Robert Delaunay is quoted as saying “I am very much afraid of definitions, and yet one is almost forced to make them. One must take care, too, not to be inhibited by them.” Agreed but lack of definition can lead to confusion and that is what is happening in social media as it enters a new phase!

Its already become too sophisticated and that phrase ‘social media’ is increasingly clouding some of the discussions and outcomes of policy decisions and solutions at the highest level in government and organisations. It also obscuring people’s understanding. We need to re define social media and bring a comprehensive discussion to the table. There will always be several definitions of phraseology, I just want to start the debate. Here are some thoughts:

The events of the last week across England should act as not just a warning to the parents of the children involved in such wanton vandalism, but every single one of us. The way in which we communicate has been turned upside down. We will need to get used to the idea that communication happens equally online as well as offline.

It is too early to tell, but once the analysis is complete, I hazard a guess that the reason the Met failed to be able to marshall and eventually stop the rioters was because the situation was moving quicker than they could even think never mind react. You can’t control something that changes quicker than you. They did not require riot vans but needed to understand the way in which these young people were mobilising themselves so that they could ‘head them off’ and restore order.

And there is the message for organisations, governments, individuals and small businesses, in fact, society as a whole.

And in this final instalment, the dilemma of today’s society is that it must continue for the interim to use possessive individualism whilst at the same time re position itself for the future where the current structure no longer provides the necessary conditions for survival and the growth of brands and organisations. An individual’s humanity and individualism more than ever, depends on her interconnectivity, relationships and connections with others delivered by social media, social connections, social networking and the web!

In the future, big organisations will not dictate the lives of small individuals. I suggest individualism is mutating. We must come to terms with these alterations that are hard to deny, still harder to make. Individualism has been one of the ingredients that has caused the problems of our society today. I’m not suggesting we revert away from individualism, on the contrary I believe we are becoming more individualistic. That will jolt company culture and have traditional leaders quivering:

What has been the impact of individualism? Contemporary theory faces the challenge that a market society persists but the conditions for extracting a common morality of values from a possessive individualist culture do not. Research indicates that there have been several impacts:

1. State regulation – possessive market relations (capitalism) have so penetrated society and individuals that extensive state intervention is required to protect society and humans from themselves.

2. Reliance – since we must eat, have a roof over our heads and live an existence, whoever can provide us with those things, gets our support. The power and control rests with those who own capital and assets.

3. Contradiction – the origins of individualism were around freedom from other men. Ironically it has led to the opposite in many cases. We struggle to think differently, organisations have similar offerings, we are comfortable buying the same things. What it has brought about is the conforming individual. Then brands complain when they cannot recruit someone dynamic.

4. ‘The Littlest Hobo’ – like the dog in the TV series, “one day I’ll settle down but until tomorrow, I’ll just keep moving on.” We have several generations where fluidity is the norm.

5. New individualism - signified by people designing their own biographies, creating several identities over their life time, individual expression, self actualisation and the ability and confidence to think different rather than comply with the norm, their parents so easily leant towards.

6. We have been busy creating selves rather than beings.

It started in 1782. England was in the throes of a major transformation from a feudal to a capitalist economy. Macpherson argues that this was what initiated a possessive individualist worldview. He quotes “The human essence is freedom from any relations other than those a man enters with a view to his own interest. The individual’s freedom is rightfully limited only by the requirements of others’ freedom. The individual is proprietor of his own person, for which he owes nothing to society.” It was the aftermath of a struggle between parliament, a civil war, republicanism, the monarchy and constitutional revolution and we, today, think we live in challenging and interesting times.