Starting a Business in a Recession

As someone who has started a business in a down economy, I have to say it is not as easy as these articles (see below) make it out to be.
For starters, this is not the time to write a business plan, as some of them would have you do. Instead, focus on finding and keeping customers.
Two, get ready to answer these questions from your customers, er, prospects:
– Who are you?
– What can you do for me?
– Why should I believe you?
– How soon can you make a difference to my bottom line?
Starting a Business in a DownturnBusinessWeek
Strategies: It’s a good time to start a businessUSA Today
How to Start a Business During a RecessioneHow
Starting Up in a Down EconomyInc.
Five reasons why a recession is a good time to start a companyThe Industry Standard
What’s a good business to start now? Something you’re good at, crazy about. Something people call you about to get free advice on. Something you want to do for the rest of your life.
Can’t think of anything yet? Here are some fun new business ideas, 999 of them to be precise…
If you already have an ongoing business, here are some things to do now >>

Brand Promises: What to Do Now

The one thing we all know as branding professionals is the axiomatic statement: “your brand is your promise.” When you start breaking that promise, you lose brand equity.
That’s been the story for so many brands, from Sears to the Republicans.
So what can you do in these turbulent times?
Step one: don’t lie. To yourself, your employees, and most of all to your customers.
Step two: think 80/20: focus on the 20% percent of actions which give you 80% of your returns. In other words, work on your effectiveness. Don’t try to do too many things at once. But focus on your best customers and more importantly, your best employees. Fire the deadwood – beginning with deadwood customers – the ones that cost a lot to service and are just not worth it.
Step three: observe your customers’ pains. How can you help them? Can you show them something they might not have known? Can you help them bring in additional revenues? Pitch in and they’ll never forget you.
Step four: invest in the future. Sure, things look bleak. But now there are more opportunities in your market and if you look closely at your adjacent markets, you should be able to see the opportunities.
Step five: service counts. The better your employees do in face-to-face encounters, the better you’ll weather the storm. Where can your service delivery be redesigned to make it even better.
Step six: be true to your brand. Don’t just start accepting anything you need to do to survive. Focus on customer value, not price competition.
Step seven: customer driven innovation. It’s now or never time. Get an innovator’s mindset.
Step eight: use the Internet like your life depends on it. Because it does. I don’t care what industry you’re in, the Internet will help you reduce your costs – marketing costs, operational costs, employee costs, and, most importantly, it can help you grow.
Step nine: test your ideas. Now is the time for smart business experiments.
The sky is not falling, despite what the papers say. Yes, you might lose your job, but you can find another one. This isn’t Europe. So get busy!

Newsweek: Shrinking to Survive?

Will Newsweek be able to compete against the Economist?
That’s what they’re betting on, apparently.
The goal is to turn Newsweek into an opinion-based “thought leader” with branded journalists like Fareed Zakaria, Christopher Hitchens, and that fossil of a conservative, George Will. So we’ll see lots more trash-talking and provocation.
While this is a step in the right direction, I think they’ll really have to worry about low-cost, online disruptors like HuffPost, DailyKos, and The Week, as well as established institutions like The Atlantic and The New Yorker.
The makeover is supposed to gain them mindshare and, ahem, walletshare. Where have we heard that before?
What they’re missing is a daily view of their ecosystem. I’ll get into that in a separate entry on ecosystemwatch.com. And as I tell my clients, thought-leaders do dominate in ecosystem competition, so the Newsweek strategy does make sense.
What I don’t see any mention of is value-co-creation with its readers. And their revenue model is still based on advertising. Even the Economist knows that to make money you’ve got to sell those country reports, the surveys, books, and conferences.
Finally, I hope they’ve thought about video – online video – as another key ingredient which makes online news attention-worthy.

