Steward Ownership

Take ownership, not possession

My (bad) experiences with shares and property
A few years back the company I worked for found itself in acute financial problems. Therefore, being the commercial director, I had taken the initiative to approach a related foreign company: to first save us and then continue to work together. That investing company ended up acquiring 80 per cent of the shares. The other 20 per cent remained in the hands of the founder. 

The following years, the investing company pushed us in a corner in which we found ourselves serving only the interests of that company. I knew this could lead to the bankruptcy of our ‘own’ company, which was no longer busy taking care of her own intentions. I struggled with the question: ‘How am I going to develop sustainable relations with customers, if I am no longer certain whether this company can operate properly? After three years of waving the red flag during management meetings, I knew for sure: our company would go bankrupt.

I found it unbelievable and unbearable. Almost all thousand stakeholders of the company wanted to take a left, but somebody far away across the border decided we would go right. And he was in his right, since he had the majority of the shares. Yet, his choice did not serve the interests of all the other stakeholders.

I prepared a restart and thought: ‘I have to include all the stakeholders with a future company to make sure it could keep with her own mission. My thoughts went to a form of co-ownership. But, how would I divide the property of the future company? What was fair? Customers 10 per cent? Employees 30? Why not the other way around? Maybe 20-20? And then still include the old shareholders for 20? An investor for 40? But, what if he asked for more? And what if the pool of employees would grow, how could I enlarge the cake to organise that? I could not figure it out.

That is show the world works
During my search to other proportions, both in terms of organisation and ownership, I came to talk with Koos Bakker, co-founder of Odin (a biological wholesaler with supermarkets) I put my question to him: ‘How do I fairly distribute the ownership among all the shareholders? He answer was: ‘If the company would own itself for a hundred per cent, would your problem then be solved?’ I was shocked. What did he actually say? How would I include the stakeholders? He said: ‘You can still include them, but you do that on a basis of their needs. Shortly: you don’t have to express involvement in possession of ownership!’

I walked around flabbergasted for a few days. Throught my talk with Koos, I suddenly realized the false needs were ‘fixed’ in ownership constructs and possession, and which potentials lied in this new way of thinking!

When I told him the company should become its own, he took me for a fool.

Meanwhile I was ready with my restart plan. It was clear that nobody was going to be the owner of the company. I had a chat with the major shareholder. I did not want to exclude him, rather include them in the future activities. When I told him the company should become its own, he took me for a fool. After twelve years of employment, spending blood, sweat and tears for this fantastic company, we both had to conclude my time to leave had come.
Despite the sadness of the departure, my enthusiasm for this new form of ownership was growing as days passed by. This turning around of ownership possibly meant the foundation of a new society! Namely, we are not speaking of political left wing (where financially powerful market players are the owners), neither political centre (where compromises are sought for -  the so-called Rijnland or stakeholdermodel)
It is, actually, the transformation of the capital ownership. I was wild with the idea, but questions were still raising. The most important ones where: ‘How does nobody knows about this? And why did I not heard of this before? It was the start of my further search.

Entrepreneurship is ownership
In october 2018 Koos pointed me to the ownership conference of Purpose Economy in Berlin. This is a German initiative that wants to rethink ownership and make it visible and known. On the website, one could read ‘entrepreneurship = ownership’ and ‘profit serves purpose’, relating to the two principles for a new formula for ownership:

1 – Profit is a means. It serves the ‘purpose’ or the meaning of the company (hence the name Purpose Economy, or betekeniseconomie). It means, for example, that infinite revenues can never be payed out, because it would mean that this part of the revenue would be serving the stakeholders, rather than the company. It also implies that enterprises are no longer commodities: they exist to serve their own intentions. Thus, selling an enterprise is not the point, unless it really serves its purpose.

2 – The company is a self-managing entity. The entrepreneurs or managers spinning their heads around that purpose on a daily basis, do also have the right of say in that company. This means that eventual investors can neither buy a say, nor speculate on the tradability of the company. This form of ownership was then called ‘purpose-owned’, ‘self-owned’ or ‘steward-owned.

