“The whole is greater than the sum of the parts.”

Let’s hold it right there – and dissect the phrase.

It is a “phrase attributed to Aristotle and misquoted by those seeking to understand one of the most mysterious properties of a system: Emergence. The quote also explains the importance of synergy and the foundations of Gestalt theory.

“And we can paraphrase it using the more modern Systems Engineering language: The System is something “besides,” and not the same, as its elements.” [INCOSE.com]

“Emergence can also describe a system’s function — what the system does by its relationship to its environment that it would not do by itself. In describing “function,” emergence suggests that there are properties that we associate with a system that are properties of the relationship between a system and its environment. [necsi.edu]

Recall that the blog often speaks to the story of creation and the character of this universe, i.e., dynamism and interdependence. And the photosynthesis phenomenon is an excellent example.

Consider: “The world of ecology, the fundamental nature of the biological and physical universe is relational. That when we change one factor, it has a knock-on effect. For example, the red knots migrate annually from Tierra del Fuego to certain Arctic islands north of Hudson Bay.

“They fly north some 9,000 miles each season; they stop in the middle of their journey on particular beaches along the Delaware Bay. There they always ate the recently-laid, protein-rich eggs of horseshoe crabs. Those eggs would give them enough energy to get to the Arctic.

“But good Americans decided that horseshoe crabs were ugly and not valuable for many things, but they do make excellent bait and attract eels and conch. So we started using them for fish bait and killing these crabs indiscriminately. It took about ten years to recognize that the beautiful red knot might soon be extinct!

“Researchers observed and studied and found multiple possible answers, such as climate change, along with coastal development. But one of the main reasons: people were killing the shorebirds’ “life source.” As soon as horseshoe crabs were more protected against use as bait, we saw a return of the lovely little red knot.

“The birds again had available protein they could eat on the shores of New Jersey and make it to the Arctic. But it’s going to take several decades for them to restore.” [Richard Rohr Daily Meditation, Center for Action and Contemplation, 19th Jan 2022]

Why does the blog keep raising our instincts? We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy that ours is a culture of impunity.

In other words, we can’t operate in a vacuum. Look at where Brexit is today or MAGA.

Or democracy. And why the blog submits that it is the mirror image of Christianity – i.e., the imperative of personal responsibility to pursue the common good. And why freedom-loving nations embrace dynamism and interdependence.

And the “common good” is an expression of synergy or gestalt. See above; the Aristotle quote.

Can we pause – and ponder?

Why do we struggle to embrace the common good?

Consider: “In contrast to the two commands of Christ, the Pharisees had developed a system of 613 laws, 365 negative “commands,” and 248 “positive” laws. By the time Christ came, it had produced a heartless, cold, and arrogant brand of righteousness.

“As such, it contained at least ten tragic flaws. (1) New laws continually need to be invented for new situations. (2) Accountability to God became accountability to men. (3) It reduces a person’s ability to discern personally. (4) It creates a judgmental spirit. (5) The Pharisees confused personal preferences with divine law. (6) It produces inconsistencies. (7) It created a false standard of righteousness. (8) It became a burden to the Jews. (9) It was strictly external. (10) Christ rejected it.” [https://bible.org/illustration/pharisaic-laws]

Does Padre Damaso come to mind?

Why does the blog often speak to the Pareto principle? It is how we get to the “vital few” versus the “trivial many.” It is how we can overcome our crab mentality.

It also brings to mind the academic world versus the real world – and “cognitive development.”

Given that experience explains how humankind can move across the continuum of binary and relative thinking, our lack of development experience explains why we can’t get to execute and realize the objects of Arangkada or AmBisyon – or the scores of industry road maps?

What about the MAP (Management Association of the Philippines)? Their theme for 2022 is “Push for change: Towards a better future for all.”

Do they also face the challenge of execution?

Consider: “Our Board will, as is customary, collaborate closely with the various MAP committees, which constitute the lifeblood of our organization.

“We have made some adjustments to our committee configuration to be more effective. For example, we merged certain committees to achieve a more coordinated approach to multifaceted challenges and avoid fragmented solutions.

“As a result, we now have just 22 committees, down from 26 last year. But this does not mean a reduction in committee leaders, as we have appointed additional co-chairs and vice-chairs to committees with broader mandates.” [“Push for change: Towards a better future for all,” Alfredo E. Pascual, MAP Insights, BusinessWorld, 17th Jan 2022]

Let’s turn to our neighbors. For example, they have moved beyond binary thinking because of their successes in traversing poverty to prosperity. They don’t debate the wisdom of FDIs, for instance.

See above; we can’t operate in a vacuum and attain the common good – when our hands are tied. While we continue to put up hoops that undermine our ability to replicate their successes, including invoking “nationalism.” Recall Padre Damaso – or fascism.

If it is not apparent yet, the blog offers an approach to get us closer to the vital few.

That our desired “outcome” is “To traverse poverty to prosperity rapidly.” And the “output” we can aim for – to make the exercise more tangible and bounded and real to Juan de la Cruz – is “To raise GDP by an incremental $200 billion.”

Let’s dissect that.

Recall the Theory of Change. We must learn to distinguish between “outcome” and “outputs.” The outcome is the “context," while outputs are the “elements.”

