data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/afb8e/afb8ef79296697e51b5bbda57572a580013d2b79" alt=""
Well, no, not according to reality.
“Should we escalate in Afghanistan? I have three answers: Yes. No. Maybe.
Yes
September 11 has taught us that an unstable Afghanistan is a direct threat to the American people. That’s what makes this so different from Vietnam. Leaving the country will afford Al-Qaeda the same terrorist haven they enjoyed on September 10... and this time without as much resistance from a Northern Alliance.
No
Victory depends on commitment, and you don’t have it from the American people. Not even from your own Vice President. Americans want jobs, not increasing bloodshed abroad. Escalation without commitment will lead to another Vietnam.
Maybe
The Afghan people will support that group which cares for their children. Currently, they’re supporting the Taliban, but mostly out of fear. If we helped the Afghans build a sustainable country that was safer and more prosperous for their children, the Taliban wouldn’t have a chance.
The Afghan government is corrupt. We can build schools and train laborers, but buildings and skills will be gone or devalued once we leave, unless the Afghan government is there to support them. It’s unclear whether they have the will, or even the capability, to do that.
Pakistan is unstable; it’s also a crucial partner for success in Afghanistan. If they continue to assist the Afghan Taliban as a way to counterbalance India’s influence, or if a coup replaces the current regime with a much more hostile one, then we’ll have no chance of containing the Taliban along the porous Afghanistan-Pakistan border. Pakistan could be our biggest wild card. Their support is and will be paramount.Leadership and Decision-making
The considerations are many, related, and complex. Regardless of what you decide, make sure you:
- Have a vision of where you want to go
- Lay out a strategy on how to get there
- Develop specific actions to implement the strategy
And underscore these things with an understanding of not just policy but also of people.
Some of the most difficult decisions I ever made as president were not necessarily the least popular – the unpopular decisions were sometimes easy because I knew what the right answer was – no, the difficult decisions were the ones for which I couldn’t know the right answer… those 10% of presidential decisions that can’t come from policy reports or staff recommendations, but rather must come from intuition. You have to listen and feel your way to the answer. If that happens, the best you can do is level with the people and say that if you’re not right you’ll change.
A great leader is a great decision-maker. You have one hell of a decision to make.”
Bill Clinton gave us a treat at this year's World Business Forum: his framework of the world.
Unlike other speakers at this year’s Forum, Clinton did not use a teleprompter or projected slides. And his paper notes? Apparently just for show – he rarely looked at them. This was the stuff of Bill Clinton legend – speaking off-the-cuff about complex issues in understandable terms. Unfortunately, Clinton fell short of legend this time inside Radio City Music Hall in New York; he meandered and had difficulty staying on point. But his content – why we should care about AIDS in Africa, bombings in the Middle East, and climate change – was no less compelling.
Clinton’s worldview starts with the premise of globalization – although he prefers to use the word “interdependence.” While Clinton rejects the idea that interdependence leads to peace and security outright (See The Complete Idiot's Guide to World War I), he believes it’s possible, if we address three persistent global challenges: inequality, instability, and unsustainability.
Challenge #1: Inequality. “The world is too unequal.” One billion people live on less than $1/day; Half the world population lives on less than $2/day. While people in the developed world live a long time, a quarter of the world still dies from either AIDS, malaria, or bad water (80% of them are children aged five or younger). If global warming proceeds at its current rate, water will become even more scarce, and the developing worlds’ problems aggravated.
“We can be made more secure by eliminating inequality,” Clinton said, citing “10-20 countries in eastern and southern Africa… many of them Muslim… who love the US.” This, at a time when the US has lost significant credibility elsewhere in the world. In these countries, many of which Clinton has visited, nobody has been thinking about Al Qaeda. Why? Because “we have cared whether their kids live or die.”
The lesson is simple and powerful. Focus on the basics and see positive results. In this case, the more we care, the more secure we are.
Challenge #2: Instability. “The world is too unstable.” What seems real one day is gone the next – money, health, security.
In cases, small and large, that span the globe, wealth has diminished like at no other time and to such a degree, since the Great Depression. A local police station in England had to fold because their pension investments in Iceland vanished in the country’s bankruptcy. China, in a short period of time, went from having plenty of cash ($2 trillion in reserves) to not enough (post-crisis they “had nobody to sell to”).
