The growing power, secrecy and opaque decision-making processes of corporations are often cited as a major threat to free, democratic societies. But what if those decisions were laid out for all to see? What if the public could influence a company’s business decisions directly, in a democratic process: what to produce, who to source from and sell to, how to market and what to do with the profits? And what if people could directly benefit from their participation in decsion making?
Often crowdsourcing is about getting people to give away their ideas, their onlyness. Yet noticing more models that compensate for participation, as is the case of this model: members will receive a twice-yearly payout through PayPal if the company makes a profit and if the community votes to pay out to members.
We can easily buy into the challenge of “who are you”, without realizing the answer is as simple as I am me…
60 years of growth was wiped out in 3.
Having a female leader = 6% higher GDP growth rate, on average, than having a man at the helm. The more diverse the nation, the more extreme the effect. In Liberia, 1 of the most ethnically fractionalized countries surveyed, GDP growth was 6.15% under a female leader and 0.69% if the leader was male…
(With all appropriate caveats about generalizing a “female leadership style”… it’s a great read. Highly recommended.)”
While the number is still too low (13%)…women are growing as share of Venture Capital.
Silicon Valley lags behind the rest of Corporate America in getting more women into leadership roles, new research finds.
Loads of stats here > http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2013/12/11/tech-leadership-lags-in-gender-diversity/?mod=e2tw
The more social mobility there is, more that society will resemble the equal-opportunity ideal.