Examples of companies standing in the light field on the Purpose Economy conference were Bosch, Carl Zeiss and Ecosia. In all these companies, the major part of the ownership is organized in such a way that the respective companies are developing along the lines of their own mission. 92 per cent of Bosch (indeed, Bosch of the washing and drilling machines) is owned by a foundation. This foundation leaves that money to work its way into society. The other 8 per cent is still in the hands of the founding family. 

On purpose Economy in Germany
Purpose Economy materialized in four different organisations:

1 – A non-profit organisation, focussing on the disclosure of this form of ownership (also named ‘steward-ownership’) while also cranking up research, putting the topic on the political agenda and organizing meetings.

2 – An investing fund, that has been opened with tens of millions by Purpose, so to strengthen this new way of thinking and make it accessible for starting enterprises. In this fund, multiple investors united themselves, without demanding a say or steering towards infinite revenues. 

3 – A golden-share foundation, that remains servant to a form of steward-ownership and to which enterprises can give a veto. This veto strictly serves to prevent a company (or shares of it) from being sold. The real board lies in the hands of the Council of Affiliates.

4 -  A steward-owned advising company, advising about steward-ownership forms. Here, entrepreneurs wanting the same for their company are being guided.

One of the milestones of this non-profit organisation is that the government is developing a new legislation, fitting the earlier mentioned principles. This legislation is a kind of BV, only with ‘tied’ capital. Therefore, entrepreneurs cannot extract entrepreneurial value for their own gain. Additionally, Purpose brought about a turnaround in the normalising of shareholders value in the jurisdiction. 

Ownership is collaborating
Let’s go back to Koos Bakker, co-founder of Odin. Koos once founded, with excess money that he more or less accidentally had access to, the Stichting Sleipnir. For those loving Norwegian Mythology: Sleipnir is the eight-legged horse of the Norwegian God Odin). This foundation functions as a joint owner and financer for entrepreneurs, without their companies becoming privately owned. Sleipner’s capital is at disposal for all joining companies. It is exchanged and allocated by mutual agreement. It is a mini society with now tens of companies, but also organisations in need for capital, such as state-free schools.

Looking from the principles of Purpose, I detect the following with Sleipnir:

1 – Not only profit, but also capital in a broader sense is a means, servant to its own meaning as well as the society. Sleipnir is, thus, from itself a social fabric, because the capital is a social resource facilitating the working together of a group of companies.

2 -  Self-governance: The free initiativetakership or entrepreneurship is being encouraged: many of the companies do no longer work with employments, rather with co-entrepreneurs. This makes that everybody bears responsibility for the success of both the company’s purpose and the financial health. 

Sleipnir in The Netherlands
Stichting Sleipnir, founded in 1983, is owner and financer of a small thirty companies. How does that actually work? You can transfer the ownership of your enterprise to Sleipnir, that then becomes owner and silent shareholder in your company. The administering entrepreneur is himself completely free of entrepreneurship. Every year, the company pays off a percentage of the issued capital to the Stichting. A surplus of profit will also have to be contributed to Sleipnir. Every joining company takes place in the Constitute of Companies. Whenever a company is in need for capital or capacities, it can be dealt with in proper consultation. 
In 2018, the Sleipnir Cooperation has been founded. Its members can experience Sleipnir and practice to collaborate. The cooperation has, for example, a liquidity fund, wherein members can deposit money and make use of it, too. The cooperation serves as a bridge to the foundation. After several years, a member will be invited to join the foundation.
Sleipnir enterprises call their activities ‘neutralized enterprising’, referring to the capital being neutralized and their entrepreneurship therefore being free. Meanwhile, I count thirty joining enterprises, among which are De Beeldhouwwinkel, The Shore, de Boomhuttenclub, Tierrafino, het Rozetuintje and de Bijzondere Tafel. 

All crossover ties of ownership
By 2019, the company I had left had actually gone bankrupt. I had decided to figure out whether I could do something with that ownership as independent professional. Finally, in 2020, I organized the Eigendomsconferentie for Sleipnir. 
The Eigendomsconferentie took place two days before the lockdown, included 8 workshops and welcomed 150 attendees. Roughly 10 of the attending companies ended up taking a next step regarding their ownership organisation. Afterwards, the foundation We Are Stewards has grown active in The Netherlands, among other things coining the concept steward-ownership on the big media channels.