In a more interdependent world, a virus in one part of the world can cause more than just isolated deaths, but also widespread panic and disruption. Swine flu has wreaked havoc in both real and perceived terms. It’s closed down school districts in the US, halted the tourism industry in Mexico, and taken the lives of many. The world is, for lack of a better term, freaking out about it. And with every new report of another well-known person contracting it (e.g., President of Costa Rica and Colombia, Tony Blair’s wife, Harry Smith of the CBS Early Show, Landon Donovan of the US National soccer team), the threat feels more real and the worry continues to worsen.
Terrorist organizations remain a major destabilizing force internationally. Post-9/11, they have managed to hit Madrid, London, Bali, and Bombay, not to mention the countless spots in the war-torn regions of the Middle East and Central Asia. At the same time, as counterintuitive as it seems, “we’re more secure because everyone’s working together.” Without collaboration in the intelligence and law-enforcement communities – that is, positive interdependence – several calamities might have occurred: Al-Qaeda in the Balkans, the millennium attack out of LAX, hi-jacked plane(s) from Indonesia to the US, Holland and Lincoln tunnel bombs in New York.
Across the various sources of global instability, the way to address it is the same. The more vigilant and cooperative we are, the more secure we become.
Challenge #3: Unsustainability. “The world is too unsustainable” because of climate change. 95% of “serious scientists” believe that if we don’t cut CO2 or methane, then temperatures will increase, oceans will rise, and 100 million people in coastal regions will become climate change refugees by 2050, having been forced to uproot by Mother Nature and settle elsewhere. In Australia, Conservatives and Liberals are debating, not about whether the problem is real, but rather how to best solve it… everyone agrees it’s a problem.
Clinton also focused on sustainability in the US. He painted a rather dire portrait of where the country is headed if income continues to decline, college costs continue to outpace income growth, and healthcare continues to cost more while covering less (and also outpacing income growth). He cited the need for a new source of jobs every eight years to remain competitive. Solving climate change, Clinton believes, is the way to do that (e.g., “green” jobs and projects). He’s not shy about the size and difficulty of the task at hand, saying that if done right, it “would be the greatest thing since we mobilized for WWII.”
In the challenge of unsustainability lies a significant opportunity for positive change. The country or company or individual willing to invest in it, could save the world’s future, if not own it.
The world in which we now live is vastly different than the one in which Clinton took office. Then, in 1992, there were only 50 websites worldwide. Today, more than 50 new websites were created during Clinton’s speech at the Forum alone. Our world is much more connected. What we do affects others more so now than ever before. The more we understand that, the more willing and able we are to address the challenges of global interdependence… and experience the peace and security associated with it.
We recently sat down with Chester Elton, best-selling author of The Carrot Principle and sought-after international speaker. As one of the world’s leading experts in employee engagement, he’s just as excitable in conversation as he is on stage. Beyond his stage presence though is his story.
Failing and quitting - two things we're taught at an early age to avoid - were not only good, but necessary for these industry titans to, in fact, become industry titans.
2. Be human. Aligning what we do to who we are is critical. How we work must better reflect who we are as human beings - more emotion and creativity, less reason and structure.
The challenge here is how: How do we become more human as professionals, as leaders? As Jim Estill put it - he's a blogging colleague from the Forum, former CEO, and current Board member of RIM (the maker of the Blackberry) - "Leadership is messy." We want to know it in rational terms but we can't because it's not. Realizing that is the first step.
3. Challenge short-termism. We all know that taking the long term view trumps the short-term one. In fact, this year's World Business Forum opened with a Hollywood-style short film containing sage advice from proven leaders about taking the long-term view. But how do we do it in today's 24/7 world? It boils down to one thing: Leadership. Specifically, three key ingredients: Courage, Faith, and Commitment.
Take the case of Bill George, whose remarks opened this year's World Business Forum. When he was CEO of Medtronics, he did not shy away from telling his investors that if they were looking for a quick buck, they could invest elsewhere.