Hunger and Republican Values

To get a better idea of what it’s like to live on a food stamp budget, CNN’s Sean Callebs decided to eat for a month on $176 and blog about it >>
What is depressing is the rising number of people going hungry in this, the “land of plenty.”
I’m just sick at the Republicans – first they get us in this mess, then they go obstruct everything. Their idea of a stimulus is more tax cuts for their friends who live in the top 2% – otherwise, nix!
The Republican party stands for one thing: lies and more lies. And the corporate media is just as guilty.
More here about what life is like for an increasing number of people on Main Street>>

A Design Guide for Recessionary Times

I think we’ve finally hit the wall in terms of design.
Whether you’re designing a product, a service, or a website, the designer has to make their work relevant to the buyer in ways they may not have considered before this recession. Here’s what I mean. Your offering is no longer competing for attention or even price. It is competing on usefulness and time to value.
The question you have to answer is this: Why will this product/service help me now, and how fast can I see results?
And, two – “How can I justify spending any money on this at all?”
Three: “What’s the risk for me (and my money)?”
Got it?
Pretty simple, but your survival as a company may just depend on answering those three questions properly.
So Hyundai designs a car which says, buy it, use it, and we’ll take it back – if you can’t pay because you lost your job. The policy allows people to return vehicles in the first 12 months if they can’t make payments due to job loss and Hyundai covers depreciation. In essence, Hyundai is eliminating your risk.
Consider a small business in today’s economy. Why would they spend money on anything but the essentials? So who needs MS Office when you can use Google Docs? Who needs a Mac when a netbook will help you get by? Who needs office space when you can work from home? Who needs to fly when you can Skype it in? Who needs to buy when you can rent? It’s not about how much the website costs, rather, it’s about how fast will I make money from the website? Why do press releases when you can blog?
It’s value time, period. Show me, don’t tell me.
One last thing, why should I trust you? Are you trustworthy? Is your product/service trustworthy? Maybe trust goes beyond the product/service. It lies in the concrete actions you take to actually help your customer. Have you ever thought of helping someone out who is not your customer?

Hyper-Disruption: India’s $10 Laptop

Here comes the next wave of hyper-disruption: the $10 laptop.
Are your ready Dell, HP, Apple? Are you ready Microsoft?
As we saw in Getting India and China Right, by Anil Gupta and Haiyan Wang, China and India are not going to be content simply filling out orders for low-cost products. They are also going to be springboards for innovation and disruptive products and services.
When I was growing up in India, there was a rule of thumb we followed which said that anything made in India should sell for 10 times the amount in the West and vice-versa. Looks like that rule still applies!
I’m still somewhat skeptical, but hey, it’s coming. If not tomorrow, then soon.
The point is this: every assumption we have about price limits and barriers needs to be challenged. If we don’t challenge them, Chindia will.

