If the think tank that is prepared to address the issue of how to modernize capitalism is going to work it must have ideas from many quarters. Vested interests will be represented, though it is to be hoped not too heavily. The normally silent voices must also be heard and those expressing them must be encouraged to think through what they want to say. “Gimme more” is not an acceptable approach.

The world has to reconcile

-          the wish to exploit the planet with the compelling need to conserve it,

-          the urge to invent new products, services and aspects of life with the need to use and properly develop what we already have,

-          the desire to acquire personal wealth with the need to see that others have the ability to do so as well,

-          the requirement to provide healthcare with the need to prevent people from abusing it by leading unhealthy lives,

-          the aspiration to give a free hand to the young with the need to take care of the increasing number of old,

-          the unavoidable restraining of dangerous criminals with the objective of minimising time wasted in detention,

-          the ability to monitor the behaviour of people with the wish to give them reasonable privacy and freedom to live their lives as they want,

-          the desire for independence with the clamour for support.

Capitalism is not responsible for all of these but the wealth created by it is the source of funds that makes them work. Wealth, therefore, is the foundation of the New Capitalism. How that wealth is to be distributed and made is the corner-stone of New Capitalism.

As a rather overpopulated, wealthy place, the world has the resources to handle its population, though fewer people would be easier and more might prove disastrous. Population growth will only come under control when the basic needs of existing people are sufficiently met to make large families unnecessary as a support for old parents. Addressing the human right to have enough food to eat and enough water to drink is therefore the first priority.

The aid agencies do a good job of dealing with famine and epidemic illness. It should be possible to build on their work towards the desired end if enough money is made available. The challenge is to achieve this without the usual bureaucratic drain on resources as well as the widespread corruption that could follow making much greater resources available.

Education about how to handle the limited resources and the basic economics and politics of the world comes a close second in importance to survival. In the post knowledge era it is relatively easy to ensure that everyone can find out what they need to know. Education will therefore be about how to access, qualify, understand, interpret and use information. A type of teacher is needed that will encourage greater understanding of the fundamentals of life and enthusiasm to make it better for others as well as ourselves. Some teachers already do this.

We will continue the brief for the New Capitalism Commission on Monday. Please do think about this urgent need for reform of the system that has served us well but is now failing so many.

So Fred Goodwin, who you knew as Sir Fred, the former boss of Royal Bank of Scotland, has been stripped of his knighthood. The British Institute of Directors warned of creating “anti-business hysteria” and a former Labour Party Trade Minister, said there was “the faint whiff of the lynch mob on the village green” about the decision. The more traditional bankers accused Fred of helping to turn an industry with a reputation for being safe, solid and secure into a casino. At the same time as this unusual gesture of disapproval, the current RBS boss forgoes his million pound bonus since it would have come directly from taxpayers who bailed the business out after many of them had lost much of their capital.

Meanwhile, down under, Ken Grenda, the boss of a ‘bus business he sold for a tidy sum has dished out A$15M to his staff as a gesture of gratitude for their loyalty and devotion. Good on you, Ken, a very practical way to say what others only mouth “people matter”. Back at the ranch in the US Mark Mardell, BBC Reporter, commenting on the Republican race for nominating Obama’s opponent in the next election asks “Has America fallen out of love with wealth?”

Move over to Ireland and you can see the house that angry artist Frank Buckley built using decommissioned Euro notes – a billion of them. So the Irish have it in for the European Union who furnished them with massive grants to improve their infrastructure. And in Britain they have decided that people on welfare should stop making more money than those working for a living and paying taxes; there’s brutal for you!

And finally St Paul’s Cathedral will no longer have a small tent village of protesters about the City of London on its doorstep. The Authorities have had it removed. The ‘Law and Order’ Bishops beat the ‘Jesus-Loves-Them’ Bishops of the Anglican Church. The nomads move on.

All only straws in the wind but a common message runs through these disparate stories: all is not well with capitalism. The message, long since acknowledged by ordinary folk, is reaching the top people in government and business. Not before time. These are little signals, haphazard and uncoordinated; as important, nevertheless, as are pump primers to water flow.

Where do we go from here?

Raising questions and protesting are always the start of major changes in society’s attitudes and behaviour. Resistance from the establishments who perceive themselves as threatened is inevitable. Those who talk of hysteria betray their own by simply mentioning it. Those who claim God is on their side do a bigger disservice to themselves even than to Him.

