u200b\u200bof the prophets. On behalf of the collectivist abstraction, imposing despotism.
"reviewed the original values \u200b\u200bof the left?
know them. The highest is that of freedom. Freedom, for millennia, it means respect for the rights of every human being, including freedom of thought and expression, to decide, traveling and doing as he pleases while the same does not prejudice the rights of others.
Freedom also means questioning the dogmas, ideologies or alleged official truths. Includes, of course, the plurality of approaches and criteria, which are enriched by the exchange. Includes freedom of expression by all means the man has access, covers, of course, creativity artistic and scientific. Creativity remains a strong correlation with the freedom of the press, which should not be censored either directly or indirectly, because that censorship is a grievance as scary as when a king murdered a prophet because he had questioned.
An axial value of the left original is its support for progress, hence use the word "progressive", but in fact often prop up the backlog and resentment sterile. Finally, its quality is stronger desire to achieve the elimination of poverty through equal opportunities, transparency, competitive and merit recognition. In other words, the slogan of socialism is that "from each one according to his ability and each receives according to their product. "amazing formula A liberal.
These original values \u200b\u200bof the left is opposed to the principles of right, manifest in their expressions totalitarian: no curtailment of freedom and individual rights , persecution of dissidents, censorship of the press, stifling creativity, the abomination of pluralism, intolerance, manipulation of the poor whom you want to keep in their misery. Amazing! is what the leftist totalitarianism.
Synthesis Manichaean would have us believe that the left is associated with progress and prosperity, while the right, with backwardness and evil. One is lovable; the other, dreadful. However, the evidence shows that the left has betrayed its original values. Since Khrushchev questioned Stalinism, it is true. But Stalinism was not only the product of one man, but a system that could not work otherwise, as demonstrated by the same Khrushchev to suppress the uprising in Hungary and crush the Prague Spring. What values \u200b\u200bhad left covering one third of humanity, if China and other countries including the Soviet orbit? It was considered cutting edge of humanity and hope of the people; production of great art with its repressive and mediocre "socialist realism" torch of science idealizations grounded in the ideological myopia. For decades, the "true" left, the most successful, which made fun of social "reform."
left or moderate social democracy, however, took pains to keep the original values, including respect for the institutions of democracy. But in Latin America has remained in Cuba's Stalinist version, without shame and with teratological features it shares with North Korea. From Cuba were irradiated for half a century attributes violent, oppressive, delusional and messianic. Excels in all areas ultraconservative nature, generous to unify down. Some countries of the subcontinent hesitant seem to want to continue their anti-democratic model, which betrays, like Stalinism, the original values \u200b\u200bof justice, liberty and fraternity, curtailed the flight of people and death hurts the plurality of ideas. Is left to restore the Ancien Régime with a new label. Because ... What is the difference between these leftist totalitarian Louis XIV, Stalin or Hitler? It is no coincidence that Georges Sorel has simultaneously admired Lenin and Mussolini. Or Mussolini has banned criticism of Stalin and that Stalin has rejoiced in Hitler's Judeophobia.
way, we should not forget that the left originally was the most fought anti-Semitism in the nineteenth and early XX. But then he became anti-Semitic, with the use of other words and new excuses. It has also become complicit in ultrareaccionarios regimes where women are oppressed, homosexuals are shot at and the decisions are made, ultimately, by an ayatollah. Surely Marx must have a seizure in his grave.
The word "revolution" has been co-opted by the left. But the revolutionaries were not always left. Recall that there was a "conservative revolution" in Europe after the First World War. We said that was considered revolutionary fascism and Nazism. After the Hitler-Stalin pact, did the current "Bolshevik-Nazi" who had no trouble finding solid theoretical basis, but lacked time to develop. In short, totalitarianism on both sides agree in their hatred of democracy and falsely share Puritan character. Love and glorify violence and use the word "death" in their slogans (SS skulls and "socialism or death" with Fidel and Hugo Chavez). Coincide in their tendency to single thought, which leads to one party and one leader. Supporters of left or right have in common the catastrophic thinking, and proactive drunk omnipotence. This left treacherous original values \u200b\u200bascribed their own now, populism, with clear ingredients fascists.