Book Review: “Getting India and China Right” by Anil Gupta and Haiyan Wang

The edge has become the core.
That’s the central idea presented by Anil Gupta and Haiyan Wang in their new book – Getting China and India Right: Strategies for Leveraging the World’s Fastest Growing Economies for Global Advantage.
It’s not enough to merely be present in India and China, argue the authors.
Their thesis: “…any Fortune 1000 company that is not busy figuring out how to leverage the rise of China and India to transform the entire company runs a serious risk of not being around as an independent entity within ten to fifteen years…”
China and India are different from all other countries in that they present four “stories” or opportunities rolled into one:
1) Mega Markets: they provide growth opportunities for every product and service
2) Cost Efficiency Platforms: with low wage rates, they can help reduce your global cost structure
3) Innovation Platforms: the talent pool of engineers and scientists can boost your firm’s technical and innovation capabilities
4) Launching Pads for New Global Competitors: your next global competitors are likely to emerge from here
So what are you supposed to do?
The book guides you, chapter by chapter, to explore the following imperatives:
1) Compete in India and China simultaneously. Why? Four reasons: i) the growth trajectory for both countries places them as the world’s top 4 and 5 markets for every product and service imaginable; ii) India and China offer (for the time being) complementary strengths in services and manufacturing respectively; iii) there are also remarkable similarities which help your company transfer learning from China to India and vice-versa, accelerating your success in both countries; and finally, iv) an integrated China and India strategy helps you reduce your political, economic, and intellectual property risks inherent in operating in just India or China.
2) Compete for mega market dominance through micro-customers. The authors show you how to compete at the top, middle and bottom of the pyramid in India and China. What I found especially interesting was the authors’ insistence that innovation opportunities abound at the bottom of the pyramid and that companies should use this segment as a “learning laboratory” for the discovery of new business models!
3) Leverage China and India for global dominance. There are three opportunities: cost arbitrage, intellectual arbitrage, and business model innovation – each of which can help you build a global platform for competitive advantage.
4) Compete with the locals – the dragons and tigers. The authors show you how to defend yourself and compete against the emerging titans in India and China using three key strategic initiatives: i) attack these emerging titans on their own turf; ii) neutralize their supply-chain advantages by tapping into the cost effective and innovation opportunities available in both countries; and iii) pursue an integrated India plus China strategy which, oddly enough, is more difficult for the emerging players in both countries.
5) Compete for local talent. You must project a positive and visible presence in the local media and local academic institutions. You can offer better global career opportunities for employees outside of India and China. Finally, by being sensitive to cultural and social mores, your company can build strong emotional ties to employee families – spouses, and yes, parents! The authors also suggest you hire in second and third tier cities to achieve lower salary scales and reduced turnover rates. (Wuxi is calling!)
6) Rethink what it means to be a global enterprise. The authors give us four areas to rethink – global strategy, innovation, organization, and lastly, our very mindsets. They warn us to stay slightly ahead of the changes in each of these areas, lest we get left behind on the road to global competition.
This is not a light read, but it is an essential one for every manager or leader with global vision. What I haven’t mentioned in this blog post is the detailed case studies and business examples the authors present to make their case.
Ignore the timely warnings and insightful lessons in this book, and chances are we’ll see you on TV asking for a government bailout.
For more info, see Wang’s blog here and this article in the Wall Street Journal>>

Susan Solomon: “Global Warming is Irreversible”

Now what?
Our carbon drain is clogged, and we’re going to drown in our own bathtub.
Here’s the bad news:
“People have imagined that if we stopped emitting carbon dioxide that the climate would go back to normal in 100 years or 200 years. What we’re showing here is that’s not right. It’s essentially an irreversible change that will last for more than a thousand years,” says Susan Solomon on NPR
Are you ready for long droughts and rising seas? While some environmentalists are worried about the extinction of polar bears and emperor penguins, or the dying oceans, I’m thinking about human extinction. As usual, the poor will be hit the hardest.
Poor Al Gore keeps trying to wake us up:

This is a national security issue which makes Al-Qaeda look like the Peanuts.
Meanwhile, the Republicans, led by Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter are still on their “global warming is a hoax” bandwagon.

Here Comes the Tech Greenwave: Asus’ Bamboo PC

Asus Bamboo PC
The Asus Bamboo PC is here, supposedly.
Asus is advertising it, even linking to Amazon, where it seems like they’re not quite ready for it.
My cynical side sees this is the latest in the greenwashing movement in the high-tech industry. If they’re serious, however, I applaud them.
Here’s how ASUS puts it:
ASUS has created a strategy dubbed the “4 Green Home Runs” to deliver greener products for the consumer. The “Green Home Runs” are Green Design, Green Manufacturing, Green Procurement and Green Service and Marketing.
OK, let’s do it – a green value-chain! I just hope we don’t learn later that they’re clearing Giant Panda habitat to make PC covers.
Geek info: ASUS U6V-V1-Bamboo 12.1-Inch Laptop (2.53 GHz Intel T9400 Processor, 4 GB RAM, 320 GB Hard Drive, Nvidia 9300M GS Graphics, Vista Business)
BTW, Bamboo is pretty nifty and is definitely one of those “sustainable products for our future.”

BBC Documentary: What Now Mr. President? (Wake Up, Everybody!)

