Thursday, May 31, 2018

Need and frustration lead to innovation--that in turn is always opposed by inertia of prior system...

Soldiers who won in the long lasting Dacian wars were given land in Dacia after its Roman conquest of 106 A.D., in payment for military service. After colonization of North America from 1492, in a watershed decision, the U.S. Supreme Court in Johnson v M'Intosh (1823) took property ownership of U.S. land for federal government from First Nations so that Virginia could pay its militia that fought the Revolutionary War. 

About 1700 years apart the same pattern creates property rights where none existed. Discovery doctrine, used in both cases, spreads as property rights are needed. 

A system based on rule of law that guarantees property rights, in order to survive, needs to have its currents reach every element that the flow may reach. Constructal law predicts a global property rights regime. Before, constructal law predicted free roaming bison over prairie lands of First Nations. What happens when two systems meet, or compete?

Monetary system evolved from transactional money-less exchanges, through the middle ages, Bretton Woods, US Exit from gold standard (Nixon shock), Bretton Woods II, to Euro-zone creation in late 1990s, and aftermath of 2008 crisis. We live the competitive & cooperative nature of a system with multiple currencies of last resort (with China's arguably winning). Many actors felt a disconnect between their perceptions about their own net worth and their access to the controls of the financial system. Young professionals, frustrated with a system out of their control, asked: "Why not make a start-up for monetary instruments directly, without intermediation of any product or service?" Hence the rise of "alternative virtual currencies."

Read all about it in the:


Series A:

Mathematics, Physics, Technical Sciences, Information Science 



(May 2018)

Adrian S Petrescu, Ph.D., J.D.

Saturday, May 19, 2018

“When in doubt, ask a child...”

Two great lessons I learned in life occurred serendipitously. 

Part of my research in Brussels in 1999 with EU businesses and institutions, seeking factors of creativity and innovation leading to business success in startups in particular, was to interview the leadership of a team of researchers facilitating watching children interact with and through technology. I later witnessed myself the frustration of the 2-3 years old trying to figure out why the DOS/Win laptop was not touch screen... The team was taking notes originating ideas that we as adults were not seeing due to our already established anchors coming with our prior learning. The work never fully made it into my Ph.D. thesis or the two theses for certificates in European affairs. My own child treated her 2006 laptop as touch screen because the car GPS was already so. Touch revolutionized every devise eventually. The team I mention didn't originate the ideas though. Did they keep and originated any other ideas from their list? Maybe funding was cut & the center closed:(

I write a list of things I did not use sufficiently in research over time. I parse it for inspiration for future projects. I share them.

Minds of children are anchor free.

What's on your list? What have you learned recently from a child or children?

I used to say as a result of this little lesson: "When in doubt ask a child. It turns out we have one handy at all times. It is us. Earlier on. Before we were taught it cannot be done." You are thus absolutely right. Self observation it is, if it works. Let's remember in the alternative what the master did. As he aged Edison adopted a street child in his teens and made him his senior assistant who was always pointing out to Edison the question "why not?" I always saw that as even the master loosing his spirit from his own teen years and needing a boost of teen "can do attitude." 

Today we may call that coaching.;)

Adrian S. Petrescu, Ph.D., J.D.
Chief Future Architect, InnovationTrek
We got here. What's next?
Accelerate Innovation. 
In companies and self.
Grow flow. Naturally.

Friday, May 11, 2018

Mastering and harnessing the power of our own addictions

On leadership we all have our own perspective and that makes the entire difference. From answering the classic question if leaders are born or nurtured to whether leadership is always or only top down or it more often bottom up and thus distributed, everyone and every research outlet have their own take.

Yet, one perspective will always prevail, and that is the one that is assessing leadership characteristics through actions that systematically bring everything closer to the way nature evolves, or works. 

The general question "is your life or your business like water?" meaning that everyone around depends on it with their life comparatively more than their dependence on anything else. Let's notice things that release dopamine become like that. Others have mastered that gate into our brain. With tobacco and alcohol or FB or social media likes in general. 

We however can "fight back" and lead a movement from the ground up to self-become addicted to our own success... that in turn would be the truly next generation of distributed systemically radically different leadership. Naturally. 

Adrian S. Petrescu, Ph.D., J.D.
Chief Future Architect, InnovationTrek
We got here. What's next?
Accelerate Innovation. 
In companies and self.
Grow flow. Naturally.