“Bail without trust vs. confidence without bail: The mess 3.0”

HERE IS FIA

HERE IS FIA

Fiar comes from the Latin fidāre (by fidĕre) and the RAE understands it as ” assuring that another will fulfill what he promises or will pay what he owes, obligating himself, in case he does not do so, to satisfy for it “. This implies that we have traditionally been able to:
(1) ” Insure ” with guarantees, insurance, reinsurance, solvency certifications and the participation of financial intermediaries and various guarantors.
(2) ” that another will fulfill what it promises ” through the systems of guarantees and guarantees legally recognized (involving notaries, Public Treasury, registries, financial entities, public administrations, agencies, etc).
(3) ” or will pay what you owe ” through a system of banking, legal, fiscal, administrative and / or media penalties. Our legal system makes it very clear which are the possible infractions to a norm and our philosophy is that whoever does it, pays for it.
(4) ” obligating itself, in case it does not do so ” with the fear always over that a breach will be punished by financial entities, public administrations and / or organizations that seek to sanction harmful citizens or companies.
(5) ” to satisfy for it ” through the system of fines and corresponding surcharges, with public lists of offenders and defaulters, if they are not able to satisfy the commitment acquired.
We have generated a punitive regulatory system that regulates the provision of services, but this has not generated confidence in the public or in the system. Fiamos confidence in the guarantees and far from achieving a more reliable company, we have achieved the opposite. Now citizens feel less empathy towards a system based on the strong principles of ” bail ” and do not feel much confidence before the guarantee. In Spain, in fact, we think that “brands lie, lack values ​​and do not contribute to a better world”. Despite all the guarantees.

THERE IS TRUSTED

THERE IS TRUSTED

Trust comes from the Latin confidāre (by confidĕre ) and the RAE develops it as ” deposit in someone, with no other security than good faith and the opinion that he has, the hacienda, the secret or anything else .” This implies that we could now:
(1) ” Deposit in someone, ” not in anyone, but in someone who is a member of your peer community and has a digital reputation. You want your driver to be a member of Blablacar, whom you recognize as your equal.
(2) ” without more security than good faith “, since there is no guarantee of any kind. Of any kind. Zero. Collaborative schemes work only with trust, which is an emotion that does not require official certificates. There are unknowns of the economic function of the demand that we do not know how to legally combine and can not value economically. Empathy emerges in the business world as a new generating lever of millions of dollars and interactions.
(3) ” and the opinion that it has ” through the system of digital reputation and absolute transparency of the members of a virtual community with each other, who function as a globally interconnected brain 24/7. The new system rewards excellent citizens and relegates those who are not trustworthy to oblivion.
(4) ” the hacienda ” through a system of platforms that put people in contact who want to share their things. They open their homes on HomeAway, they sell in Wallapop, they cook their best dishes in Eatwith, they learn with other members of the community in Tutellus or Milingual and they viralize content in social networks. This happens because it is requested by a demand that is willing to pay for it, which is exactly what it wants: the human touch that the industry denies it.
(5) ” the secret or any other thing ” or the so-called experience , which does not try to offer something incredible, but those things that we all ask: be calm, feel free, know what we pay, not feel isolated or manipulated and believe that no we have doubts. In the Peer-to-Peer, that is ” the experience ” and many people can offer it, but few companies.
Online communities operate under a self-regulatory scheme that encourages transactions based on trust, empathy and digital reputation. Our current dynamics in Spain are trying to restrict these initiatives normatively, fitting demand phenomena into normative frameworks of supply.

HERE IS A LINE 3.0

HERE IS A LINE 3.0

Things are changing and not knowing how to identify the occasion in time can generate significant risks. The huge Blockbuster, Kodak and Nokia did not understand the digital transformation and (almost) have disappeared. In a lustrum those marks will sound as historic as the Great Depression of 1929. However, Uber, BlaBlacar and Google have known how to understand the digital transformation and they have appeared, but we first banned them (and then let them survive with droppers), second we prosecute him every two times and at the last we invite him to leave, because our laws do not understand his language.
To clarify a bit the mess, the Catalan Competition Authority has just published a report called ” Transactions between equals (P2P). A step forward “(May 2016) in which it places the peers as the center of the new paradigm, but raises the need to undertake normative challenges, if or if, in Spain, in line with the preliminary conclusions of the CNMC in this regard.
Our system is being configured with two actors that have a different understanding of the economy:

  • On the one hand, the economy of companies (Business-to-Consumer), which promotes the guarantee and guarantee system, is developed under a complex regulatory framework, needs an enormous administrative machinery and is in crisis. Understands the economy from the offer.
  • On the other, the economy of citizens (Peer-to-Peer), which fosters a system of trust, needs a simple administrative machinery, is developed under a simple self-regulatory framework and is expanding. Understands the economy from the demand.

The schemes that work under the “business economy” of those that work under the “economy of citizens” are already clearly differentiated. However, we prefer to grant the same normative treatment to both surety and trust, knowing that they follow different dynamics. Keep putting the new digital demand schemes in the same analogue bag of life offer does not seem very sensible.

What will we do before the next regulatory challenges? Where do we leave space for the new producer citizen?

You Might Also Like