Michael D. Moberly, Principal, Founder, kpstrat
This post @ Business Intangible Asset Blog considers where-when-if truth is – could (deservedly – potentially) be a useful – relevant (value-add) intangible asset when-if truth were applied more overtly to-for business operations, processes, interactions, transactions, brand development – marketing, and operating culture.
It is kpstrat’s (long standing) perspective that truth, introduced at the right time, right place, and right way, will likely be recognized, and interpreted as a…
- principled, differentiating, attractive, valuable, sustainable, and competitive advantage influencing – delivering intangible asset, plus
- influential contributor to a business’s operating culture.
An obligatory start to developing (and ultimately, writing) this post lies with the Merriam-Webster dictionary, which defines truth as…
“the body of real things, events, and facts.”
In addition (to numerous open-sources) I examined transcripts of the radio program ‘On Point’, ala a four-part series produced by WBUR – Boston (National Public Radio) in collaboration with The Conversation, which aired in February 2020 titled ‘In Search of Truth’.
I do this because, I am a ‘business intangible asset strategist and risk mitigator’ perpetually laden with the inclination to describe, differentiate, and assess various business things intangible conveyed not only with client observations, but also in mundane activities I engage daily.
I suspect readers of this blog agree, it would be inappropriately unfortunate if businesses and their leadership were to assume comfort in allowing truth to be defined (distinguished, characterized) as either…
- merely a matter of or a difference of opinion, or
- receptive to being influenced relative to,
- time, place, circumstance,
- an ideological – political lens, and/or
- personal – professional challenges or experiences.
In the present day, however, we are obliged to recognize each (of the above, and others) can and variously doinfluence what – how one
- may be inclined to conceive-perceive, see-hear, frame, and communicate what they sense-feel about) particular-things,
- at particular-times and in particular-circumstances.
- how and ways we interpret – assess particular-things which we attach particular – importance, both initially and overtime, and the
- various ways we may choose to express our perspective about those particular-things, e.g., as we accumulate additional life experiences, i.e., personal and/or professional.
It appears for some (present day) that the ‘body of things, events, and facts’ chosen to be accepted and believed represent a truth (reality) variously influenced by political and/or ideological interests…
- which (unnecessarily, but not coincidentally) may lie in opposition to an alternative perspective (being offered) emanating from the same (open source) ‘body of things, events, and facts’.
Unremarkably, similar phenomena – interactions materialize for business leaders, managers, investors, and strategists, (wherein either, often irrespective of generation) relative to…
- which, what, how, when, why particular – influences may materialize (time, place, issue, circumstance, etc.) that
- favorably – adversely influence one’s receptivity to the presence – relevance of objective evidence and indicators, that otherwise,
- may-could-should (fiduciarily) oblige one to (at minimum) listen, rationally debate, and objectively consider, sometimes even ‘slightly tweaked’ differences (in language and/or strategy) relative to an already established convention.
It appears in some (present day) business circumstances, particular – influences and/or experiences are conceived (e.g., personal, professional, historic, sociological, political, ideological, etc.) to variously effect…
- what, if, when or how one may be receptive to and choose to believe as truth,
- irrespective of the initiating-underlying issue, challenge, risk before a business,
- more so when the same (open source) ‘body of things, events, and facts’ to be examined, understood, and considered to achieve a desired outcome.
Again (present day) it appears in some instances – for some business’s, internal – passionate debate and decision-making are predictably (ideologically) influenced in ways that essentially limit, omit, or preclude potential benefits to be derived from rational – objective debate and consideration, in advance of decision-making, doing this,
may not consistently or strategically be a good thing, insofar as a business’s strategic – competitive viability – sustainability, irrespective of sector.
How can – what are the (various – relevant) ways truth could be relevantly – operationally framed, recognized, and applied (to-for a business in 2021) in intangible asset contexts, that would…
- universally translate and be objectively measured as relevant (and perhaps additional) contributors to a business’s (unique) mission, operations, and the various transactions a business routinely undertakes, and also
- convert to observable – desirable – sustainable ROI’s (returns-on-investment).
when – if truthfulness is un-mistakenly + universally regarded by stakeholders, customers, consumers, and investors, when more overtly exhibited in practice, i.e., voice, expressions, demeanors, and culture, at the right time, right place, and in the right way…that’s probably going to be a good thing!
Experientially, it is variously (obligatorily) presumed when commencing discussions regarding truthfulness’ relevance to a business operating culture (i.e., its competitiveness, revenue generation, sustainability, and attractivity, etc.) to seek reasonable consensus about…
- why, when, where, under-what-circumstances, and how much truthfulness is (a.) necessary for relevancy, and (b.) could-should be (more overtly) exhibited,
- as preludes to-for introducing and executing same as a (conceptually, practically, and favorably) influential and valuable, all-be-it intangible, contribution to a business’ operating culture,
- beyond, and/or – as an extension to existing practices and operating culture, (recognizing implications to the contrary may be interpreted as an afront) and
- differentiate those contributions – exhibitions of ‘truthfulness’ (qualitatively – quantitatively) to business valuation, competitiveness, revenue generation capability-capacity, and sustainability, irrespective of sector, products, services, history, and/or offerings.
Respectfully, some business leaders – management team members, et al, (for a host of reasons) may not be readily receptive (experientially – practically) to conclude there is sustainable value and ROI to benefit their business by more overtly conveying – exhibiting truthfulness’…
- especially if-when there is little – consistent evidence to date which suggests ‘truthfulness’is consistently – necessarily being sought or in demand,
- aside from product labeling of contents – ingredients, etc., and/or during-the-course of adverse civil actions in which a settlement may be negotiated – agreed providing a non-disclosure agreement is in place.
More specifically, can – could – would (more) overt – consistent exhibition of truthfulness actually – materialize (as business operating culture) to…
- perhaps more quickly, consistently, and favorably inspire and affect (for example) business branding and transaction outcomes (which preferably, some readers correctly interpret to be an underlying thesis of this post).
To that, a respectful and practical question is warranted…why do most business leaders and management team members irrespective of sector, or country, obligatorily assume and fiduciarily devote…
- time, effort, procedures – processes, legalize, training, and resources to
- safeguard and perpetuate the sustainability of their (likely) externally acquired or proprietarily developed, tweaked, and marketed intangible assets, i.e.,
- various forms, contexts, uses, and applications of intellectual, structural, and relationship capital,
- which routinely meld (collectively – collaboratively) as contributions to – as ‘operating culture’ = another business thing intangible.
One answer to this question is…intangible assets are consistent – direct contributors to most every business’s value – valuation, competitiveness, revenue generation capability-capacity, resilience, and sustainability, and
- today and for the foreseeable future, (whether formally recognized – measured, or not) and irrespective of sector (products, services, offerings) are variously – routinely intangible asset intensive, dependent, and reliant.
objective – replicated economic studies over 20+ years, describe 80+% of most business’s value, competitive advantages, and sources of revenue (generation) lie in – derive from intangible assets.