Here’s a documentary from the BBC’s Panorama.
Here’s how they pitch it:
“Barack Obama takes over as US President with a promise to dramatically change America and make it a fairer place. He is inheriting the worst economic crisis in almost a century, and a country so unequal that 23,000 people die every year because they cannot afford basic healthcare. To close the gap between rich and poor Obama will have to take on the might of the corporate world, which wields enormous influence in Washington. Can he change the world’s most powerful country, and should he?”



Question: ever wonder why this kind of a documentary never makes it to US television?
Wake Up, Everybody! Check out Harold Melvin & the Blue Notes:

Video: Bill Gates on the Future of Aid

UPDATE: You can download the annual letter (PDF) here or read it online here >>
The Economist video interview with BG:

The interviewer has a bit of a chip on his shoulder, but Gates does a convincing job of focusing on the issues. I really think Gates has finally found his true calling.
Sign up for his annual letter >>

Google’s Larry Page Reveals his Success Secrets

This just came in on my N2N (nerd-to-nerd) network. I thought I’d share it w/ everyone. It’s titled: “Secrets of success from Google co-founder Larry Page.”
Here you go – take it as propaganda, if you want, but it is interesting all the same:
# If you have a product that’s really gaining a lot of usage, then it’s probably a good idea.
# When you grow, you continually have to invent new processes. We’ve done a pretty good job keeping up, but it’s an ongoing challenge.
# We built a business on the opposite message. We want you to come to Google and quickly find what you want. Then we’re happy to send you to the other sites. In fact, that’s the point. The portal strategy tries to own all of the information.
# Pretty early on, I saw a newspaper story about Googling dates. People were checking out who they were dating by Googling them. I think it’s a tremendous responsibility. If you think everybody is relying on us for information, you understand the responsibility. That’s mostly what I feel. You have to take that very seriously.
# Part of our brand is that we’re pretty understated in what we do. If you look at other technology companies, they might pre-announce things, and it will be a couple years before they really happen, and they don’t happen in the way they said they would.
# Through innovation and iteration, Google takes something that works well and improves upon it in unexpected ways.
# If you can run the company a bit more collaboratively, you get a better result, because you have more bandwidth and checking and balancing going on.
# The ‘be good’ concept also comes up when we design our products. We want them to have positive social effects. For example, we just released Gmail, a free e-mail service. We said, ‘We will not hold your e-mail hostage. ‘ We will make it possible for you to get your e-mail out of Gmail if you ever want to.
# The dotcom period was difficult for us. We were dismayed in that climate… We knew a lot of things people were doing weren’t sustainable, and that made it hard for us to operate. We couldn’t get good people for reasonable prices. We couldn’t get office space. It was a hypercompetitive time. We had the opportunity to invest in 100 or more companies and didn’t invest in any of them. I guess we lost a lot of money in the short term — but not in the long
term.
# Talented people are attracted to Google because we empower them to change the world. Google has large computational resources and distribution that enables individuals to make a difference.
# We don’t have as many managers as we should, but we would rather have too few than too many.
# We think we’re an important company, and we’re dedicated to doing this over the long term. We like being independent.
# Serving our end users is at the heart of what we do and remains our number one priority.
# It definitely helps to be really focused on what you are doing.
# My experience is that when people are trying to do ambitious things, they’re all worried about failing when they start. But all sorts of interesting things spin out that are of huge economic value. Also, in these kinds of projects, you get to work with the best people and have a very interesting time. They’re not really taking a risk, but they feel like they are.
# From its inception, Google has focused on providing the best user experience possible. While many companies claim to put their customers first, few are able to resist the temptation to make small sacrifices to increase shareholder value. Google has steadfastly refused to
make any change that does not offer a benefit to the users who come to the site.
# You (the Google user) want answers and you want them right now. Who are we to argue?
# Many leaders of big organizations don’t believe that change is possible. But if you look at history, things do change, and if your business is static, you’re likely to have issues.
# If we are not trusted, we have no business. We have such a lot to lose; we are forced to act in everyone’s interest.”
# I would rather have people think we’re confused than let our competitors know what we’re going to do.
# We chose it (the name Google) because we deal with huge amounts of data. Besides, it sounds really cool.
# The ultimate search engine… would understand exactly what you mean and give back exactly what you want.
# Our company relies on having the trust of our users and using that information for their benefit. That’s a very strong motivation for us. We’re committed to that. If you start to mandate how products are designed, I think that’s a really bad path to follow. I think instead we should have laws that protect the privacy of data, for example, from government requests and other kinds of requests.
