Hello,

As some of you know, my name is Rafal and I am one of the founders of the RBEFoundation. I would like to start discussion about the possible merger of our organizations into one corporation (structure).

Why so? A little bit on my background - I hold the master degree in management and marketing and have more than 5 years of experience in the intenational trade, including working for the biggest corporations in the indutry. Credentials done

Now, I assume that reaching the goal (which we basically agree with Andrew is the same) together in the efficient manner is our target. From both, the theory and practice of the organizational management, the merger of similiar prganizations is the preffered way to do that. In this way, the resources that were part of each individual group (be it developers, storage,infrastructure,legal etc.) can be then reorganized and used efficiently. On the other hand, the suggested cooperation, while preserving the "independence" simply won't work as efficiently as we would wish it to.

At this point I don't want to go into details as the intention is to have the disscussion first about the general idea.

From my perspective, the optimal solution would be - RBEF and Atlas merging "into" EOS. The reason for that is pretty simple:
1. RBEF as a whole was intended to support and be the "specialized"/commercial arm of the ZM, which didn't happen. Atlas on the other hand can be another specialized project.
2. EOS is an established legal organization, and registration of different ones, makes the things even more complicated. We can have one membership base.

Of course there is an issue of the "sentiment" of all merging groups. personally I don't mind abandoning the RBEF name, but I would appreciate the "transition period" for all RBEF members to get used to it.

After merger we would be more than happy to work together as a EOS members on the projects, that we already have at hand - Starfish, brand image, fund raisings etc.

Finally I would be very glad to transparently facilitate the process, serve as a bridge and solve the problems as I have the knowledge and experience in this area.

That sounds like a wonderful idea, and the Sequence of Relations would surely aim to help in this transition period. I think that we could begin by integrating the practical aspects.

Rafal wrote:


Well, u r already in the technate with EOS.

Rafal wrote:


In the holonic model we use where different groups have commonality they form a higher holon to combine their resources. So for example, RBEF and EOS have some common ground with the umbrella project so that becomes a higher holon where we combine common resources to work on that.

Where we differ we work on our on projects separately. That has the advantage of allowing each group to run its own affairs, localising and distribution of power, different stiles of leadership / operation and the option to test out different ideas and solutions.

ration, while preserving the "independence" simply won't work as efficiently as we would wish it to.

Rafal wrote:


Yes, sounds good. Also I think ur members will need time to understand what EOS does and our design.

Glad to hear that! Actually there is plenty of books on the subject (merger of organizations) that I am familiar with, as well as the whole process is pretty nicely described.

What we should start with (and this is the purpose of this particular thread) is some form of "common understanding" and the will to actually do it. Since our visions are similar as well as the transition plan and rality check is 90% compatible, the rest is as a matter of fact the technical issue. The whole problem is how to do it as painless as possible and avoid shaking the organizations too much.

I suggest to create some form of "Joint Team", design the special section of the forum for it (or separe project) and have a discussion over it there. As I understand it would be section of relations on the EOS behalf. On the RBEF it will be most pobably the facilitators (admins) team.

Again, I am hoping to assist by designing and moderating this process based on the available knowledge to create the simple step-by-step process,like:
mapnp.nonprofitoffice.com/vertical/Sites...-8F9A07113E70%7D.PDF
and avoid problems like:

Could open an "embassy"? A forum thread to further news and integration, as in the Atlas forums.

Rafal wrote:


I suggest Enrique for that. He can take it from here.

ui

Actually we are experiencing the dtabase problem on our forum, and since it is more like merger "into" EOS it would be appropriate to have the thread opened here.

About the holonic structure - the thing is that we are doing 90% the same things and it is the waste of resources. For example instead of wasting the time and efforts on doing exactly the same as separate organizations, we can efficiently use the combined resources.

The "individuality" is also not an issue here as we (RBEF) for some time already have the discusion on changing the name, so adapting the EOS is not the big issue.

The main problem,where we will need the flexibility on both sides is the organizational structure and stated goals. With new members, your goals and methods might be challenged and on your side it will require patience and flexibility to educate new members as well as be open for new ideas (for example how to combine the "holons" idea with the real-life legal system)

Anyway, it is the separate issue though.

Rafal wrote:


We would be honored.