Many think tanks and universities regard the subject as too big for them to tackle and too controversial for their wealthy business backers to understand. But a clearer definition of capitalism will benefit all the legitimate earners of the world both rich and poor. The clamour for reform must grow louder and must try to be more rational. Capitalism did a good job until it became abused. Its modification must build on that, not just destroy it. A Big Voice and a Deep Pocket are needed to set in motion the next, logical steps to reform.

Any offers?

When I stood on the top of one of the highest peaks in South Island, New Zealand the other day I marveled at the view, at the mountains and the beautiful rolling hills. But the thing that made the biggest impression on me was the fresh air. Something rare in today’s world.

The Joyful Frog is a cause for celebration for much the same reason. Start-up teams making their way to market through the jungle of partnership, invention, planning, financing, developing, launching, falling over, getting up – it is refreshing to see such a light touch by Meng, Hugh and their excellent team. If only all educational institutions were so open, so fit-round-the-learner, so encouraging, even.

The motives of the budding start-ups are interesting. Passion for the digital technology involved tops the list. Business potential, making money, driving a fast business, trying to help others, all feature prominently. To be asked to advise them is humbling and flattering. Humbling because the sheer pace of digital growth is breathtaking and leaves anyone over thirty gasping; flattering because there are still fundamentals as relevant today as they ever were and which are not always immediately obvious.

Amid this welter of praise do I see any less rosy sides to digital startups and their hot-housing development?

All startups are based on partnership. The shared interest, the common technology and the probable earlier association of the partners successfully binds them in the early stages. They face common enemies – the market place, lack of resources, unknown but suspected competition, lack of experience in the fundamentals of business. Is there too little preparation for the longer-term sustaining of partnerships? Agreements are best made early and based on the objectives of the participants. Sorting out conflicting priorities later can be extremely difficult, occasionally fatal.

Good to have a fresh view provided it is tempered by the practices that have steadied ships in the past. Young Captains need to be taught not to steer too close to the water’s edge, however enthusiastic they are. On the other hand risk is endemic in all business ventures and courage is a prerequisite. I see plenty of willingness to take risks, not quite so much calculation of the risks themselves. It is only fair to add that these are very early days and I have no doubt that risk evaluation will surface as the projects progress.

If I had to forecast a question not emerging yet I would say that the potentially very short life of several of the projects under development requires each start-up to have a strategy that involves systematic idea and product development beyond what is currently being produced.

This is a new generation of entrepreneurs in a new technological age, creating new economies that few understand. Letting go – delegating as we used to call it – may prove tough for some of them. The fun side of business is always balanced by the need to harness others to help – and then letting them do so.

For all the questions that I have raised, it is wonderful to see the encouragement and enthusiasm JDFI is nurturing. As with everything encouragement leads to enthusiasm leads to determination. And there is plenty of that about.

Oh be joyful, Frog. You have every reason to do so.

Trying to book an apartment in UK in December we received the following reply:

Due to the long stay nature of our corporate clients

with options to extend, it would be to (sic) early to

offer availability. I suggest you re check in October.

While this is a poor illustration of the depth of the UK recession it may partly explain the cause of it. It is certainly a vivid example of the problems attitude and culture can create. How does an employer interview for attitude? How does a business create a culture of care?

It is fairly easy to find out if a candidate for a job has the technical skills needed to do it successfully. Qualifications, experience and simple tests can predict with reasonable certainty fitness for purpose. So why is it reported that nearly half of management hirings fail within the first eighteen months? And if the reports are true that 90% of these failings are due to attitude how can employees demonstrate good attitudes both at interview and when they start work?

Contrary to popular belief, employers seldom look for people to join them who merely perpetuate the existing business. All businesses are subject to swift, sometimes dramatic, change. That implies that the existing culture will need modifying from time to time. This is not to throw out the good aspects of it but to recognise that changing technological and competitive situations will demand a developing, not a static culture.

When interviewing a candidate for a job I look for one vital ingredient beyond the skills needed to perform the work – determination. If everyone I hire is determined it won’t make for an easy ride for me as a boss but it will make the business very successful. How do I recognise that determination? By the candidate’s enthusiasm in preparing for the interview, by the focus the candidate has on the business and me, the interviewer, rather than on himself or herself and by the intelligence and appropriateness of the questions s/he asks me.

What does a determined candidate offer for the business that others don’t?

First, an attitude of success. People who are determined to achieve, achieve. Second, the ability to build on their determination by the key management technique of encouragement. Encouragement spawns enthusiasm; enthusiasm fuels determination. That does not work unless there is a spark of determination to start with.

