A Global Guild must aim to cause the bare minimum of disruption, even if the ‘bare minimum’ is sometimes substantial. The point is that at the global level of complex interconnectivity, any intervention whatsoever inevitably causes unintended consequences. So, all proposed changes should be as focused as possible – rifle-shots rather than scatter-gun approaches.
After all, in terms of world governance the Global Guilds are supposed to be a process of last-resort. And anyway, it is generally good practice in a complex environment that issues should be resolved as locally as possible, which is a long-standing ‘Principle of Subsidiarity’ that has successfully been adopted in communities ranging from multinationals to governments to the Roman Catholic Church. Moreover, a Global Guild has little direct power of its own, only the opportunity of influence within member corporations and via the public. That means, once again, the Global Guilds’ involvement should be as minimal as is needed to manage the risks of global backlashes to its members.