# Many companies are under pressure to keep their earnings in line with analysts’ forecasts. Therefore, they often accept smaller, predictable earnings rather than larger and less predictable returns. Sergey and I feel this is harmful, and we intend to steer in the opposite direction.
# We think a lot about how to maintain our culture and the fun elements. I don’t know if other companies care as much about those things as we do. We spent a lot of time getting our offices right. We think it’s important to have a high density of people. People are packed together everywhere. We all share offices. We like this set of buildings because it’s more like a densely packed university campus than a typical suburban office park.
# We’re trying to use the web’s self-organizing properties to decide which things to present. We don’t want to be in the position of having to decide these things. We take the responsibility seriously. People depend on us.
# Google is organized around the ability to attract and leverage the talent of exceptional technologists and business people. We have been lucky to recruit many creative, principled and hard working stars. We hope to recruit many more in the future. We will reward
and treat them well.
# By always placing the interests of the user first, Google has built the most loyal audience on the web. And that growth has come not through TV ad campaigns, but through word of mouth from one satisfied user to another.
# You don’t want to be Tesla. He was one of the greatest inventors, but it’s a sad, sad story. He couldn’t commercialize anything, he could barely fund his own research. You’d want to be more like Edison. If you invent something, that doesn’t necessarily help anybody. You’ve got to actually get it into the world; you’ve got to produce, make money doing it so you can fund it.
# Invariably we try 10 things that don’t quite work out in order to do one thing that’s successful. And we learn a lot in doing the 10 things that didn’t quite work.
# We have a mantra: don’t be evil, which is to do the best things we know how for our users, for our customers, for everyone. So I think if we were known for that, it would be a wonderful thing.
# It is an advantage being young. You don’t have as many other responsibilities.
# If you have a great product that meets people’s needs, they start telling their friends, especially when it’s a search engine, which is something that everybody has to use. So we’ve actually been growing 20 per cent per month, compounded, for our whole history,
and without spending any significant money on advertising. It’s an incredible phenomenon.
# We were, I guess, lucky enough to be trying to be profitable long before it was fashionable, and that was a really good decision. I think it’s more luck than real insight on our parts, but Sergey and I really felt a lot better about having a business that could actually make money. So we figured that once we were at that stage then not much could hurt the company.
# We are focused on providing an environment where talented, hard working people are rewarded for their contributions to Google and for making the world a better place
# The amazing thing is that we’re part of people’s daily lives, like brushing their teeth. It’s just something they do throughout the day while working, buying things, deciding what to do after
work and much more. Google has been accepted as part of people’s lives. It’s quite remarkable. Most people spend most of their time getting information, so maybe it’s not a complete surprise that Google is successful.
# Our goal is to organize the world’s information and to make it universally accessible and useful. That’s our mission. When we started, we had about 30 million Web pages, which was quite large for the time — that was two years ago. Now, we have well over a billion Web pages. So that gives you some idea of how we’ve grown in content. So we try to make more and more stuff available to people. We try to, when you come to Google, fulfill that need that you have as quickly as possible.
# Because of our employee talent, Google is doing exciting work in nearly every area of computer science. Our main benefit is a workplace with important projects, where employees can contribute and grow.
# We’ve actually been very deliberate about making all of our decisions in a way that minimizes the risk that we will go out of business basically. We have pretty conservative financial planning. That turned out to be really smart, and we’ve had tremendous viral
growth anyway, so we haven’t really had any marketing expenses or things like that and we have huge volumes.
# The increasing volume of information is just more opportunity to build better answers to questions. The more information you have, the better.
# You can try to control people, or you can try to have a system that represents reality. I find that knowing what’s really happening is more important than trying to control people.
# In the same way Google puts users first when it comes to our online service, Google Inc. puts employees first when it comes to daily life in our Googleplex headquarters.
# Technology knowledge is going to drive wealth: people’s ability to deal with technology and to build interesting things.
# Always deliver more than expected.
# It is a tremendous responsibility for us to have all eyes focused on what we do and to give people exactly what they need when they ask for it.
# We believe it is easy to be penny wise and pound foolish with respect to benefits that can save employees considerable time and improve their health and productivity.
# Our opportunity and responsibility has continued to expand. It doesn’t feel all that different to me than it did a few years ago.
# The thing that matters is experience. We have lots of executives from failed companies; they learned a lot from these things. They say, ‘We can’t do that — we tried that and it didn’t work.’ So failure is useful.
# When you have basic technology you find interesting things to do with them, and if you’re lucky they’ll turn into something big.

