entities 
entities
BOP terminology
I’m curious what people think about the term, “Bottom of the Pyramid.” It’s descriptive and understandable, but implies a terrifically OECD-centric worldview. Is “Base of the Pyramid” any b
etter? Is there another phrase out there being used that people find to be as sticky and functional?
Trackback
December 31st, 2006 um 5:05 pm
Sara:
I don’t think “Bottom of the Pyramid” or “BOP” is a productive metaphor.
The resonance with “Balance of Payments” (BOP) in international accounts is not helpful.
I’d rather coin “Balance/ing of Values” (BOV) as the acronym.
In my experience the family, social and agricultural values of those populating the “bottom of the pyramid”, left in their own voices to broadcast those values person-to-person, are often more immediate and compelling than others at the ToP.
Instead of height metaphors (pyramids), let’s form holistic ones.
December 31st, 2006 um 5:41 pm
I like the principle you’re describing.
January 1st, 2007 um 8:08 pm
i wonder if something that has bop would work. i like your ideas, bruce
January 2nd, 2007 um 7:38 am
on the other hand, bop has been effective in getting big corporates to look down … and think about building things for the people there.. focusing on them… it just doesn’t work when you think about it from the view at the bottom
January 2nd, 2007 um 8:56 am
The Pharoahs “pyramids” were built by slave labor.
I would rather aim at productive, positive messenging in the social capital markets.
I’ve used sustainable resiliency(TM), and the Means Meter(TM) as such imagery. Both easily get the b=point across of “what can I do?”
Kevin, let’s work up a posting for me and my work on Xigi.
I think the physics of what’s to be done to achive sustainability is scalar/molar, and starts with the individual’s choice.
January 2nd, 2007 um 10:52 am
Bruce maybe you can blog about your ideas on this? I agree with you. Wondering how you create new nomenclature that gets used and replicated. Easier at inception. More difficult when seeking to replace existing nomenclature that has proliferated, but not impossible.
January 17th, 2007 um 12:17 pm
I think the term “Bottom of the Pyramid” is a useful term, just not in the context of this website. In fact, I think organizations need more flexibility in classifying themselves. BoP, for example, could be split into Food-aid, Refugee-aid, Disaster-aid, etc.
I believe increased specificity will improve the usefulness of xigi by providing viewers with more information. I imagine investors might be overwhelmed by the morass of BoP organizations that will eventually have profiles on this site.
April 6th, 2007 um 5:20 pm
I have been torn on this in presentations and have settled for using BoP and base of the pyramid, though it is semantics the connotations of base of the pyramid seem to better reflect the core values of my constituency, solid, rooted, hard working true foundations for their communities. Also for me “base” holds a far more egalitarian value as I use it to refer to our supporters and donors as well as our constituents.
April 6th, 2007 um 5:34 pm
I was talking to rob katz of wri yesterday and he said they along with most think tanks and academics have moved to base, but unfortuately the best seller in the field, prahalad’s book, uses bottom. katz said most journalists use bottom for their first story and by their second story have moved to base.
April 7th, 2007 um 11:05 am
I agree base is preferable to bottom, although they’re definitely shades of the same color. What do people who are among the “base of the pyramid” say? Does the concept serve any useful purpose for them? Can any folks with this perspective or who’ve talked recently with people in this proverbial “base” chime in?