Thoughts about change

It is hard to write about political changes without talking about politics. It is said that if you do not accept change yourself, you will be rendered irrelevant and eventually perish.

Change is one of the most laborious processes to swallow, both as an individual and moreover as a society that flourishes on the idea that what exists is right and shouldn’t be changed. Thoughts fixations define the reciprocal relationships between the various examples that we use to measure success, but they also make us forget that by doing so we build a wall around our creativity and innovation.

Some may disagree, but I stand by the fact that for the past ten years the American economy as a whole and Silicon Valley, in particular, presented a slow yet constant decreased ability to innovate. Most companies (excluding some well-documented examples) have reached their “golden age, ” or in other words, they got old, less observant, full of bloated ego but more importantly, they became fragile. They are stuck in the loop of thought fixation and to ease the pain they have surrounded themselves with rings and rings of regulations that are anchored in paper-based politics.

In one of my older articles, I wrote about the current generation of C-Suites and politicians that manage the world with a limited understanding and thereby under-utilizing the potential of technological and societal changes in almost every area. We live in an “expired social construct” — most of our eco-social constructs we have surrounded ourselves with (urban, medical, education, transportation and more) serve the limited model of yesteryears society, and are therefore leaving us with decision patterns from days gone by.

“We are led by blind people who are blind to our blindness— we are being forced to sleep through the biggest change humanity has ever experienced.”

Ayn Rand’s idea that our knowledge and values are objectives, shaped by the nature of reality to be discovered and used by one’s mind is a great way to look at businesses, society, politics, and life. It is not about what was, nor about what will be, but what is. By facing the current, we can silence the subjective voices and focus on the wishes instead on the tools to execute them; changes are objective self-interest processes that we should use to fulfill our desires.

Looking into the future, you cannot predict which groups will survive, it’s well known that many advanced groups eventually fade away. Charles Darwin, Origin of Species, 1859

While the 2016 US election will go down in the history books as one of the most controversial elections in history, it will also pave a path of lessons in marketing, transformation, segmentation, and strategy.

John Locke said that the government exists to serve its citizens, not citizens to serve governments, and the government is obliged to secure life, liberty, and property. Thomas Jefferson did what every talented politician does and changed “property” with “the pursuit of happiness”.

During Obama’s administration, one of the successful highlights was what is known as “Obama care” at the same time Google invested millions of dollars in building a research organization that looks at aging with their ultimate aim to find a cure for dying. I often ask the question, whom would you like to be governed by: By a government that promises to take care of you when you are sick? Alternatively, By a company that promises you will never die?

In yet another article I wrote about the da Vinci gap — the unfortunate reality was many leaders have dismissed their responsibility for the future and lost their appetite to think big. These heroes without vision are busy analyzing and planning, while others are building for immortality. These heroes without vision, powered by siloed vision, are fragmenting our reality and building a new circle of ideological wars.

(r)Evolution can start with the simplest idea. We need to dream big dreams and believe in at least one. Da Vinci did.

In the current claimant of blind leadership, we have to distance ourselves from the contradictions that the political situation is placing in front of us and look at change as an opportunity to use our one mind. Tot to continue on the same path of “things we know that we know” but disconnect from the laziness and fear and build an infrastructure for new business models, new definitions of innovation and most importantly create a mindset, that will encourage the next change.

We need to believe that the best solutions to a problem are not hitting it with everything we have, but by viewing it from all possible angles. If something does not work for its intended purpose, it might work for something completely different — that is the meaning of change.