This does not match the original values \u200b\u200bof the left than any well-born would not stop clapping. Can not keep calling the left, but left or pseudoprogresismo false. You do not have prophets of peace, harmony and growth, but of subjugation, corruption and drowning. No question the despots when they fit the crown that says "socialism" or "left." There is a respectable crown is a fake crown as the King Momo Carnival. Only the left leads to a tragic carnival.
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Restaurant Cuts Your Tie Off
THE IMPORTANCE OF WORKING ENVIRONMENT (1)
There are two types of lines: Those who believe that the factory is working alone and therefore the employees and workers are part of the landscape and / or are appendices (Sometimes unwanted) of machinery and equipment and therefore cost and who believe that quality is in day to day, hour after hour, those who manufacture quality is the personnel operating the equipment, who supervise operations and those who control the quality. Moreover, those who have this second opinion, they believe: a-The operators generate product quality supervision and control (usually narrow), which is to say they are appendages of the machines (or so) and b - Those who believe that the quality of manufactured each from their jobs and the supervision and control are necessary but not sufficient activities. This article
aims to show the benefits of belief 2b. Let's get to the point:
to work under a system as described, requires the development of 2 aspects: leadership and the work environment, aspects, of course closely linked. In this post we see the working environment.
desirable elements:
a-sense of responsibility and self
b-Dedication and commitment to quality and cost of quality manufacturing
Creativity
c-d-Standards of Conduct
e-Sense of belonging
However, nothing is free to receive must be given. In this case we must give the possibility to become visible characteristics. We will see positive:
1 - Training
Training has several positive effects on staff, some of these are:
a-Increase their knowledge and therefore their individual autonomy in the management, we can exchange experiences and update their knowledge.
b-With the participation and debate feels included and improves their critical thinking.
c-Increase your self-esteem, which is recognized as a "person required within the structure of the company" and therefore will provide some "opportunities."
d-re-union with the personal ties are strengthened with peers and diluted distances with their supervisors.
e-The company may try to highest quality standards (eg, new systems management, such as statistical control, 5's, BPM, etc.)..
2 - Overhead
clear game rules allow each person to make decisions knowing in advance the consequences (positive or negative) of the same, no surprises and the work environment should aim to relax, encouraging positive attitudes in employees.
The system of rewards and punishments must be strict, but should not dehumanize, but the line between precision and fear becomes too thin is dangerous. Similarly
turning the company information to staff, the accuracy is very important because it affects the credibility and attitude of staff towards the company. Until next
There are two types of lines: Those who believe that the factory is working alone and therefore the employees and workers are part of the landscape and / or are appendices (Sometimes unwanted) of machinery and equipment and therefore cost and who believe that quality is in day to day, hour after hour, those who manufacture quality is the personnel operating the equipment, who supervise operations and those who control the quality. Moreover, those who have this second opinion, they believe: a-The operators generate product quality supervision and control (usually narrow), which is to say they are appendages of the machines (or so) and b - Those who believe that the quality of manufactured each from their jobs and the supervision and control are necessary but not sufficient activities. This article
aims to show the benefits of belief 2b. Let's get to the point:
to work under a system as described, requires the development of 2 aspects: leadership and the work environment, aspects, of course closely linked. In this post we see the working environment.
desirable elements:
a-sense of responsibility and self
b-Dedication and commitment to quality and cost of quality manufacturing
Creativity
c-d-Standards of Conduct
e-Sense of belonging
However, nothing is free to receive must be given. In this case we must give the possibility to become visible characteristics. We will see positive:
1 - Training
Training has several positive effects on staff, some of these are:
a-Increase their knowledge and therefore their individual autonomy in the management, we can exchange experiences and update their knowledge.
b-With the participation and debate feels included and improves their critical thinking.
c-Increase your self-esteem, which is recognized as a "person required within the structure of the company" and therefore will provide some "opportunities."
d-re-union with the personal ties are strengthened with peers and diluted distances with their supervisors.
e-The company may try to highest quality standards (eg, new systems management, such as statistical control, 5's, BPM, etc.)..
2 - Overhead
clear game rules allow each person to make decisions knowing in advance the consequences (positive or negative) of the same, no surprises and the work environment should aim to relax, encouraging positive attitudes in employees.