Threefold ownership
The lockdown, following directly after the conference, gave me time to dive deeper in this fascinating topic. Searching for answers, I stumbled upon Economy Transformers, who did research to ownership relations back in 2019. In 2020, Economy Transfers published an inspiring document which reads that ownership should actually by of the creative entrepreneurs, the society or itself -at the same time! This is the so-called ‘threefold’ ownership. The research pertained to ownership of land, but could be extended to ownership of companies. With the threefold ownership, Economy Transfer sketches the lines of this potential new society: de vrij-gelijk-samenleving. You can link ‘vrij’ to the freedom of creative ownership and ‘gelijk’ to the thing that emerges when you make capital its own (and in this way invites initiative taking). The form Sleipnir takes is organized following the same line of thinking, as a matter of fact.

Ownership Different
At the end of 2021, I was called by the Iona Stichting. The management, together with the Donor Impact Invest Fund, wanted to raise attention for different ideas around ownership. A very broad topic, with which they had no experience themselves. I asked big questions: ‘Who is the owner of this idea?’ Do we not need to practice with the meaning of a company or initiative being of its own?’ It would not be right to create a stage while we ourselves lack the understanding of the content. We started the search for this understanding with a lager group of people who are in one way or another involved with the topic. We described clearly the purpose, the intention of Eigendom Anders, and sort of made it the owner of Eigendom Anders. This way, Eigendom Anders is of itself, for and by participants and contributors. There are people offering capital or capacities, and there are participants who just buy a ticket. Nobody throws their individual terms in the mix. When a surplus arises, the group can be consulted on what could be done with it, what would fit the intention of Eigendom Anders. I call myself the active intention-custodian (and there are more!) and I am also process keeper. Everyone with an initiative or suggestion is welcome to claim ownership over it, as long as it suits the purpose of Eigendom Anders.

On the 6th of October 2022, the first edition of Eigendom Anders Festival had place in Common Grounds in Amersfoort, counting 8 rounds of dialogues and workshops and 90 participants. On the 22d of may 2023, the second edition was held at Zwier, in Vinkeveen, this time including 24 workshops and welcoming a small 200 participants.

So how do I look at these forms of ownership myself?
In those five years of fulltime (re)searching, I have drawn two conclusions.

1 – You need the creative ownership (the entrepreneurship) as well as the purpose (the true intentions and meanings) to develop a suitable form of ownership. Namely,  the only goal of the ownership is to serve this very same purpose. Now I understand why Purpose Economy uses the word purpose in her work. This creative ownership is a whole task in itself! Many entrepreneurs immediately want to develop from the idea of doing it together with more people, after which some end up in a situation in which the idea changes into something different than the original. So, in the beginning, take ownership, not possession!
In the beginning of my quest I was thinking: ‘We need a lot of money for cool companies to create that new society.’ However, that was a misconception. We mainly need courageous, creative owners, foregrounding clear intentions and principles. It never starts with money, it starts with creative ownership. After that, money comes in as a means.

After five years, I can say that I transformed my own relation to money and possession completely. I feel more free and rich than ever before.

2 – Research the society you long for, and see whether money can be a guiding factor or may lead to inequality. I myself now look to money as a means and I embrace human structures encouraging enterprising and collaborating from a simple legal foundation. In this way of working lies a new society; the vrij-gelijk-samenleving, following the words of Economy Transformers.
After five years, I can say that I transformed my own relation to money and possession completely. I feel more free and rich than ever before. I see myself as an expert by experience and a practical researcher around subjects of possession and ownership. Since a few years, I make the true intentions of enterprising and collaborating experiential and I guide others to practical forms of ownership. I do this as a shareholder of Economy Transformers.
If this topic interests you: feel most welcome in a community of pioneers. And, who knows, I meet you sometime at Economy Transformers or at the next Eigendom Anders festival!