leadership – Page 4 – Chrysanthemum Marketing

Weighing the Trans-Pacific Partnership on a Larger Scale

Two statistics alone — that 96 percent of the world’s consumers and 80 percent of the world’s purchasing power are outside the United States — should insure our attention is riveted on the first of President Obama’s signature trade deals, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), as it bobs before an un-receptive Congress in a lame-duck year.

This week TPP evangelist Charles Rivkin was in town to talk about the state of the deal and its benefit to the small businesses and tech startups that make up 95% of Austin’s economy. Ambassador Rivkin is no empty suit. His blue-chip credentials in technology, entertainment and business include negotiating the $1B sale of the Jim Henson company. A self-effacing speaker, he cited a nickname, “Don Quixote,” for promoting causes he believes in (like President Obama).

Trade is a complex topic that quickly becomes emotional. But Ambassador Rivkin did something interesting: he inched the discussion out of the “what” category (jobs) and into another, more properly labeled “how.” Framing TPP as a once-in-a blue-moon opportunity to “raise the standards of international trade” — climate change, endangered species, human rights — while also touting the benefits to specific sectors of the economy. In technology, for example, TPP is the first trade deal to address intellectual property.

Windmill alert: Watchdog groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Public Citizen oppose the deal, which doesn’t go far enough for their respective publics. EFF in particular is worried the deal will hamper investigative journalism and openness while endangering privacy. Nobel Laureate and Columbia business professor Joseph Stiglitz, an advisor to Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, is also against it, pointing out that financial industry, as always it seems, gets off lightly, as do pharmaceuticals and big business in general.

But other voices support Ambassador Rivkin’s argument. The New York Times’ Nathaniel Popper’s nonlinear look at trade deals cites TPP supporter David Autor (“China Shock”):

global-trade_paul-windle — Courtesy of Paul Windle, the New York Timescites TPP supporter David Autor (“China Shock”): TPP:

“The gains to the people who benefited are so enormous — they were destitute,m and now they were brought into the global middle class…The fact that there are adverse consequences in the United States should be taken seriously, but it doesn’t tilt the balance.”

In other words, trade can be seen as a tool to offset economic aid, or as Popper concludes, the benefits of trade have to be evaluated on both sides of the transaction.

Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman is a bit pithier: “Politicians should be honest and realistic about trade, rather than taking cheap shots. Striking poses is easy; figuring out what we can and should do is a lot harder.”

Any way you cut it, I’m glad we have a savvy Don Quixote at work on TPP.

Trying a New Approach to Collaboration, Large and Small

When I think of horrific meeting experiences, my mind rewinds to a hands-on seminar I led years ago for Apple. The objective was to introduce teachers to Apple’s desktop. It was a group presentation with auditorium-style seating and keyboards for participants to use in conjunction with the talk. About 10 minutes into my sch-peel, a tiny grandmotherly-looking woman stood up and said to the group: “We’re not idiots. Why do we have to listen to this person, let’s just do this!” And away they went, clicking happily along in utter chaos. That was point my boss walked in. Needless to say it was an interesting debrief.

I thought about that woman this week during a Liberating Structures workshop led by Keith McCandless (who wrote the book) and Anna Jackson who spearheads an LS meetup group here in Austin. Is there a better way to inform, collaborate, teach and motivate a group of people? I’m a newbie but I’d say the tools they introduced me to are the best I’ve seen so far. I can see how they could work in all kinds of organizations. The idea is to tweak the feng shui of group interactions – topic, space, pacing, participation – and deploy a set of tools that better focus and distribute the conversation among the people who matter.

liberated meeting — Are there more possibilities here? Bigger group, more leaders. See the 1-2-4-All tool.

You can read more on the Liberating Structures website. It lists all the tools and gives you a menu of when/how to apply them.

Since I haven’t applied it yet, the results are theoretical. But hey, if it works for The World Bank and The Gates Foundation, I’m all in. I’m intrigued about seeing how the tools would work cross-culturally, in situations where some of the participants are remote (there’s a technology conversation) and when selling one’s ideas to executives.

More to come. I only wish I, like Merlin, could live backwards: Just think how I could have helped and gained from that woman who was so frustrated and anxious to learn so long ago. I hope she’s running a company somewhere.

Stuck in a Habit: Is Predictive Adaptation Possible?

Editor’s Note: I was thinking about this post in terms of a session on Predictive Adaptation I sat in on last month. Dr. Liz Alexander moderated. She is considering a book on the subject which boils down to:

Can we stay tuned in enough to adapt prior to a change in our marketplace?

As the shelf life of companies grows shorter and shorter, the ability to adapt is on the short list of survival strategies. How do we cultivate it? One way is to not be stuck in our habits.