The system of rewards and punishments must be strict, but should not dehumanize, but the line between precision and fear becomes too thin is dangerous. Similarly
turning the company information to staff, the accuracy is very important because it affects the credibility and attitude of staff towards the company. Until next
EXPERIENCE
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Does Downtown Disney Sell Leather Bracelets
Moving on: A MEDICAL POEM
Dino Luis Ladette
With love
VEN, VEN ACA
sit beside me HERE
ROADSIDE AND LOOK:
NOTES AS THERE ARE AT ALL
VAS TU, YO VOY
THAT THERE THE STONES TO REMOVE
OR THAT OTHER AND THEIR WELLS AND TUNNELS
DO YOU SEE THOSE TWO FIGHTING FOR A PIECE OF CLOTH?
... SI YA VI THE HANGING TREE ...
COME A LITTLE
go up Look down
ANTS CAN NOT SEEM crazy? Notice
CLIMBING TO THE COLLECTIVE
AND IN LOWERING
is like a big monster swallowed
THE digesting and the defects
... LISTEN: SHOTS ARE ...
DO YOU KNOW THAT THEY ALL JUST WANTED
HAPPINESS?
EVENING COME SEE YOU SHOW SOME
LOST AFTER SUN MOUNTAIN
MIRA, NOW THAT WHEAT FIELD IN THE TWILIGHT
IS NOT IT WONDERFUL WHEN THE SUN
upon the sea?
CLOSE YOUR EYES THIS AROMA DEEP
ASPIRA
LET THIS OLD WILLOW
WE RIDE BLANKET FOR YOUR ARM
GRAMA DIME:
WHAT YOU FEEL?
SI HAPPINESS IS DINO Ladette
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Street Address For Johnson Baby Oil
EUROPEAN UNION - TRANSPARENCY AND CSR (CSR)
Federation of Financial and Administrative Services
The European Commission will launch five working groups to promote transparency and CSR in companies
groups "will address primarily the issue of transparency in business" and present their findings during the English presidency of the European Union.
The European Commission will launch five working groups that will study from September this year and March 2010 how to promote transparency and corporate social responsibility (CSR) in European companies rose today as the head of the unit of CSR International Agreements and Toys DG Enterprise European Commission, Luis Montoya.
At the conclusion of a conference organized by Forética in Madrid, Montoya said the groups "will address especially the issue of transparency in business "and present their findings during the English presidency of the European Union.
addition, Montoya pointed out that Spain is a country well positioned within the European Union in terms of development of Social Responsibility of the companies, but noted that "there is still work to be done for sustainability is seen by all as a value."
in the day, Forética presented 'CSR Toolbox', a set of tools and reports that aim to serve the companies to implement and measure the benefits of CSR policies. This "toolbox" is a collaboration durante18 months of intersectoral working groups composed of 200 representatives of companies and its stakeholders in 20 thematic laboratories. CSR
Toolbox contains the results of these laboratories were divided into five key thematic areas for business and society: the creation of an integrated workplace, human capital development, building new business models, production and promotion dela sustainable consumption and the strengthening of trust through open communication.
Secretary-General for Employment, Maravillas Rojo, said during the opening ceremony said that "moments of crisis are testing the values \u200b\u200bupheld by the CSR" and was convinced of the these values \u200b\u200bare "crucial as a means for the future." He stressed the importance of confidence-building companies in times of economic uncertainty.
The tools included in the presentation of 'CSR Toolbox', and the ongoing work of the laboratories, will be publicly available through the page web'www .foretica.es / TOOLBOX '
E. Press
Article Date : Wed, 20 May 2009 6:30:00 EST
Federation of Financial and Administrative Services
The European Commission will launch five working groups to promote transparency and CSR in companies
groups "will address primarily the issue of transparency in business" and present their findings during the English presidency of the European Union.
The European Commission will launch five working groups that will study from September this year and March 2010 how to promote transparency and corporate social responsibility (CSR) in European companies rose today as the head of the unit of CSR International Agreements and Toys DG Enterprise European Commission, Luis Montoya.
At the conclusion of a conference organized by Forética in Madrid, Montoya said the groups "will address especially the issue of transparency in business "and present their findings during the English presidency of the European Union.
addition, Montoya pointed out that Spain is a country well positioned within the European Union in terms of development of Social Responsibility of the companies, but noted that "there is still work to be done for sustainability is seen by all as a value."
in the day, Forética presented 'CSR Toolbox', a set of tools and reports that aim to serve the companies to implement and measure the benefits of CSR policies. This "toolbox" is a collaboration durante18 months of intersectoral working groups composed of 200 representatives of companies and its stakeholders in 20 thematic laboratories. CSR
Toolbox contains the results of these laboratories were divided into five key thematic areas for business and society: the creation of an integrated workplace, human capital development, building new business models, production and promotion dela sustainable consumption and the strengthening of trust through open communication.
