The principles of generativity are simple, yet profound:

• Relate to images of phenomena;
• Represent images of phenomena;
• Reason with images of phenomena.

These are the effective ingredients of thinking generatively.

In reverse order, we cannot think generatively before we have represented the phenomena ideationally. Similarly, we cannot represent ideationally before we have related to images interpersonally.

The probabilities scientists have given us normal curves: nice, linear, idealized symmetrical distributions around central tendencies such as means or averages. The curves tell us something about where people and products stand in relation to this central tendency. The work of the 20th century has been based upon these probabilistic assumptions. The mission of the 20th century has been to move toward reducing our deviation from this idealized central tendency: in other words, to look more and more like the middle of the curve.

Figure 5. The Normal Curve

The normal curves also attempt to tell us how people and products move through the phases of the curve. For example, the normal curve has been adopted by the marketplace to reflect the movement of products and people through market phases: opinion leaders, early adopters, middle adopters, late adopters, laggards or non-adopters (see Figure 6). While this approach has produced an extraordinary array of products and services, it has simultaneously generated apparently finite images of people who look and act and think alike.

Figure 6. The Market Curve

In fact, the market curve is not a normal curve. Indeed, nothing in God’s universes is linear, normal and symmetrical. To be sure, the so-called market curve is comprised of multiple market curves: each, in turn, is multidimensional, interdependent and curvilinear as well as asym-metrical and changeable (see Figure 7). We may view a phenomenal representation of these multi-modal market curves in the illustrations below:

• Generating or stimulating markets;
• Innovating or initiating markets;
• Commercializing or making markets;
• Commoditizing or draining markets;
• Attenuating or breaking markets.

For our purposes, we label the acronym for these market phases GICCA. They have profound implications for their corporate cultures and their people and products.

Figure 7. Multi-Modal

Indeed, elevated requirements have been determined for the processing systems generated by the multi-modal curves (see Figure 16). As may be viewed, the requirements for corporate-community processing capacities align directly with the GICCA phases:

In other words, at the highest levels, the multi-model processing systems require advanced generative processing systems: S–P–R, S–OP–R, S–MP–R. We are not free to generate if we are not empowered to think!

Figure 8. Multi-Modal Processing Requirements

The first phase of reasoning is exploring images. This means exploring or expanding alternative views of our images. For example, when we explore our image of The American Enterprise System, we discover that American corporations have settled into Innovator–Commercializer positioning (see Figure 9). This is often referred to as “The Japanese Model:” slightly innovative commercialization. It has been adopted by many American corporations such as “Microsoft.”

Figure 9. Innovative–Commercializer Positioning

The advantage of this position is that it usually settles in running in the “draft” of the market leaders and, thus, minimizes the expenditures of leadership. Unfortunately, since America dropped out of Research and Development leadership, there is no nation for America to follow.

Nevertheless, American companies must once again consider its historical 20th century positioning of Generative – Innovative leadership (see Figure 10). Of course, this requires an upgrading of E & T as well as R & D: Education and Training as well as Research and Development.

Figure 10. Generative–Innovative Positioning

No crises are insolvable. With generativity, crises are merely opportunities for greater growth. Even the Global Financial Crises may be transformed from problematic to possibilistic.

First of all, we must analyze the assumptions involved:

• Leaders wrongfully assumed that finances generate wealth.
• Financial services mistakenly set out to become the market-driver and, in so doing, to displace Manufacturing.

Secondly, we must analyze the implications of their superstitious reasoning:

• Finances are merely ways of measuring the outcomes of wealth-generating activities.
• Financial Services mistakenly have driven Manufacturing down to 12% of GDP while building their own contribution up to 21%.

In so doing, Financial Services have already failed several times in the last two decades to establish their powerful leadership in the marketplace. They have failed because they have “over-reached” the power of their critical contribution—as a “catalytic agents”—to be invested in wealth-building activities.

The real contribution of Financial Services is as an integral part of the Organizational Resource Integration Component: the support systems that implement the Marketing Component’s Initiatives. In other words, Financial Services must get into the business of supporting others’ efforts to produce substantive wealth-generating products and services. As a member of the Resource Integration Team, Financial Services may contribute to projecting and enabling the costs and benefits over the life of the products.

One of the tangible benefits of the Global Financial Crises is the clarification of roles and functions. Another more powerful generative contribution is the evaluation of marketplace initiatives to marketplace positioning.

The prepotent breakthrough model is the Generativity Positioning System™ or GPS™ (see Figure 11). As may be noted, GPS™ implements Generative–Innovator Positioning in the Marketplace at the highest levels as follows:

Generative Positioning Functions are accomplished by
Policy-Making Components empowered by
Leadership Processes.

Figure 11. The Generative Positioning System in the Marketplace

The most critical function of this GPS™ source cell is implementing The Requirements–Capacities Matrix (see Figure 12). As may be seen, the Capacities of the organization are compared against the Requirements for Generative–Innovative Positioning in the Marketplace. Clearly, Generative Positioning is going to require the highest levels of New Capital Development to establish and continuously maintain positioning.

Figure 12. The GPS™ Requirements—Capacities Matrix

In GPSâ„¢, the customer may select from potentially an infinite array, those products that are (1) most closely tailored to meet the customer’s values, and (2) for which the customers are empowered by tailored capacities to meet the product’s requirements for managing.

For example, the customer may view electronic representations on Computer-Assisted Designs all kinds of products—homes, cars, equipment. The customers may then select and “tailor” those products to meet their needs.

The generative marketplace of the future will be driven by The Generativity Solution—the generativity of breakthrough initiatives and architectural designs (see Figure 13). Anything of value that can be conceived can be achieved in Generativity Positioning Systems™ of New Capital Development.

• MCD or Continuous Marketplace Positioning for Comparative Advantage.
• OCD or Continuous Organization Alignment with Marketplace Positioning;
• HCD or Generative Human Processing to implement Organizational Alignment;
• ICD or Schematic Information Modeling to reflect Generative Human Processing;
• mCD or Operational Mechanical Tooling to implement Schematic Information Modeling.

The actual design and assembly of the products will be “farmed out” to MOHIMs for the highest levels of New Capital Development just as OEMs or Original Equipment Manufacturers currently organize their production efforts.

Figure 13. New Capital Development Systems

The paradigm shift to GPSâ„¢ requires that all NCD Components contribute to the substance of the products being produced and delivered. The criteria of measurement revolve around increasing the “size of the pie” rather than redistributing the “sizes of the pieces.”

In this context, we have once again placed Americans back in the leadership role:

• The American learners with expansive acquisition of knowledge and skills;
• The American workers with elevating levels of applications in producing products and delivering services;
• The American entrepreneurs with escalating levels of transfer to generating wealth;
• The American citizens with accelerating levels of enlightenment in governance and politics;
• The American leaders with potentially infinite levels of generativity in all.

In other terms, we will have a Fulfillment of Human Generativity, Reinvigoration of The New Capitalism, and a Renaissance of Civilization.

Just as the corporate leaders on Main Street need to learn the ingredients of corporate growth, so do the national leaders in America need to learn the ingredients of socioeconomic growth.

Just as the underclass people marginalized by “The Cycle of Social Failure” need to learn how to become productive individually, so do those marginalized by “The Cycle of Financial Failure” need to learn to perform profitably in our times.

Rather than to pit Main Street versus Wall Street, we must all learn to become generative in entrepreneurial ways where each grows so that all have the opportunity to grow.

In transition, The Generativity Solution empowers us to solve all human crises. “The Generativity Solution” is “The Human Solution.”