Effectiveness and Efficiency: Making Government Accountable – The Role of the Chief Performance Officer

We all know that the role of government is different from the role of business. To pretend, like the Republicans do, that government should be run like a business is to a mistake of gargantuan proportions. Business and government have different functions. One to maximize and sustain profits, the other to “insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, etc. etc.”
So how do we go about measuring performance in government? And how can we manage government strategically?
Let’s start by looking at the functions of government ( from the Preamble):
1. To form a more perfect Union
2. To establish justice
3. To insure domestic tranquility
4. To provide for the common defense
5. To promote the general welfare
6. To secure the blessings of liberty
Now let’s adapt these functions for each government agency. For fun, let’s start with the IRS Without a fair tax system, we aren’t going to have 1 through 6. So how do we look at what the IRS needs to do to become more effective and efficient? For starters, the tax code has to become more equitable. This means our corporate friends need to start paying their fair share. Loop holes for the super-rich must be closed. We need to stop rewarding companies that ship jobs overseas. And hey, let’s add a carbon tax so we know we’re going to be building sustainable industries.
I’m only half kidding.
Each agency will have to create a scorecard of what “performance” means. And it will have to be measured against delivered results. WaPo has a cute article about this.
The real task is to manage government strategically. Here’s a fun chart from Nancy Killefer herself:
strategic governance
Read: How can American government meet its productivity challenge?
In the end, you can’t manage what you can’t measure (including intangibles). So here’s to the future of transparent, accountable government. Bring it, Obama!

The Limits of Green: Environmental Branding gets Messy

Prediction: 2009 will get “greenwashing” companies into hot water.
The danger in cause-related marketing is that it causes more harm to a company than good, especially when companies get involved in less than good faith.

This can happen, for example, when a company like P&G gets overzealous in its PR and engineers its own green awards.

And the slope gets slippery when the Sierra Club gets involved with Clorox.

Or when SC Johnson creates its own Greenlist(TM) process – and logo! Does anyone really believe that Windex is a green product?

Or when Dell claims it’s carbon neutral.

The simple question for business is can we trust youThe answer, so far, is no.

After eight years of laissez-faire, perhaps we are finally entering into a new phase of corporate accountability. And it’s not just about greenwashing.