Secretary-General for Employment, Maravillas Rojo, said during the opening ceremony said that "moments of crisis are testing the values \u200b\u200bupheld by the CSR" and was convinced of the these values \u200b\u200bare "crucial as a means for the future." He stressed the importance of confidence-building companies in times of economic uncertainty.
The tools included in the presentation of 'CSR Toolbox', and the ongoing work of the laboratories, will be publicly available through the page web'www .foretica.es / TOOLBOX '
E. Press
Article Date : Wed, 20 May 2009 6:30:00 EST
Friday, May 15, 2009
Mysore Mallige Bf Live
on mythology and other ways multistakeholder to hang the glass half full
Posted by: Josep M. Lozano on 14/05/2009 on blog: Individual, Business and Society
Go ahead my conviction that without a multistakeholder approach
can not talk about CSR. Without building relationships with stakeholders are not properly
CSR, among other reasons because, however much that we repeated the litany of social
, the company relates to society in the abstract, but particular groups of people. Now, not for the fact that relations
multistakeholder CSR is given. The finding of the stakeholders (the famous
maps) does not automatically lead CSR, and this is one of the misunderstandings
more evenly spread. Note of the fact that there
stakeholders and taken into account when making decisions is not apparent or clear the capacity
relationship who wants to settle with them.
latter needs to take values \u200b\u200band criteria, which are those that modulate the relationship, not the fact
the relationship itself. In other words, it is possible much multistakeholder analysis and management, and remain at zero degree of CSR.
said, if we look now only in the rhetoric of CSR, we must conclude that this, in relation to multi-stakeholder approach has generated its own mythology.
This mythology is to be assumed, in the abstract and a priori, without the possibility of critical debate and policy with a strong aroma, multistakeholder
every relationship must have the form of dialogue (words multistakeholder dialogue and
today seem united by an indissoluble marriage bond.) And besides, that this dialogue
is well done and has not made perfect until it reaches a consensus or agreement of all participants. Well, I think the time to ask to what extent the multistakeholder approach has not risen to the reference category of myths dialogue and consensus, as absolute values, or more beyond here, "of whom everything is devalued and delegitimized.
I have nothing against dialogue and consensus, rather the opposite. But do not think we should have
toward them an attitude of devout worship,
as outside them there was not CSR or multistakeholder relationships worthy of the name.
Let's go step by step, and let us make some questions.
I said that stakeholders say that there is a question of fact. But the fact
that makes it clear that there is need to dialogue with them by
the simple reason that ... you have to talk (from the assumption that dialogue is always good
), do not look so clear. Dialogue requires prior
clarify who talks with whom, what, what, why and under what conditions. Do not let
of surprise that is sometimes asserted, and is required, the need for dialogue without clarified the answer to any of the above questions. I admit that sometimes hide a sensible way to avoid trouble, but the desire -
implicit or explicit-no problem always seemed a sad way to
prestige dialogue as a regulative idea.
other hand, whenever someone comes to me full of dialogic impulses, I am reminded of Antonio Machado: "To talk, ask first, then listen ...." It sometimes happens that multistakeholder dialogues spoken much, but asks little and heard less. If there is something (one more ...) which I have never had success in my proposal to organize, no multi-stakeholder dialogues, but listen multistakeholder ... Meetings (both business and general level) with the sole purpose of listening, where the activities of each participant responded to the sole purpose of verifying that you have listened well, and each one has felt well heard. That's what I made clear when a manager once told me to meet someone just to hear it seemed a waste of time ... Multistakeholder dialogues
potential are of many kinds: business, to meet the challenges of a particular company, the management, to try
organizational problems, but complex, with incidence of multiple factors, sectoral frameworks to define the performance of companies of specific sectors;
regions, to generate changes in corporate culture in a given territory; públicospolíticos, to discuss, propose or implement public policies, public-global, to establish shared frames of reference on CSR and development.
"In all these cases, it is always necessary and reasonable dialogue? "Dialogue is the condition for
anything even pretend to do in this context?
Do I need to always be multi-stakeholder dialogue? And certainly far
allows multiplying the number of the famous multi dialoguing, and who decides on the limits
?