Ultimately, Bill's leadership paid off. In 10 years with Medtronics, he took the company's market value from $1B to $60B. It's no wonder his book, True North, about authentic leadership, is a critically acclaimed best-seller.
4. Do One Thing. In a more interconnected world, the little things we do have an even bigger impact. Several headliners at the Forum captured the spirit of this concept.
In the fabric of this year's World Business Forum lie true success secrets... personally, professionally, and as a global community: Be human. Take the long view. Embrace failure. Do one thing.
If we can do that, we can change the world.
Hamel likened our time to that of Frederick Taylor’s, about a hundred years ago, when in 1912, his idea about something called “scientific management” – the model for today’s corporation – was so advanced, so controversial that he was called into Congress to testify. He called for a “mental revolution” among “workmen… and… management” for scientific management to take hold. He gave life to concepts like efficiency and productivity and standardization.
Our modern-day Frederick Taylor, Gary Hamel, tells us that Taylor’s revolution has plateaued and we're ready for another. Hamel’s premise is rooted in employee engagement. No more than 20% of people are engaged at work, which means there’s a lot of latent productivity and untapped innovation in the workforce – in other words, there’s room to get a lot more out of employees. And corporations today – how they’re organized and what they value – will not do it. A revolution is required.
But why must corporations revolutionize to survive? And more importantly, how can they do it?
Why
Corporations aren’t human. And they must be to survive.
Diligence, obedience, and structure will no longer be cornerstone principles of the corporation; Passion, creativity, and innovation will be. Why is Hamel so sure? “... because the upcoming generation will accept no less.” These are young people who grew up in the meritorious world of the internet, not the authoritarian world of the corporation. They derive power from and give power to others based on content, not title. They are creative and passionate. They are the drivers of the participation economy that Kevin Roberts, of Saatchi & Saatchi, spoke of earlier at the Forum. They don’t respond to marketing but movements, not to information but inspiration. They will not put up with only 20% engagement in the workplace.
To engage and retain this next generation, the corporation will have to fundamentally morph the way they manage them.
How
W.L. Gore is a good place to start. The company that brought us GORE-TEX is living proof of what the next-era corporation will look and feel like. No titles. No rules. No assignments.
Sound like a slacker’s paradise? It’s not. This company, started by a DuPont engineer, recognizes over $2 billion in annual sales and has not one quarterly loss in the last 30+ years. They have found a way to create entrepreneurs and collaborators in the workplace.
Here’s how they do it:
1. No titles. Nobody has titles at Gore. When Hamel was on-site, and noticed that nobody had titles on their business cards, he asked a Gore employee, “How do you know who’s leader?” The response: “Well, if you call a meeting and people show up, that’s a good sign.”
2. No rules. There are no rules at Gore. Take for example their travel and expense policy – there isn't one. Employees can travel when they want, however they want, for as long as they want, expensing whatever they want – all on the company’s dime. How can this system work? The company simply posts travel expenses online, where everyone can see. If everyone were to see that you ordered the $1,000 bottle of wine, perhaps you’d be more inclined to buy the $20 one.
At Gore, there’s just one guideline: No “waterline issues.” No employee should take a risk that would sink the company, punch a hole in the bottom of the company’s proverbial hull, nothing that would damage its reputation or get it into legal trouble or ruin the brand. In meetings, it’s not uncommon to hear Gore employees asking each other, “Is there a ‘waterline issue’ here?” (Hamel implored us to imagine what the world would be like if the financial services industry asked the same question before the economic crisis.)
3. No assignments. Nobody at Gore tells employees what to do. They choose what they work on and who they work with. All commitments are voluntary. How do they manage this apparent free-for-all? Peer ratings. An employee rates 20 peers and 20 peers rate that employee – ranked 1 through 20. The rankings are used to determine salary.
The Challenge
It works for W. L. Gore, but how does it, or will it, work elsewhere? Such is the challenge of Hamel’s insight. While he gets us thinking (even excited) about the management revolution, he doesn’t provide all the answers (nor does he have them). What he does provide is advice on how to get there:
A. Challenge dogma. Basic assumptions in modern day management – authority trickles down, change starts at the top, senior executives set strategy, takes crisis to provoke change, freedom and discipline are trade-offs – are false. Unlearn the old; discover the new. Many innovators, including Bill Gore (founder of W. L. Gore), never went to business schools.
