In our last post, we discussed the restructuring of the Empire of Australia Company taking into account post-Marxist criticisms of capitalist structures. We began to propose specifics of this restructuring including the creation of two new share classes:
- Collective Shareholder
- Creative Shareholder
Barely was the metaphorical ink on our post dry then we began to receive input from some of our collaborators around the Creative Shareholder piece.
The lions-share of the criticism came down to the egalitarian nature of the distribution of Creative Shares. The idea that ANY work on the Empire Universe should be valued the same as ANY other work rankled.
For example, let’s take two imaginary creative collaborators to our project: Amy and Agnes. Amy writes one article for the Canon and calls her contribution for the year done. Because of our proposed structure, she would skate by and receive the same right to vote and profit as Agnes. Meanwhile, Agnes wrote three episodes of our future HBO series, edited two more, and wrote 50 Canon articles. Agnes is quite the powerhouse and Amy is a slacker. Why should they receive equal remuneration?
An excellent criticism.
It was proposed that instead, we offer two annual evaluation periods for contributions to the Empire Universe. Every collaborator would offer their own assessment of how much each collaborator contributed to the project. Their contribution would be evaluated according to three criteria:
By adding these two elements, we add a dimensionality to the creative shareholder aspect that I believe answers the criticism of our collaborators.
We’ll continue to ponder this over as we overhaul the company’s complete governance structure to create something equitable, sustainable, and profitable.