I will add a little technical comment. Our organizations are formed around online communities and as such to merge them we can help ourselves with a technological solution. It was my attempt to increase cooperation by pulling together news from all the different websites onto our front page (and although it would have been team spirit if everybody else did the same, I do not see it as a requirement). This way when we follow our site we can stay aware that everybody else is contributing as well, on their respective sites. I have successfully integrated news from the EOS, Atlas, Umbrella and RBOSE sites, however I hit a snag with the RBEF, as the forum does not provide a RSS feed.

If this could be implemented (it takes an addon for the forum) that would help.

LP,
Jure

I must admit that I am quite fond of this idea. Personally, I think that both EOS et al would benefit from such a move, especially regarding the social impact that we are aiming at with such - let's admit it - bold visions of the future. I am also in accordance that at this point in time we do not have such vast resources (in terms of human force and finances) that would allow us the luxury of pulling off several similar projects at the same time. And a revitalisation on all fronts is more than welcome. I believe that a common identity would provide us with a leverage towards higher goals for all members involved.

Are we looking into the new Earth Organisation for Sustainability?

Hello everyone,

If we can formalise the basic understanding we have, it should be sufficient for a merger. While an actual merger into EOS is a more drastic solution than joining the technate. However, having a common communications platform is the most important thing, and the holonic structure would remain in any case, so holons have maximum independency while having the possibility to directly coordinate with other holons to reduce redundancy. I assume this could also be accomplished within the technate structure, but having mergers into EOS might make space in the technate structure for a wider range of organisations. Those who follow almost exactly the same goals and are willing to join EOS should by all means do so in my opinion.

On a side note, I was contacted by an Austrian guy who plans on starting a federation on demonetization including various approaches. I will post in more detail about this once things are clearer, but it is obvious that people in this area start to organise. Lets just be careful to maintain course and our organisational principles to avoid downfall due to centralisation and bureaucracy. The holonic structure, if properly executed, should help us here.

Kind regards,

Raffael

EDIT> Earth Organisation for Sustainability - thats the spirit ! Hopefully, by the time we could say interplanetary, we wont be necessary anymore...

I didn't want to mention, but such a change would be nice, given the more "internatonal" membership.

And of course I agree - the first benefit of such merger would be the common platform for communication. We can even think about it in stages, where te first stage is RBEF being the specialized unit within the EOS before dissolving into the structure naturally, when the members will gradually get familiar with other activities. On my example, I have no problem in adapting into EOS and participate in more asks, but some people might like to take it slow.

Regarding the merger - as for me it is the matter of efficiency. No matter how inter-linked we are and feeding the news without one common structure, we are separate and cooperation will always take too much time to be efficient. Moreover, if the EOS vision is to be realised then the further "aquisitions" are very possible, as this is the way to growth.

I suggest to digest the whole idea a bit, discuss it internally (I have a "green light" form most of the admins already) and brainstorm a ittle bit more. Personally as an outcome I would like to see the "merger manual" as an outcome of this process adjusted to the specific status of EOS - holons.
I think it might be a good point to start - create the "task force / joint commitee" to work out such manual and then implement it and test on the EOS/RBEF merger example.

Yes, we could actually change the name to "Earth Organisation for Sustainability"

Rafal MSc. wrote:


The most natural way from the EOS perspective to do that would be to formulate RBEF as a project group. RBEF has a goal and a team, this can be one holon (on a certain level), of people working on implementing a Resource Based Economy.

The holon system is not trying to be overly bureaucratic, it is basically the way people organise themselves when working on projects, you have a team, perhaps with subteams, working on the various aspects of the problem, which then become part of larger groups, or reorganise themselves to work with other people outside the existing groups, to form new groups.

This natural progression can also facilitate the transition you speak of. Of course what this really depends on is simply what people choose to do... and this should be the most comfortable with everybody anyway.

LP,
Jure

Yes, I think this is the bestto have RBEF as a project (holon) within the structure and let people naturally explore EOS, while staying in the familiar enviorement.

On a side note - I have just seen the Z:3 and I need to say that from economical point of view I am dissapointed. As much as it is appreciated of mking the message more "balanced", there is a huge gap to cover with actual implementation.

My main concern is that there is an RBE which is build with assumption "imagine that we have discovered new Earth", while not addressing the core problem of how the actual means of production, land and all resources will be transfered to this new system? Nationalisation? Political action? Buying them out?

I think this is the area where the actual research and plan need to developed and implemented in the form of analysis, political plan and changes to be implemented... otherwise the idea will be twisted,as it happened always in the past.

Rafal MSc. wrote:


Well. This is why EOS is existing.