Rebooting America

A similar tune from both Friedman and Krugman at the NYTimes
Here’s Friedman:
My fellow Americans, we can’t continue in this mode of “Dumb as we wanna be.” We’ve indulged ourselves for too long with tax cuts that we can’t afford, bailouts of auto companies that have become giant wealth-destruction machines, energy prices that do not encourage investment in 21st-century renewable power systems or efficient cars, public schools with no national standards to prevent illiterates from graduating and immigration policies that have our colleges educating the world’s best scientists and engineers and then, when these foreigners graduate, instead of stapling green cards to their diplomas, we order them to go home and start companies to compete against ours.
To top it off, we’ve fallen into a trend of diverting and rewarding the best of our collective I.Q. to people doing financial engineering rather than real engineering. These rocket scientists and engineers were designing complex financial instruments to make money out of money — rather than designing cars, phones, computers, teaching tools, Internet programs and medical equipment that could improve the lives and productivity of millions.
For all these reasons, our present crisis is not just a financial meltdown crying out for a cash injection. We are in much deeper trouble. In fact, we as a country have become General Motors — as a result of our national drift. Look in the mirror: G.M. is us.

and Krugman:
So what are the lessons for the Obama team?
First, the administration of the economic recovery plan has to be squeaky clean. Purely economic considerations might suggest cutting a few corners in the interest of getting stimulus moving quickly, but the politics of the situation dictates great care in how money is spent. And enforcement is crucial: inspectors general have to be strong and independent, and whistle-blowers have to be rewarded, not punished as they were in the Bush years.
Second, the plan has to be really, truly pork-free. Vice President-elect Joseph Biden recently promised that the plan “will not become a Christmas tree”; the new administration needs to deliver on that promise.
Finally, the Obama administration and Democrats in general need to do everything they can to build an F.D.R.-like bond with the public. Never mind Mr. Obama’s current high standing in the polls based on public hopes that he’ll succeed. He needs a solid base of support that will remain even when things aren’t going well.

Go Barack, Barack!

Farewell Harold Pinter

An interview,

and this statement:

A legislator of mankind…
P.S. see also: this and this >>
P.P.S. fun quote: “I do think the American President [Dubya] and our Prime Minister [Blair], the Prime Minister of this country, are gangsters” – Harold Pinter

The Financial Crisis: Perspectives from China and India

James Fallowsinterview with China’s Gao Xiqing, president of the China Investment Corporation is an eye-opener:
– “People, especially Americans, started believing that they can live on other people’s money. And more and more so. First other people’s money in your own country. And then the savings rate comes down, and you start living on other people’s money from outside. At first it was the Japanese. Now the Chinese and the Middle Easterners.
– “If you look at every one of these [derivative] products, they make sense. But in aggregate, they are bullshit. They are crap. They serve to cheat people.
– “I have to say it: you have to do something about pay in the financial system. People in this field have way too much money. And this is not right.
– “Today when we look at all the markets, the U.S. still is probably the most viable, the most predictable. I was trained as a lawyer, and predictability is always very important for me.
– “Americans are not sensitive in that regard. I mean, as a whole. The simple truth today is that your economy is built on the global economy. And it’s built on the support, the gratuitous support, of a lot of countries. So why don’t you come over and … I won’t say kowtow [with a laugh], but at least, be nice to the countries that lend you money.
– “Talk to the Chinese! Talk to the Middle Easterners! And pull your troops back! Take the troops back, demobilize many of the troops, so that you can save some money rather than spending $2 billion every day on them. And then tell your people that you need to save, and come out with a long-term, sustainable financial policy.”
and then there’s the Indian perspective:
– “In India, we never had anything close to the subprime loan,” said Chandra Kochhar, the chief financial officer of India’s largest private bank, Icici. (A few days after I spoke to her, Ms. Kochhar was named the bank’s new chief executive, in a move that had long been anticipated.) “All lending to individuals is based on their income. That is a big difference between your banking system and ours.” She continued: “Indian banks are not levered like American banks. Capital ratios are 12 and 13 percent, instead of 7 or 8 percent. All those exotic structures like C.D.O. and securitizations are a very tiny part of our banking system. So a lot of the temptations didn’t exist.”
– ” “We recognize it as a problem of plenty. It was perpetuated by greedy bankers, whether investment bankers or commercial bankers. The greed to make money is the impression it has made here. Anytime they wanted a loan, people just dipped into their home A.T.M. It was like money was on call.”
Serious business this.