So when employees have run the gauntlet of an ‘attitude interview’ and got the job what can they do to reinforce and build on the expectations they have so enticingly raised?

For the answer please see my article of 29Sep11 ‘The First Five Hundred Minutes’ http://www.terrificmentors.com/2011/09/the-first-five-hundred-minutes/

Whoever called these the ‘soft skills’ ought to be sued for misrepresentation. They are seriously harder than most of the technical skills. Let us call them the Attitude Skills. They can be found in a wide variety of types and styles of people. Their common factor is that they succeed.

You may often have heard me refer to The Tree on the other side of the Field. It is a vital part of life’s fulfillment; without it you will never have a destination, never feel that life is, has been or will be worthwhile. If you’d like the story of the Tree, please ask me.

Two men were walking down a road together. It was early evening and the sun was soon to set. They were weary because they had walked a long way already and there was nowhere in sight that could provide them with shelter and a night’s refreshment and rest.

“Please tell me,” said the younger man, “when do you think we will reach the nearest inn? I am tired, my feet hurt and I am hungry.”

“We do not know when we shall reach the inn,” replied the older man, “the map is not clear. So we have two opportunities. We can rest, which will help your hurting feet and weariness but won’t solve your hunger, or we can continue without pausing which will get you food and rest sooner but will make your feet hurt even more. Which would you prefer?”

The young man thought about it and replied “Why did we not get a better map so that we could judge the distance to the inn and make a rational decision?”

“Ah,” replied the older man, “that is because you were anxious to set out so quickly that we skimped on our preparation for the journey.”

It is not possible to map out your whole life’s journey. There will be opportunities, challenges, accidents, events of good luck along the way. If you know where you are aiming for and you have prepared adequately to get there you will be able to assess those chance events, both good and bad, and decide whether they are worth pursuing or not.

To blossom fully a Tree must have Roots. Only when its Roots are deep and firm can it sway successfully in the high winds and handle the storms that come its way.

Where do those Roots come from?

Parents, home, family, school and university teachers, close friends. These good, and sometimes not so good, people all contribute to the roots of our tree by helping to shape our purposes, our principles and values, our hearts and courage and our relationships.

All these people have agendas which range from their success to yours. Most agendas are mixed. These roots become less influential and effective as you grow up. Children and parents go their own ways, as is right. School and university pass; friends change and move on.

The Tree must renew its Roots, delve even deeper into life if it is to continue growing. The Roots that the Tree must grow are not concrete pillars or iron girders. They are unique, living, growing roots – your own, nobody else’s. They do not come out of a recipe or result from a prescription. They grow by experimentation, encouragement, enthusiasm, determination.

Mentors are the gardeners who help those Roots to grow. If your Roots seem shaky, a little underdeveloped, not substantial enough to support your Tree in a storm, a Mentor will help you to find the Tree, map the journey and grow the Roots.

That is what Mentors do.

One of our Mentor’s, Denise Pang, has contributed much to the idea

and shaping of this Daily Paradox. I am very grateful to her.

When you draw a dotted line on your organisation chart do you think that you are causing confusion? May I suggest that you should? I have seen many dotted lines in my time and drawn more than a few and I have observed the damage they can do if not handled properly. Line managers run a business and carry the profit responsibility; staff functions are there to serve them, not to boss them.

That is not to say that staff functions are unimportant. They are vital to the smooth running of a business. Whether accountants, HR, marketing services, CSR, Health & Safety or compliance of any sort, business would be in deep trouble without them. But, as the old saying goes, ‘accountants should be on tap not on top’. One of the reasons that capitalism as a concept has performed less well in recent years is that it has become purely finance oriented. It is now dominated by ROI and KPI at the expense of the sustainable and socially acceptable.

Unravelling this situation will not be solved simply by making the lines of authority clearer. There will need to be a change of purpose imposed by – or at least accepted by – shareholders. Moral behaviour of business people as well as their better treatment of the planet is a prerequisite to making a new capitalism work. However, clarity of control and responsibility will help to achieve these aims.

I have come across organisations – not just businesses – where, for example, HR controls pay and conditions, overriding line managers whatever their seniority. That is clearly wrong. It is desirable that a line manager should consult the experts in any function in order that he may be well informed and keep within the law in making his decisions. It is wrong that they should normally have control over him.

One of the keys to good management is leadership. Leaders’ styles will differ but they must be accountable and responsible, something that can only happen when they have authority to make decisions. How is the balance between line and staff to be maintained?