Here we must add another of the mysteries of multi-stakeholder dialogue:
everyone says we should translate the little word for the expression of interest groups.
Let's do it, well ... and ask why, if it is interest groups in multistakeholder dialogues
never talk about interests. If they are
stakeholders must be because they have interests, no? Well, by golly we never talk about the
interests that each has to want to be present in the dialogue. And even less
one wonders whether all interests are legitimate. Or if everyone is equally legitimate
. Or if they are all level. O if you have to have the same weight in the final outcome of the dialogue
. As the primary objective of the dialogue is ... dialogue, and dialogue presupposes as a condition of legitimacy of any action
want to perform or any conclusion you want to reach, the contents are perpetually subordinate to the procedure. In the same way that it is worth asking whether it is plausible that in the name of CSR Anyone can ask anything to a company, we also have to ask whether it is plausible that multi-stakeholder dialogue on behalf of anyone to disqualify any initiative for the simple fact that have not ignored or not taken into account.
Finally, all leads to a fascination with the consensus. Sometimes it seems that it has imposed
widespread view that if no consensus means that there has been no dialogue
or not there was a dialogue well. "Consensus ... for what? Why
reach consensus? The consensus is not an end in itself, nor, by itself, a test of the quality of dialogue that has taken place. There is consensus facilitators that create change and transformation, and consensus that are not nothing but a pact to serve the consolidation of mediocrity. The consensus does not seem a sufficient condition or legitimacy, or the wisdom of an agreement or a decision, and the lack of consensus seems sufficient grounds to dismiss or delegitimize an agreement or decision. Multistakeholder dialogue should vindication of the importance and value of dissent, to the extent that spurs innovation and intellectual activity, and not immersed in a water bath around the least common. Dialogue can only be fruitful consensus that if simultaneously accept dissent, and not considered a disturbance, an obstacle or a request for exclusion. And in some cases, on the border, the statement of consensus blessed as an absolute value can not be anything but an expression of laziness and / or irresponsibility: when a consensus as a criterion absolutitza decision-making what is doing, after all, is deciding to give up and just putting your signature on the distillate multistakeholder that have brought together.
may not believe me, but again I have nothing against
multistakeholder dialogue and against the consensus. But when they take their own life and spend
part of the mythology of the CSR, then do not go beyond being a variable of the proven and pleasant experience to pass the time until nightfall.
Or until the meeting ends, which for that matter.
Posted by: Josep M. Lozano on 14/05/2009 on blog: Individual, Business and Society
Go ahead my conviction that without a multistakeholder approach
can not talk about CSR. Without building relationships with stakeholders are not properly
CSR, among other reasons because, however much that we repeated the litany of social
, the company relates to society in the abstract, but particular groups of people. Now, not for the fact that relations
multistakeholder CSR is given. The finding of the stakeholders (the famous
maps) does not automatically lead CSR, and this is one of the misunderstandings
more evenly spread. Note of the fact that there
stakeholders and taken into account when making decisions is not apparent or clear the capacity
relationship who wants to settle with them.
latter needs to take values \u200b\u200band criteria, which are those that modulate the relationship, not the fact
the relationship itself. In other words, it is possible much multistakeholder analysis and management, and remain at zero degree of CSR.
said, if we look now only in the rhetoric of CSR, we must conclude that this, in relation to multi-stakeholder approach has generated its own mythology.
This mythology is to be assumed, in the abstract and a priori, without the possibility of critical debate and policy with a strong aroma, multistakeholder
every relationship must have the form of dialogue (words multistakeholder dialogue and
today seem united by an indissoluble marriage bond.) And besides, that this dialogue
is well done and has not made perfect until it reaches a consensus or agreement of all participants. Well, I think the time to ask to what extent the multistakeholder approach has not risen to the reference category of myths dialogue and consensus, as absolute values, or more beyond here, "of whom everything is devalued and delegitimized.
I have nothing against dialogue and consensus, rather the opposite. But do not think we should have
toward them an attitude of devout worship,
as outside them there was not CSR or multistakeholder relationships worthy of the name.
Let's go step by step, and let us make some questions.
