I suggested in earlier posts that anything that you manifest, that you make real, has gone through a light-verb-noun process. Like I did with resources and value, we now want to see if you get to a different understanding of what you have learned about organizing, if you start from the light versus starting from the noun. As I showed before, if you start from the light, you start with abundance and choose for what is manifested here and how. If you start from the noun, you end up walled into starting with an assumption of scarcity, which will not allow you to get very far. Now I will develop that understanding step by step.
Starting with the possibility-light level of organizing, from the level of infinite abundance, the why question focuses on choosing the highest level of harmonic vibrancy available. You saw in the earlier chapters that people seek greater harmonic vibrancy. When it is greater around you, you feel better. You feel greater abundance in all dimensions of your experience. And, when there is less harmonic vibrancy around you, you feel worse. You experience greater scarcity. The data that I will share in Part 3 shows that many groups around the world are finding sustainable ways to live out of greater harmonic vibrancy. The secret they are finding is to make the harmonic vibrancy the why of their work. And they find that, along the way, they are able to experience greater abundance in all factors of their life. They say that they listen for the harmonic vibrancy, and the how and the what become relatively straightforward. This is the same experience musicians share.
The how of organizing at the light level makes explicit the potential available to the individuals and the group in their interactions, strengthening the harmonic vibrancy experienced in each relationship (self, other, group, nature, spirit). You use a term for this in your daily life, collaboration. Collaboration is working in relationship to a greater why.
The what of light-level organizing is a set of incentives and structures that simultaneously address the group and individual perspectives of outcome/motivation and function/task. The “inspirited” organization focuses on the growth of the harmonic vibrancy common to the group, as people experience it in the different relationships. This seemingly simple focus wallops a huge punch. It builds in structures of growth, stability, and health for all five relationships (self, other, group, nature, spirit) with everyone that engages with the group. These are critical processes defining the systems of political economy today that determine the organizing forms you use.
There are significant costs to not organizing at the light level. The lack of focus on harmonic vibrancy makes it harder to find those people most attracted to and able to contribute to the higher light in harmonic vibrancy. This translates into the inability to attract high potential people to the group. The best people attract the best relationships, so without them it is hard to attract high potential relationships. Without the possibility-light-level of organizing, there is little time, energy, and space for emerging possibilities – people are too busy getting the work of today done. This makes it difficult to find deeply inspiring innovations. Even though the opportunities for constant and deep learning are always present, they are impossible to see without a focus on the light level. Without high potential people, relationships, and innovations, it is hard to maintain immanence and thus sustainability becomes ever more difficult. Another huge cost from not organizing at the light level is the misalignment of people’s motivations and the group’s organizing principle. As I just suggested, the inspirited organization focuses on the growth of the harmonic vibrancy common to the group, as people experience it in the five primary relationships. Without the possibility-light level of organizing, the inspirited organization becomes focused on specific processes and charters that cause many of the maladies you experience every day. The next post, on the development-verb level of organizing, explores this. These represent a very significant cost for most groups; costs which are easily avoidable and which many groups have figured out how to avoid. They avoid these costs, not by working on minimizing them, rather by designing them out from the onset – the possibility-light level of organizing.
 Historian of economic thought Alessandro Roncaglia documents that, “Let us recall that ‘political economy’ is the term by which economic science was commonly designated, until Marshall shifted to the now dominant term ‘economics’; in contemporary economic literature, the term ‘political economy’ has been revived by those streams of research (such as the Marxists, the post-Keynesians, the Sraffians or neo-Ricardians) which lay stress on the social nature of economic activity” (Roncaglia, 2006, p. 53). He is referring to Alfred Marshall (1842-1924), the very influential economics professor at University of Cambridge.