Since line managers make the profits of a business the staff functions are indirectly paid by them. This gives rise to some antagonism between the profit centres of a business and the so-called head office costs. The simplest way to make sure that services are used is to charge the profit centres for them. This may sound contradictory. If the profit centres have to pay won’t they resist using the services? The evidence is to the contrary.

A modest time-based contribution for the use of services actually makes them more efficiently used and more appreciated. It is not necessary to charge the full economic rate; an element of subsidy is normal and leaves the centre in part control of what service is to be provided. We all appreciate what we pay for more than we appreciate the wholly “free” – even when we know perfectly well that ‘free’ is a rare occurrence in this world.

Next time you draw a dotted line on your organisation chart, think about how confusing it can be – and how easily the confusion can be mitigated.

A school in Singapore has broken twenty-seven records aiming to get some of them into the Guinness Book of records. Well done them. Of course breaking records in such diverse ways as largest number of people standing on one leg simultaneously or biggest sand art montage or largest logo made of balloons does not necessarily improve exam results but it is worthy of celebration for another reason.

Singapore built its amazing success on discipline and obedience. It could not have been achieved otherwise. Singapore has only one natural resource – people. In the early days of independence in the 1960s, people had to be harnessed to the tasks first of survival and then of building financial success. The prices paid for this were some loss of political freedom and a failure to develop creativity.

Every society has creative people in it and Singapore had its share but creative thinking was generally not encouraged because of the inherent questioning of authority and ‘stepping out of the box’ that goes with it. It was assumed (in my opinion, correctly) that such questioning would weaken the discipline needed to build a city-state. So creativity was not then encouraged.

All that has changed in the last few years and Singapore is starting to produce high level creativity in digital media, the world of high technology and the arts. We have an outstanding Symphony Orchestra, excellent local writers and actors plus computer and internet innovation as good as any silicone valley. There is still room for improvement.

Great footballers and cricketers come from countries where most people play these games; great music, from countries where everyone learns an instrument. So it is with great creativity. The more people engage in it the more successful will be the creative output.

And that is why breaking records is a good idea. It gives pupils the chance to think of the next record to break, to invent ways of exploring what is a record and the opportunity to think about the relevance of records as a measure of human achievement.

Education – not just in Singapore but all over the world – has become too dreary, joyless, financial-reward focused. The thrill of discovery has been replaced by the drudge of repetition and regurgitation.  Dish up the stock answer and get your certificate; challenge the established order and get labeled ‘difficult’. We have to learn to play in teams, for sure, but we also have to learn to build teams, our own teams with our own new ideas.

I have a challenge for enterprising Ng Shok Yan, Principal of the Fajar Secondary School. She encouraged the ‘record breaking’ experiment that has such possibilities. Can she now see if the school can break the most important record of all – to bring more joy and laughter than any other school to the children she so clearly cherishes?

That would be truly an outstanding and worthy record to break. Go for it!

New Zealand is one of the last frontiers of Paradise. Beautiful, varied, offering climates ranging from sub-tropical to sub-Antarctic these larger than life islands are clean, fresh and unpolluted. With mountains to rival the Highlands of Scotland and the three million year old gravel Canterbury Plains with their windbreak hedges at times dwarfing even the Great Wall itself, New Zealand can truly claim scenery and sights to stir the heart.

Climate is important in a world becoming prone to violent extremes of weather. Even at the top of North Island and the bottom of South Island the climate is temperate permitting sunbathing at noon and cosy fires in the evening for much of the year. The environment is significantly undamaged because there is not great commercial prospect from hurting it and not enough people to support to make doing so essential.

With a population of under 4.5 million there is plenty of space in a country whose land mass is bigger than the UK which houses 65 million people. It’s an outdoor place with skiing, white-water rafting, rugby, cricket, wonderful horses and great equestrian events of all sorts.

Getting from one place to another is easy even when the drive is long because there are virtually no traffic jams and the roads, though seldom dual-carriageway, are well maintained – no mean feat in a country where rockfalls are common and many roads explore passes chiseled out of energetic terrain.

Altogether a place for the young – and yet the young are leaving for Australia and for the world’s cities. New Zealand has a net outflow of people. Some come, mostly to retire and find breathing space, air and pristine water. More leave to find jobs, the attractions of urban living and those material advantages which only large populations can provide.

Multiple choice means multiple people.