I said that stakeholders say that there is a question of fact. But the fact
that makes it clear that there is need to dialogue with them by
the simple reason that ... you have to talk (from the assumption that dialogue is always good
), do not look so clear. Dialogue requires prior
clarify who talks with whom, what, what, why and under what conditions. Do not let
of surprise that is sometimes asserted, and is required, the need for dialogue without clarified the answer to any of the above questions. I admit that sometimes hide a sensible way to avoid trouble, but the desire -
implicit or explicit-no problem always seemed a sad way to
prestige dialogue as a regulative idea.
other hand, whenever someone comes to me full of dialogic impulses, I am reminded of Antonio Machado: "To talk, ask first, then listen ...." It sometimes happens that multistakeholder dialogues spoken much, but asks little and heard less. If there is something (one more ...) which I have never had success in my proposal to organize, no multi-stakeholder dialogues, but listen multistakeholder ... Meetings (both business and general level) with the sole purpose of listening, where the activities of each participant responded to the sole purpose of verifying that you have listened well, and each one has felt well heard. That's what I made clear when a manager once told me to meet someone just to hear it seemed a waste of time ... Multistakeholder dialogues
potential are of many kinds: business, to meet the challenges of a particular company, the management, to try
organizational problems, but complex, with incidence of multiple factors, sectoral frameworks to define the performance of companies of specific sectors;
regions, to generate changes in corporate culture in a given territory; públicospolíticos, to discuss, propose or implement public policies, public-global, to establish shared frames of reference on CSR and development.
"In all these cases, it is always necessary and reasonable dialogue? "Dialogue is the condition for
anything even pretend to do in this context?
Do I need to always be multi-stakeholder dialogue? And certainly far
allows multiplying the number of the famous multi dialoguing, and who decides on the limits
?
Here we must add another of the mysteries of multi-stakeholder dialogue:
everyone says we should translate the little word for the expression of interest groups.
Let's do it, well ... and ask why, if it is interest groups in multistakeholder dialogues
never talk about interests. If they are
stakeholders must be because they have interests, no? Well, by golly we never talk about the
interests that each has to want to be present in the dialogue. And even less
one wonders whether all interests are legitimate. Or if everyone is equally legitimate
. Or if they are all level. O if you have to have the same weight in the final outcome of the dialogue
. As the primary objective of the dialogue is ... dialogue, and dialogue presupposes as a condition of legitimacy of any action
want to perform or any conclusion you want to reach, the contents are perpetually subordinate to the procedure. In the same way that it is worth asking whether it is plausible that in the name of CSR Anyone can ask anything to a company, we also have to ask whether it is plausible that multi-stakeholder dialogue on behalf of anyone to disqualify any initiative for the simple fact that have not ignored or not taken into account.
Finally, all leads to a fascination with the consensus. Sometimes it seems that it has imposed
widespread view that if no consensus means that there has been no dialogue
or not there was a dialogue well. "Consensus ... for what? Why
reach consensus? The consensus is not an end in itself, nor, by itself, a test of the quality of dialogue that has taken place. There is consensus facilitators that create change and transformation, and consensus that are not nothing but a pact to serve the consolidation of mediocrity. The consensus does not seem a sufficient condition or legitimacy, or the wisdom of an agreement or a decision, and the lack of consensus seems sufficient grounds to dismiss or delegitimize an agreement or decision. Multistakeholder dialogue should vindication of the importance and value of dissent, to the extent that spurs innovation and intellectual activity, and not immersed in a water bath around the least common. Dialogue can only be fruitful consensus that if simultaneously accept dissent, and not considered a disturbance, an obstacle or a request for exclusion. And in some cases, on the border, the statement of consensus blessed as an absolute value can not be anything but an expression of laziness and / or irresponsibility: when a consensus as a criterion absolutitza decision-making what is doing, after all, is deciding to give up and just putting your signature on the distillate multistakeholder that have brought together.
may not believe me, but again I have nothing against
multistakeholder dialogue and against the consensus. But when they take their own life and spend
part of the mythology of the CSR, then do not go beyond being a variable of the proven and pleasant experience to pass the time until nightfall.
Or until the meeting ends, which for that matter.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
How To Use A Proxy On Ipod Touch
Under CSR following article is in crisis, and then read the commentary:
Corporate Social Responsibility of companies does not convince its own employees, according to a study
MADRID, 23 Abr. (EUROPA PRESS)
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) of companies not convince its own employees, according to a study by the consultancy Krauthammer which shows that about 50% of the companies "disappointed" in this regard.