The End of Chinamerica

Interesting commentary from Harvard’s Niall Ferguson:
With China decoupled from America—relying less on exports to the U.S. market, caring less about its currency’s peg to the dollar—the end of Chimerica would have arrived, and with it the balance of global power would be bound to shift. No longer so committed to the Sino-American friendship established back in 1972, China would be free to explore other spheres of global influence, from the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, of which Russia is also a member, to its own informal nascent empire in commodity-rich Africa.
Yet commentators should hesitate before prophesying the decline and fall of the United States. It has come through disastrous financial crises before—not just the Great Depression, but also the Great Stagflation of the 1970s—and emerged with its geopolitical position enhanced. That happened in the 1940s and again in the 1980s.
Part of the reason it happened is that the United States has long offered the world’s most benign environment for technological innovation and entrepreneurship.

Read all about it >>

Girl Scouts: Sell This!

One of my pet peeves with the Girl Scouts of America is their exploitation of children:
“…they have to sell 40 boxes of cookies at $3.00 apiece just to make $20.00. The other $2.50 goes to the Girl Scout Organization.”
What a rip-off.
Instead of selling cookies, the Girl Scouts troops should be selling these. And keeping the PCs.
Why can’t www.laptop.org donate or sell PCs to poor schools in the US as well as the rest of the world? C’mon St. Nicholas (Negroponte)!

The Death of Venice?

veniceflood.jpg
Last year, at about this time, we were visiting Venice, admiring its art and artifacts, as well as the fiestiness of its people… what a difference the flooding makes.
Venice is just one of 21 coastal cities that will have to contend with the impacts of rising sea levels. Learn more >>

Strategic Cost Reduction: How to Trim the Federal Budget using the Pareto Principle

JH3 is a big fan of the 80/20 principle:
The 80/20 rule provides the foundation for a relatively simple exercise for executives. It involves answering the following questions:
* Which 20% of the products or services generate 80% of the profitability?
* Which 20% of the customers generate 80% of the profitability?
* Which 20% of the geographies generate 80% of the profitability?
* Which 20% of the assets generate 80% of the profitability?

These are powerful and revealing questions, yet few companies today are able to answer these questions given the way their accounting and information systems are set up.

I wonder if the same approach could be applied to the Federal Budget. Obama, are you listening?
The pareto questions might look something like this:
– Which 20% of our costs take up 80% of the budget?
– Which 20% of our services impact 80% of the tax-paying public?
– Which 20% of our geographies require 80% of our aid?
– Which 20% of our public generate 80% of our tax revenues?

Betcha these could be eye-openers!

Accenture: How To Create A Culture Of High Performance

Accenture is advertising How To Create A Culture Of High Performance.
I agree with them that “the central attribute of a successful leader is the ability to change the way people think.
But I completely disagree when they say that “Successful leaders get everyone to share the same mindsets.”
I think the opposite is true: successful leaders bring together diverse points of view to challenge each other and present different alternatives, thus helping the leader make informed, effective decisions.
What Accenture is calling “mindsets” is really groupthink. Groupthink is a recipe for disaster, not high performance.
In the course of a two-year investigation, Accenture determined five “mindsets” which matter most in improving business performance:
Mindset 1: Maintain the Right Balance Between Market-Making and Disciplined Execution by Avoiding False Trade-offs and Committing to a Dual Focus on Present and Future.
Mindset 2: Identify and Multiply Talent by Investing a Disproportionate Amount of Time in Recruiting and Developing People.
Mindset 3: Use A Selective Scorecard to Measure Business Performance By Relying on a Simple, Memorable Way of Measuring Success and Using Every Occasion to Share Success Stories Throughout the Organization.
Mindset 4: Recognize Technology as a Strategic Asset by Investing in Technologies that Demonstrably Lead to Better Business Performance.
Mindset 5: Emphasize Continuous Renewal by Ensuring the Organization Understands What to Preserve and What to Jettison.