The attractions of being well away from the action, of potential self-sufficiency, of trees so deep-rooted they can grow to Amazonian heights, of grapevines glistening in the damp sunshine, of a pace of life to restore the soul and permit time to wonder at the glories of the world – all these seem overwhelmed by the need to congregate in bigger masses, to seek the glitzy world of high tech and celeb and the material standards that go with them.

Why is it that the grass of paradise always seems greener on the other side of the fence?

New Zealand’s paradise was partly fashioned by earthquake and there are still many of them to remind the inhabitant that the country lies on a major fault. Mercifully, most of them are confined to limited areas and do little damage. It seems that whenever there is potential paradise on this earth there is some compensating distress to counteract it.

Perhaps that is true of all paradise?

The first time I landed in New Zealand over thirty years ago the pilot announced over the aircraft loudspeaker “Welcome to Auckland, ladies and gentlemen, please out your watches back twenty-five years”. The jibe would never be permitted today. For all that it is unfair in many respects it still has a comforting ring of permanence and stability about it that few other places can boast. Whether to live there is one question; there is no option that it is a paradise that must be visited.

We don’t have too many of them left on the planet.

Gong Xi Fa Cai

Gong Xi Fa Cai  – Happy New Year – to all readers and listeners to The Daily Paradox.

The year ahead looks challenging so we shall need all the help the Dragon can give us.

May you prosper in health, happiness and fulfillment.

From all of us at Terrific Mentors International:

Eliza Quek quekeliza@gmail.com +65 94567360

Denise Pang denise.pang@terrificmentors.com +65 97871420

Mike Langton mike.langton@gmail.com _65 98166076

Tan Chi Chiu tancc@terrificmentors.com +65 98629755

John Bittleston john.bittleston@terrificmentors.com +65 94568785

www.TerrificMentors.com

The next Daily Paradox will be on 25Jan12

There are two distinct camps on the subject of transparency and secrecy. Whichever side you are on you will likely have a feeling that the other side has a case, too. Some of the people I have talked to about the subject would indeed be on the other side if it were not for their personal  interests or those of others they care for or about. The issue is important to our creative future.

As an author I want my royalties. They don’t amount to that much but they reassure me that someone, somewhere is reading what I have written. Authors like that. They like it so much that they do about 96% of their writing without pay, anyway. They have something to say; they want to be heard. As a human being I want everyone to learn as much as they can, to make as much use as possible of the tremendous gift of knowledge that we have and to lead ‘forfilled’ lives – lives fulfilled for others. Half of me says ‘you must pay’, the other half says ‘please take’.

It is right that those who invest their time and money to make new discoveries, to illuminate the path of humankind and to help towards that desirable goal should be rewarded. “The labourer is worthy etc.” It is also right that knowledge should be free, that transparency and openness is the road to better behaviour and less corruption.

Although intellectual property protection is the focus of the controversial bills in the US and has led to Wikipedia making its grand gesture, there is more to it than creative protection.  Your time is valuable. When someone calls you about work outside your working hours you answer. They are now intruding on your time. Should you be paid for that? The Brazilian President thinks you should. He passed a law. It is proving unworkable but the thought is there. Overtime in Brazil has become very popular.

How about the government department that demands your time to complete forms and business returns? You pay them for their time through your taxes. How do they pay you? Or the bank that keeps you waiting on the phone as they rattle off advertisements while you queue for attention? Perhaps you should even be paid for standing in a taxi rank – after all, you pay them if they wait for you.

What to give and what to sell – that is the question.

All reasonable people want the world to take advantage of our increasing knowledge. Apart from anything else it may be the way to save the human race on the crowded planet. It is certainly the way to longer, fitter life and to more enjoyment from it. But so much have we concentrated on the importance of wealth that we have become used to measuring everything in money and are inclined to be cynical about those things that do not have a cash value. This is ironical as we see money being devalued daily by the printing press.

Our inclination to measure everything is inherently sensible – up to a point. It leads, however, to our trying to measure the immeasurable and ignoring anything that does not fit the model. A good example is smiling. We know that people who smile make a better living and live longer than those who don’t. Yet we cannot measure the value of a single smile in dollar terms.

An additional problem where IP is concerned is that some countries ignore the laws of intellectual property protection altogether. Trying to enforce one set of rules at one end of the pitch and a different set of rules at the other is neither possible nor sensible.

There is no easy answer to what should be protected and what should be free. A complex answer will be unworkable. What should we do?

I hope that some of my readers will want to contribute to the debate. It is going to continue for a long time.