How It Started

The issue of “certification” came up as: it’d be nice to have a Radical cert. Certification makes sense in the Fiat system, run by hierarchies and organized around domination through fear, a mighty authority certifies that you are qualified. On the other hand, “certs” are incongruous with a Radical model, without hierarchies, domination, or fear posing as “motivation.”

Given that we live in a Fiat world, and will do so for a while, the urge for differentiation is not unreasonable, Hey, we are certified as Radical! However, rather than an external authority, the people who embody a company are the ones to positively declare that, We are on a Radical path, and here’s the data that tells where we are along the path

Not Aligned

“Certs” are incongruent with the Radical model because they are issued by external authorities brought in as an authority to the certs’ rules.

For example, the Great Place to Work™ Institute has become a “culture authority.” Early on it was very good at getting brand name clients like Forbes and other businesses that wanted to be certified by the same people who certified Forbes. They issue a survey, collect responses from employees, and then return to the bosses their score broken down by categories. The survey and its categories are not very scientific or methodological, but it is practical enough to convince people who value the cert more than the data. They want the bragging rights. “Higher” is not “better,”.

Another example is B Labs which has become an “environmental impact authority” with its “B Corp certificate.” They investigate, quantify, and corroborate any and all claims that the bosses may make. But bosses are very good at obfuscating things and while many companies have deeply ingrained values that happened to be aligned to the ones that B Corp claims, most others use their B Certs for virtue signaling and bragging rights.^∇

Nonetheless

In our Fiat world, it makes sense to have external authorities investigate that management is not lying or are pressuring their employees to “be positive.” The resulting certificate and their ranking make the service easier to sell to the bosses.

By contrast, in the Radical model, a company’s co-owners, backed by fully transparent data, are the ultimate authority in declaring what path they’re on based on what they live day and day out.

To Protect Employees

The results of these surveys are redacted, for the privacy and safety of employees But that excuse does not apply in the Radical model since these are no employees who can be fired for voicing their thoughts or pointing out what needs fixing. Radical co-owners don’t need “protection” from hearing what others have to say. In fact, because the data is fully transparent, the same is true for the community outside the company: anybody can look at the details, ask questions, comment on conclusions, and, ultimately, learn.

And, yes, all co-owners can agree to lie and put out false data. That is very unlikely, however, and would eventually come out.

What Is the Alternative?

Surveys are fine for collecting data relatively quickly, but they need to have a foundation. The Radical Foundation has only five to remember,

Questions based on this Foundation gives companies, and anybody else who cares to look, a view of how the company is doing, what needs to change, improvements, etc. Is the company more decentralized or less?.

ENDNOTES

• Dan & Jessica. What Does Certified B Corporation Mean? < (alt., <https://diigo.com/0pa15t>). Mar 9, 2020.