Fragmented Cooperation

How we create and perceive the world around us depend in large part on the company we keep, the information we gravitate towards, and the styles of interaction we prefer.

I try to keep up with my line of work by reading newsletters, attend webinars, and participate in different online groups, in addition to joining ongoing conversations with fellow board members, team colleagues and professionals in various network. These contacts give me an opportunity to be updated on important news and developments in the sector. And, by writing this blog, I continue to explore what I hear and read.

Recently, representatives from social and political spectra, together with billionaires and other far-flung classes made appearances at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, to converse about the world. The task of solving problems or at least theorize about solutions, were also on the agenda.

This gathering, which used to serve as a harbinger for developments that made the world go ‘round, is in its current state rather resembling a not-so-cheap carnival ride, and there is no free cotton candy. By offering top-tier membership at $921,000, and a fast-food lunch coming in at $60, the expectations should be at level. With the smartest and the brightest collectively putting their brains together in a secluded alpine landscape, what could go wrong. (No question mark intended.)

This year’s theme, ‘Cooperation in a Fragmented World’ takes the pulse on how Davos itself as a phenomenon has evolved; fragmented in the sense that is it now a full-blown see-and-be seen affair, and less of cooperation, as it seldom generates significant or exciting program declarations, or actionable initiatives, on how to tackle the world’s troubles. It might also be considered an oxymoron, since it is combining two outliers of sentiments that ordinarily are juxtaposed and not necessarily of the same origin or solution.

With such images in mind, Davos could be assumed to have too little of reality and too much of a 3D-made version of living above it all, alp-tops not included. Some numbers show that this is quite the case. When “(O)ver the last decade, the global billionaire class has more than doubled in size, and the wealth of that class has skyrocketed at a similar rate, 99.6%”, something’s clearly off.  Adding insult to injury, Oxfam reports that a whopping $42 trillion USD in total wealth has been created since 2020, the beginning of the global Covid-19 pandemic. 62%, or $26 trillion, of that massive increase went to the top 1%, equal to 78 million people (or 23% of the U.S. population) instead of shared equally with the world’s population of 7.888 billion. What a thought?!

A recent article on how hard it is to be a billionaire cited Rockefeller and Carnegie’s legacies as examples of wealthy individuals of the previous Gilded Age (it’s been suggested that we are in a 2nd Gilded Age at this time). Elaborating on the chore of giving, the text draws parallels to Jeff Bezos, who has expressed similar sentiments as he is moving from business leader to philanthropist.

Whether viewing the situation from 100+ years ago, or taking a look at contemporary conditions, the tendency to conflate loads of money with equal amount of smartness is a common mistake, and one which I pondered in a previous blog. Comparisons of this type, and insights into high-level donor and corporate mover-and-shaker, behavior has helped me connect the actual reality where initiatives funded by these individuals would make, and often made, a huge difference.

There are signs that philanthropists and global agencies alike are starting to shift their approach, expressing a desires to connect with grassroots organizations and unite in ways that will lift people out of poverty, heal illnesses and ameliorate suffering directly in the communities. This is a welcome development since the knowledge that people who are affected possess, and can bring to the table, cannot be underestimated.

But is this enough? How do we move from a fragmented to a cooperative world? I believe that the Davos’ theme hit exactly where it was intended – calling out the fragmentation that has been under way for a while, and attempting to redefine cooperation on new terms. But unfortunately, the declarations did not make it to the masses. Press didn’t report so much on process or results, as being preoccupied with the furry clothing of certain attendees.

A dedication to solve problems requires people to meet, and under less than ideal circumstances, even. The opulence is one thing, but when events like Davos is the be all-end all, then we have lost sight of cooperation, and fragmentation is the rule.

Perhaps the spectacle that is called Davos would do better if it rolled down the hillside and settled in a valley, enabling more people to join, to be heard, and seen. Reality is still worth a gathering.

Photo: Saurabh Deshpande via Pixels