What if you knew what your coworkers really thought about you and what they were really like? Ray Dalio makes the business case for using radical transparency and algorithmic decision-making to create an idea meritocracy where people can speak up and say what they really think -- even calling out the boss is fair game. Learn more about how these strategies helped Dalio create one of the world's most successful hedge funds and how you might harness the power of data-driven group decision-making.
Check out more TED Talks: http://www.ted.com
The TED Talks channel features the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global issues, the arts and more.
Follow TED on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/TEDTalks
Like TED on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TED
Subscribe to our channel: https://www.youtube.com/TED
The biggest issue I see is social pressure from seeing other peoples results. The social pressure of not wanting to be called out, or the social pressure to follow what other people are doing. These social cues are hardwired and can change the flow of decisions within a group.
I have finished watching this video completely.
I am a Taiwanese who cares about the global affairs.
And, sadly, most of my fellow Taiwanese don't really care about the world.
Hopefully Taiwan can become increasingly globally-aware and globally-competitive.
God bless Taiwan.
make sure that capitalism work for the majority of the people, to look at the bottom of sixty percent population, how you approach the wealth gap and opportunity gap? They paint the picture of the future. What I want is a meaningful work, a meaningful relationships, throught radical truthfulness, and radical transparency, because they're reinforce each other.
You can know what others are really thinking and what they are really like if you are truthful and honest about what you think about yourself and about others while at the same time refraining from becoming arrogant in your belief that you are right. You very well could be completely wrong and you have to be able to accept that with humility. Believing in yourself is about believing you can make mistakes and that others can too. Nobody is perfect but they are similar.
Companies are an organizing principle that assumes that the conditions for 'perfect competition' cannot be met. As new organizing principles - such as decentralized autonomous organizations - emerge, individuals can increasinly trade amongst themselves without the friction of rent-seeking companies. - https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesfinancecouncil/2018/07/30/the-economics-of-decentralized-organizations-the-end-of-for-profit-corporations/#499b819a3966
* “ How to build a company where the best ideas win”
understand others perspective or have others to stress test your perspective in order to make a idea meritocracy (not autocracy which you lead and others follow nighter democracy which everyone’s point of view is equally valued) in order to do that you need radical truthfulness and radical transparency , then you can collect the right principle and embed them to algorithm , and then those algorithm provides following algorithm in parallel to your thinking.
Tool required to do this is explained as following:
Title of discussion
RULE : Rating ability by everyone (1to10) and why (reason)
As you farther scale the process you will come across such a DATA ;
A C D E F B
B 3 5 8 6 5 -
C 9 - 6 4 0 8
D 8 7 - 6 7 6
E 4 6 8 - 2 9
F 7 5 4 0 - 2
A - 3 9 5 6 8
It helps one to see every ones opinion and let go of their opinion in order to see the bigger picture . it changes ones perspective from 1 dimension to multiple dimensions and it improves conversations with shifting from arguments to figuring out the criteria to eventually see the right pictures , after that we can apply all the best well stress tested perspectives before making any decisions in our life (business, which generally is the deep meaning and purpose of life and it earns us value/counting/money as said in ancient Hebrew and later it able us to get a great deal of happiness in the case of success).
Benefits: it eliminates arrogant and naive believes from one which holding the wrong opinion and fighting for it and then he can make the right decision which as fellow human we all will effectively benefit from such a transformation.
Also after analysing the results we will be able to categorise people and then putting them in the right team which they can be effective positively in all of us best interest.
* Refers to Ray Dalio’s way of running his hedge fund and being able to be better than all competitors in the last 25 years.
The best idea wins..... how do you know? who decides what is the best idea?.... Risk Parity is a flawed strategy that happened to work for years because of the rate decline (basically the only reason for his success apart from salesmanship). The last few years there was no added value for the strategy compared with a traditional balanced portfolio.
The flaws of Risk Parity are: 1) Risk is not measurable it has been replaced by the rear view mirror called past volatility.