So while half of the firms in question are exemplary in terms of CSR, the rest has a policy "reactive or inactive." In addition, respondents believe that companies "must implement the belief that economics and ecology are the same thing, "something seen only in 26% of companies surveyed.
The survey, conducted in collaboration with experts from the University of Amsterdam and Erasmus University Rotterdam, examined a total of 16 specific areas related to CSR. Among other conclusions, the report notes differences between what employees seek and experience, and that "far from being passive observers, are taking an active role."
As pointed out by a member of the Steering Committee Krauthammer Ronald Meijers, "given the current turmoil in the economy and ecological environment, companies fail to identify and exploit such basic things as efficiency on resources "...
is a paradigm, a great joy, the note tells us nothing more and nothing less than:
to-CSR (CSR) IS ALIVE AND SO IN CRISIS. OK, OK: SOLO WHO MAY BE IN CRISIS IS ALIVE AND FIGHTING FOR YOUR LIFE.
b-50% OF THE APPLICABLE CSR companies surveyed FEW YEARS AGO NOT !!!!. I knew one day would talk about CSR. WE ARE IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION!
c-WHO ARE THE POLLS SAY BUSINESS (ONLY 50% OF THEM !!!!) "disappointment." AWARENESS MEANS THAT THERE MUST BE.
d-SURVEYS WERE ANSWERED BY THE EMPLOYEES !!!!.
e-EL 26%! BUSINESS IS AWARE OF THE BUSINESS-ENVIRONMENT RELATIONSHIP ENVIRONMENT. NO ES POCO.
THIS, DEAR READERS, FROM MY POINT OF VIEW IS THE GLASS HALF FULL. Toast.
Until next time.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Using Disinfectant To Clear Herpes
PERSONAL VALUES AND THE INTERNAL RSE (3):
continue with the previous example: A company in the middle (large and well placed) has decided to heavily invest in infrastructure and this has delayed salaries for 3 months (taking advantage of that production is seasonal and are currently under repair), arguing that there is no money, but checks for vendors leave on time. BUSINESS ECONOMIC
We maximize the numbers to calculate a maximum gain for the company:
- Staff are not paid: about 200, say.
- Average salary: $ 2500 .- Well, well, accept it.
- Total money not paid in a timely manner: $ 500,000.
However, this figure must be paid sooner or later, so the net gain of managers would be the interest earned (saved)
- Interest rate: 4% monthly
- Months of delay: 3
- Total money saved delayed salary: $ 60,000 .-
is absurd !!!!. The damage caused by a number that is lower than the price of 1 (one) car moving managers.
Comparing this with the income of the company (actual): 107,000 tons produced with an average selling price of U $ S 330 / Tn, gives us a little more than U $ S 35,000,000.
OTHER BASURDO!! It is as clear a forest to get a toothpick.
Unless the reason was not economic. But, what?.
not understand ... I repeat: The question is not who is responsible?, But how do we change this methodology, this absurd way of doing things?. The road is CSR.
Oh, I forgot: In the long term, even in the medium, the numbers do not close, the effect of the damage.
Until next time.
continue
continue with the previous example: A company in the middle (large and well placed) has decided to heavily invest in infrastructure and this has delayed salaries for 3 months (taking advantage of that production is seasonal and are currently under repair), arguing that there is no money, but checks for vendors leave on time. BUSINESS ECONOMIC
We maximize the numbers to calculate a maximum gain for the company:
- Staff are not paid: about 200, say.
- Average salary: $ 2500 .- Well, well, accept it.
- Total money not paid in a timely manner: $ 500,000.
However, this figure must be paid sooner or later, so the net gain of managers would be the interest earned (saved)
- Interest rate: 4% monthly
- Months of delay: 3
- Total money saved delayed salary: $ 60,000 .-
is absurd !!!!. The damage caused by a number that is lower than the price of 1 (one) car moving managers.
Comparing this with the income of the company (actual): 107,000 tons produced with an average selling price of U $ S 330 / Tn, gives us a little more than U $ S 35,000,000.
OTHER BASURDO!! It is as clear a forest to get a toothpick.
Unless the reason was not economic. But, what?.
not understand ... I repeat: The question is not who is responsible?, But how do we change this methodology, this absurd way of doing things?. The road is CSR.
Oh, I forgot: In the long term, even in the medium, the numbers do not close, the effect of the damage.
Until next time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)