My Photo

May 2010

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          

Search this Blog


  • Society for New Communications Research


Hub Headlines

« PR's Siege Mentality and the Vulnerable Corporation | Main | You're Invited to Our Upcoming Gala »

February 02, 2006


David Phillips

Sorry to take so long to respond.
My take on Marxism challenges his theory that society includes various classes and institutional forms (organisations) which develop on the basis of relationships that are not just a mode of production. It has the codicil that that relationships with the means of production form the base and that other groups form the superstructures. This is challenged in the Relationship Value Model because it posits that production, that is the process for changing value, is between actors' interaction through networks to create convergence in value. Actors belong to many organisations (some formal and some informal) which also have changing values. In the Model, society is based on many interdependent centres of material interest (organisations) that concurrently change and morph. The base, if there is one, is that actors' knowledge (or interest in knowledge), environment and networks are the lubricant of value to form capital. This means that actors may be involved in creating much more value away from 'the means of production'.

I have a short essay at:

The concept of capital, to my view is that it is only as good as the relationships that sustain it.

Thus, Stonehenge was once a a great capital asset but 4000 years later we do not understand its value and thus as an asset it is of liitle value compared to the value it had when it was built.

Put another way. Capital and assets only survive when it is supported by public relations... Now there is a challenging idea.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter
    AddThis Social Bookmark Button
    Blog powered by Typepad