2) Leveraged returns of low risk investments do not behave the same as non leveraged returns of higher risk investments.
Both assumptions are made by Dalio and he is rewarded by the markets for a long time. Where is their doubt on this?
I don't understand why people are so eager to take the advice from investors and VCs. It seems like every single person who's ever been a VC has written a book lately, and from what I've read they're all pretty bad. Shockingly, old, rich white dudes don't really know how to build a business unless it already has $10 million in the bank. Give them a brick and mortar storefront and no money and they'll fail faster than you can imagine.
This guy doesn't have anything real to offer entrepreneurs. It might sound good, but he's just making it up, he hasn't actually done anything but be rich for the last 30 years, his advice means basically nothing unless you're already rich.
huge fan of mr.Dalio, though his management approach is too obsequious, especially when it comes to adopting technology in a workplace. this "data-driven" dot-collector thing is not some magical formula that prevails a strong leader with clear mind. Machine may trade better than human, but certainly not manages people better than human in current stage of technological progress
Ray is a great man. I just bought his book, Principles, and it is full of wisdom. I've worked in 12+ big organizations, including IBM (under Lou Gerstner in the 90s), American Express, etc. and his tool (Dot Collector) would have been wonderful and powerful. Today, I teach Digital Marketing at a college in Canada, and I find that his principles also apply to marketing and entrepreneurship. Because of our ego and insecurity, we often hide our thoughts from others for fear of being criticized. Even within a family and within a network of friends, we often do not, as Ray says, "put our honest thoughts on the table." Yet, no honest sharing of thoughts means no feedback, which means no progress and no personal/professional evolution. Ray intends to make a tool resembling the Dot Collector available to Silicon Valley startups because they've expressed interest in it. This is great, and I do hope more organizations adopt his principles and methods. It will not be easy for many people to suddenly become honest and transparent, but the alternative (to work in a culture of dishonesty and non-feedback) will increasingly become intolerable.
To work with it you need to have a group of people, that are perfectly reasonable and opened to improve themselves. I can only imagine how embarrassing or insincere or just awkward and problematic this model has to be. Everyone has the emotional side of the personality, so people in this company has to be embarrassed or to fake their behavior or to just angry with the others.
In a competitive either/or environment, it makes perfect sense that Radical Transparency is too much vulnerability. HOWEVER, in a cooperative environment, anything less that Radical Transparency is poison to trust.
As a really nice trifecta of resources to consider (in ADDITION to Ray Dalio's book!) if you want to delve deeper:
3) Read: An Everyone Culture, by Robert Kegan (Dalio is featured there)
2) Read: Throwing Rocks At the Google Bus, by Douglas Rushkoff (platform cooperatives as economic yin dancing with western capitalism's yang - both/and)
1) But first, after watching Dalio's talk, Spend 30-40 minutes grokking The Evolution of Trust: http://ncase.me/trust/
I recommend putting your attention precisely on WHY you feel hiding is the right action (it may well be!), and what feels too vulnerable to share (it may well not be!).
I wonder what Ray Dalio would think of a business owner who sits in meetings for 5 to 8 hours a day, discussing "fourth order effects", philosophy and block chains, when they should have been getting new projects for the company. Draining the companies account to about $2k, over 8 months then telling your last remaining staff member "i give up, and sorry about your $26,600 i wasted on my parking and other useless stuff". Would Ray think this is merit based ideas powering a company that's supposed to produce digital media content for marketing and web?
This dot collection remind me Daniel Kahneman advice on how to make decision of data you collected but obviously modified. Well its a big step forward to transparency, think you work in company with your colleagues being lower middle class they not bad humans but they got here because of lack of education or even luck now they life is shaped for next x years if they wont develop new skills now if you recognize they don't want to participate to improve their life then their opinion about you worth about nothing if you have goal oriented mindset :)
That was quite amazing talk by Ray Dalio. It all seems to have developed from his evaluation of the default of Mexico in August of 1982. He deemed himself as having been too arrogant and found a way to stress test his opinions with the help of his staff, algorythms and computers.