B. Explore the fringe. The future always starts there. Tattoos, as a small but telling example, started with sailors and bikers. Now, young women have them as body art. What will become trendy or mainstream tomorrow is at the fringe right now.
C. Experiment. “We need to be revolutionary but nobody is going let you do that,” so today’s managers must be simultaneously revolutionary and evolutionary – How? Experimentation. It’s bounded in time and risk, but allows exploration and discovery. Successful managers should ask themselves, “Am I putting a portfolio of risky projects together?”
D. Recognize natural leaders. Leaders in tomorrow’s corporation will be chosen for fairing well on new types of questions: Whose responses are rated most helpful? Who contributes the most to online forums? Whose advice is sought most often? Who responds most promptly to requests? Who is generating the most external buzz?
Hamel closed with his thesis: “Isn’t it weird that corporations are less human than us, less adaptable, less engaging, less interesting, less creative? (It’s because we apply this arcane) technology of management from 100 years ago – Management 1.0. You cannot create a company for the future unless it’s made for the human being.”
Go make it happen.
Great Depression vs. Now. Much has been made of today's economic crisis relative to the Great Depression. Krugman appears to agree with the emerging consensus - that the Great Depression was worse - but that didn't stop him from making comparisons ... or even calling out what was worse about today's crisis vs. Roosevelt's.
1. Run on banks in 2008. What happened during the economic crisis of 2008 was the same as the run on banks in the 1930’s. While mobs didn’t gather outside banks in 2008, they did gather online in the electronic marketplace (to pull their money out of the system) – and with much greater fervor.
2. World trade (or not). World trade has declined more precipitously in this economic crisis than it did at this stage of the Great Depression. Enough said.
Recovery to last long time. Forecasts generally assume economies recover in 5 years – there’s no reason to believe that will be the case this time around. We could be in recovery for much longer. “This looks to be a long siege” for three reasons:
1. No trade surplus. When countries suffer recession from financial crisis, they come out of it by moving into a trade surplus with other countries. The effects of this economic crisis are so widespread and profound that the whole world is in deficit – if the world is in deficit, then it’s that much more difficult for individual countries to get to a surplus.
2. No transportation technology. Steam-engine boats. Containerization of shipping. Airplanes. They all revolutionized transportation, significantly reducing time and cost. Now, there does not appear to be anything like that on the horizon.
3. Higher transportation costs. The cost to transport goods between countries – whether by land or sea or air – will increase as (a) oil prices rise and (b) green policies take effect, taxing emissions of transportation even further.
This last point, we found tremendously telling. Here is a leading Liberal economist making a practical argument against green policies. It became even clearer to us that the depth and intensity of our current economic crisis has affected much more than just world trade.
Bill taught us a lesson about ego and how he overcame his to become a leading expert and thought-shaper on leadership. He told us about being “The Number Two” at Honeywell, in line to become CEO of one of the world’s largest and most respected companies. Bill had been at Honeywell for 10 years. He was trying to impress his colleagues and his board. He wanted them to choose him as the next CEO. But something didn’t feel right. He even wore cuff links (which he didn’t like). He would talk to his wife about it at home. A relatively small biotech company, Medtronics, approached him several times to run their company, but they were too small. He kept saying no. His ego wanted to run a large company.
Finally he met with Medtronics. He was surprised by his reaction. He felt at home and loved the mission of their work. He left Honeywell to lead Medtronics, taking the $1B company to $60B in market value in 10 years. Now, he’s on the board – or has been on the board – of several corporate stalwarts (Goldman Sachs, Exxon Mobil, Target, Novartis) and is an international powerhouse in the field of leadership.
It’s unclear whether Bill made the move to Medtronics because he wasn’t going to make CEO at Honeywell or because Medtronics just felt like a better fit for him. But we do know that he shared with us a piece of his personal story that not many CEOs would have shared. And more importantly, his story proves that when you leave that which doesn’t feel right for something that does, good things will happen. It all comes back to passion. Follow it... by definition, it’s right.