Dominator Vs Partner

June 23, 2003

In The Wealth Of Nations (1776), generally regarded as the foundation for contemporary economic thought, Adam Smith proposed an idea that was unfamiliar at the time. "The division of labour" is one of the most interesting concepts I have ever contemplated, and it obviously was to Smith, because he devoted much of his economic work to the development of this principle. He felt that the division of labor was crucial to economic growth.

Division Of Labor
Simply stated, markets were born when people started specializing in one craft or trade, and bartering with other craftsmen and tradesmen, rather than making, or hunting and gathering, all the things their families needed.

Ultimately, an interdependence evolved, and when life, and the marketplace, were simpler, no one took these relationships for granted: A wagonwright's product was a skid without the fruits of the labor of his neighbor, the wheelwright; furniture necessary for human convenience and comfort required the specialties of both the turner AND the joiner; and without the farmer, miller, and dairyman, the baker was nothing more than a man with a big oven.

The division of labor has facilitated a natural human tendency: the continuous quest for opportunity and efficiency. This quest has resulted in developments that not only created new innovations and improved goods and services, but also increased their availability and flow between markets and countries.

Interdependence Lost
Unfortunately, over time, the division of labor has been so successful that one of its most valuable intrinsic elements, the spirit of interdependence, may have been lost.

But interdependence didn't just evaporate; it was pushed out by competition, a principle as old as creation's second organism. Wise businesspeople know that competition is the active ingredient the marketplace uses to clean itself and operate efficiently. But is it possible to go too far? To be so invested in the competitive spirit that instead of finding opportunities, we lose them? I think so -- at least for small business owners.

More Like A Wheelwright Than AT&T
We have to be careful with our attitude toward competition. We must realize that, even though it's the 21^st century, as small businesses we are more like a 15th-century wagonwright or baker, than we are like GM, P&G, or AT&T.

It's easy to see how entrepreneurs can miss this distinction. Through tenures with major corporations, many of us grew up in the marketplace being imprinted with the doctrine of fighting with, and overcoming, the competition. The Dominator Model is an old practice, and businesses have learned it from monarchs and politicians.

While the division of labor was being perfected by craftsmen and tradesmen, thus creating markets, innovations, and wealth, nations were perfecting The Dominator Model to "acquire" the markets, innovations, and wealth of other nations. As the organizations that craftsmen and tradesmen created became larger, they behaved more like nations, which is to say, with more domination and acquisition, and less with a spirit of interdependence, my term for what is called the Partner Model.

The Two Lenses
Riane Eisler, the author of Breaking Free, says we can choose to view our lives through the lenses of the Dominator or the Partner Model. But she proposes that The Partner Model is the most desirable, and that we should try to break free from the Dominator Model.

This is a watershed proposal that small business owners should take to heart. When you look at your market neighbors only as competitors, even enemies, you are viewing them through the Dominator lens, and opportunities between you and them are limited. But when you look at them in the spirit of interdependence, you're using the Partnership lens, and opportunities to leverage what you both have to offer are virtually limitless.

Don't misunderstand me. I not only appreciate the value competition delivers to the marketplace, I enjoy participating. But since small business owners typically don't have the critical mass to be dominant, we must learn how to be competitive in a number of ways.

Remember this: Thinking like a partner instead of like a dominator is not new age, touchy-feely psychobabble. For small businesses, it's our heritage. With its origins in the division of labor, the Partner Model is older than every big company, and every existing nation, and political system.

Choosing Your Lenses
Eisler asks us to examine which model we operate with, Dominator or Partner, and encourages us to seek the Partnership Model in every part of our lives. Here is a partial list of areas Eisler says we should work on, followed by my comments:

Our relationship with ourselves
Advocate, heal thyself! Alas, I am a dominator with myself. It is part of my quest for excellence. Like competition, pushing ourselves can be good. But also like competition, it can be harmful if the only lens through which we view ourselves is the critical, dominator lens. Let's push ourselves, but let's also be sure to value ourselves and celebrate the progress we make.

Our intimate relationships, including family and friends
I really believe that without love, we have nothing. Our families love us because we are family. Our friends have chosen to love us. Let's not cause them to love us in spite of ourselves. Eisler says partnering is more fun than dominating. And this is no truer than in our relationships with those who love us.

Our community relationships
Success in a community is more about service than anything else. Service is a euphemism for partnership and has little if any connection to dominating. If you want to serve your community successfully, create partnerships.

Our national relationships
The cold war is over. It's true that there are still nations out there practicing the Dominator Model, but long after they are gone, the division of labor will prevail between the people of those countries and their global neighbors. The good news is that today there are new trade agreements being negotiated between countries around the globe.

The 19^th century free trade advocate, Frederic Bastiat, said, "When goods cross borders, armies don't." The 21^st century will be the beneficiary of a peace dividend arising from the free-flow of goods, services, and communication between individuals who are building markets and creating opportunity and wealth. Free trade, enhanced by advances in technology and electronic communication, will do more to devalue the currency of the Dominator Model in politics than anything else in history.

Dominate With Partners
We must compete to survive in the marketplace, but that doesn't mean we have to view our world through the dominator lens. Small businesses have a greater ability to partner than to dominate. Looking around, we not only can see positive philosophical reasons to make our default attitude one of partnering, but a number of market forces point to the same conclusion, such as working capital limitations and small employee numbers.

For thousands of years, the division of labor has worked and benefited humanity because people depended on one another. Small business owners should embrace the benefits of this spirit of interdependence. Find ways to be a successful competitor by looking at the world with the spirit of interdependence and through the lens of the Partner Model.

Perhaps Adam Smith was reading Bernard de Mandeville's poem, Fable Of The Bees (part II, 1729) when he contemplated "the division of labour" in 1776. Here is de Mandeville's passage that applies:

...when once they enjoy quiet, and no man needs to fear his neighbour, will be long without learning to divide and subdivide their labour.

Write this on a rock... We live in an exciting time in history, but the future will be more fun for partners than for dominators.