Recall too why the blog keeps raising our penchant for “analysis” while missing the “analytics.” It explains why we fall into the trap of “analysis-paralysis.” Our analyses don’t generate the desired outcome; worse, we don’t recognize our problem and instead celebrate our inaction. We like to pursue “feel-good” notions.

For example, why did we celebrate the manufacturing uptick when we know that we are a consumption-service economy? That 60% of our revenues come from services. A manufacturing uptick coming from 30% of the economy, i.e., industry, will not make an appreciable dent.

The evidence? Vietnam overtook us driven by one FDI initiative, Samsung Vietnam – to embarrass our top companies. Sadly, our caste system has taken away any sense of outrage from Juan de la Cruz. Translation: We can only sink more profound into the abyss.

Similarly, while 10 million Filipinos benefit from agriculture, it delivers only 10% of the economy. We cannot squeeze blood out of a stone. We must turn our thinking upside down – the 4 Cs to 21st-century skills: critical thinking, creative thinking, collaboration, communication.

The challenge is how do we then develop the “plot” and “elements” of the “story” – so that we can compose a beautiful story?

In the Theory of Change, we track or map backward from the desired outcome – to ensure that the elements will yield the “desired outcome.”

Recall the blog’s description of the 21st century: It presupposes innovation and global competitiveness. And the way to express that is “To differentiate PH and be head and shoulders above our neighbors.” The $200-billion puts us ahead of Malaysia. It is an intermediate goal – and will still have work to do because they are three times wealthier than we are per capita.

And given the three legs of the economy, we can drill that down to these incremental goals: Services, being 60% of the economy, can set a target of $120 billion; industry, $60 billion, and agriculture, $20 billion – being 10% of the economy.

As the blog pointed out several times, a $200-billion goal is more tangible than a 6%-7% GDP growth rate. Moreover, that global metric did not lift Juan de la Cruz from abject poverty despite a good 10-year run (2009-2019.)

And very important: The incremental $200 billion will help us prioritize the initiatives we want to pursue.

For example, can rice and coconut attain scale? What else is marketable globally? Note that we want an incremental $20 billion from agriculture.

We can’t prioritize if we don’t put a corresponding dollar figure to each.

Again, critical: Beyond the revenues we must generate, we must figure out the margins. We want healthy margins to ensure that the enterprise can give great returns up and down the food chain, including farmers.

That is why we must do our homework to define the portfolio of Philippine agribusiness.

Scale and technology drive productivity and efficiency – and thus margins. And they all come from investment.

What about the farmer? See above; we want to differentiate and be head and shoulders above our neighbors. That means the object is “To be a world-class agribusiness enterprise.”

Let’s hold it right there.

We can’t create a world-class agribusiness enterprise if we can’t move beyond binary thinking. Recall that in a prior posting, the blog pointed out that the farmer will be both a shareholder and employee of the enterprise. 

But note too that because we want to benchmark against Thailand, we want to double our land for rice production, for instance. That is how we pursue scale and produce enough for local consumption plus exports to boot.

The farmer’s equity will be his farm plus an equal value in the form of a “stock option,” for example. That means from the get-go, the farmer doubles his equity. Plus, he will operate the machinery required by the enterprise as an employee.

What is our most efficient quasi-government enterprise? Is it GSIS or SSS, or Land Bank? Whoever. The point is that we must figure out an enterprise that will tap the best of what the country can offer. There can even be private sector participation.

We want to differentiate and be head and shoulders above our neighbors. Translation: the enterprise will be better than the GSIS, SSS, or Land Bank.

It will be the yardstick of innovation and global competitiveness. For example, to ensure credibility, we will staff the board and management of the enterprise as we do the Supreme Court. It may not be perfect, but the appointment of justices to the Supreme Court is transparent and elicits acceptance from Juan de la Cruz.

The enterprise will tap the requisite investment, technology, and other non-human and human resources from wherever.

The object is to be a world-class agribusiness enterprise. The shareholder, i.e., the farmer, will get great returns, and the employee, too, i.e., the farmer, for operating the required machinery.

Think of Fortune 500 companies whose market values are rising while paying eye-popping salaries to their employees.

As the blog acknowledges, to turn our thinking upside down is easier said than done. That’s why we want to establish a North Star that we can rally against – “To traverse poverty to prosperity rapidly.”

Then we can do a similar exercise with services and industry.

And again, we need technology – and investment, mainly foreign because we don’t have them.

Question: How do we prioritize the FDIs we must attract? How do we then pursue them?

If they are in China, we need someone like Jon Canto of McKinsey.

Here’s a quote from a prior posting: “We can create a de facto group to brainstorm and craft how to traverse poverty to prosperity rapidly.”

“And the group will be as varied as can be – from the winningest basketball coach, Tim Cone, to Jon Canto of McKinsey, who proposes a radical, targeted design to attract FDIs from China to PH. Also, from IRRI to Arangkada to AmBisyon to someone like the late George Gorospe, SJ, whose treatise on “reality” reinforces the dynamism of this universe, among others. 

The whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

It will take a village to traverse poverty to prosperity rapidly.

Gising bayan!