…

I’m a tea drinker, I have a teapot with an infuser, numerous immersion devices and a cabinet stuffed full of teas – black, herbal, medicinal, green. When I drank coffee, it was the same scenario, with different props. My freezer was full of Peets’ (now, alas, part of Starbucks) Major Dickinson blend and my cabinet, coffee brewers — drip, stovetop, percolator, French and Italian press – you get the drift.

Habits can lock us into rigid ways of thinking and doing. The solution? Try something new.

Two weeks ago I ran out of tea. I reordered in a such a panic that I used an old address. My tea — a special blend I’d grown to depend on to get me out of the door in the morning — never arrived. The tea blender refused to fix the delivery snafu. So I didn’t reorder.

That’s how one habit (getting in a snit when things didn’t go my way) forced me to re-evaluate another (my tea drinking compulsions). I was forced to rethink that morning ritual. Now I’m brewing tea bags (Choice) I buy at the grocery store. I don’t enjoy my tea nearly as much, but it’s saving me time. Unintended consequence: I’m actually getting to work on time.

Habits can be helpful, but they can also lock us into position. I’ve noticed that whatever it is hoard is a habit – wine, ice cream, tea, coffee, graham crackers. In the same way, my response to the tea blender was a habit — he chided me about my carelessness, I felt like a bad child, and I didn’t want anything more to do with him. Other habits I’ve flagged since my tea disruption:

Who I greet in the morning
Where I walk the dog
What I do with my spare time
Who I telephone to spend time with
How I think about my abilities (and shortcomings)
The books I read
How I view people with ideas that are different from mine

A search on “habits” took my to former Googler Matt Cutts’ Ted Talk, “Try Something New for 30 Days.” (Editorial note: Why is the guys can look like slobs and the women have to look like they’re ready for the Academy Awards?) Regardless, I’ve resolved, for at least 30 days (when Choice tea bags will probably already be my new habit), not to reorder tea. We’ll see what happens.

Who knows what I’ll discover.

Can We Adapt Before Change Happens?

If a lifelong attraction to fortune tellers has taught me anything, it’s that the future never turns out according to plan. And a planner I’ve always been.

So I was fascinated when Dr. Liz Alexander posed the question: Can we adapt predictively? That is, can we read trends wisely enough to see what will be required for a future that’s still around the corner?

Liz, who among other things, guides thought leaders through the process of articulating and packaging their theories, pointed out that if:

The past is a predictor of the future
Corporate shelf life continues to drop (it’s now in the low double digits)
We remain flexible professionally, accepting that each of us will have multiple professions during our working life
Then, if we pay attention to mega trends, we can determine where our professional strengths can best be applied

So much depends on seeing opportunity when it presents itself. I pulled myself away from watching the Democratic National Convention to write this. Al Franken, former comedian, current U.S. senator spoke, and I was struck by Gail Collins’ oped piece pointing out that Hillary Clinton is running for president at a time when most women are thinking about gardening, grandchildren and the occasional cruise.

These are remarkable people, obviously, but they are also tips of an iceberg of change, reminding us to stay flexible, pay attention and don’t be afraid of opportunity. Maybe that in itself is predictive adaptation.

Leadership During a Crisis: Dallas Co. Sheriff Lupe Valdez on Police Shootings

A very, very sad week for our country: four shootings in cities across the country, with five police officers shot in Dallas during a peaceful “Black Lives Matter” protest. Sitting here in the middle of Texas, I am heartsick for my state and for Dallas, which for some reason has been a magnet for tragedy. Despite a vacuum (at best) of leadership among our state’s elected officials, I take my hat off to Lupe Valdez, sheriff of Dallas County.

Dallas Co. Sheriff Lupe Valdez, "I know at some point I'll cry," Courtesy of the Dallas Morning News — Sheriff Lupe Valdez, “At some point I’m going to cry. But right now I’m too busy.” Photo courtesy of the Dallas Morning News

Valdez, who is in her third term at the helm of a racially diverse county and the state’s second-largest city, spoke to NPR yesterday, responding openly and honestly to questions that would have made many others defensive (take note, Mrs. Clinton). She explaining why she was “not comfortable” with law enforcement officers’ wearing riot gear during citizen protests: “You put people in riot gear, you’re saying we’re expecting you to misbehave, so we’re ready for you….”

She closed with one of the most human “official” statements I’ve heard:

“I think – what I hear a lot and what I feel is – or what I’ve said a lot today – at some point, I’m going to cry. But right now I’m too busy. Right now we need to take care of things. But I think that’s important for all of us. At some point, it’s going to hit us. But right now we’re just, as I said, we’re good at crisis. We react. We do what needs to be done.”

Thank you, Sheriff Valdez.