Enterra Insights

Supply Chain Management Education, Part 1

Some interesting articles and posts have been written recently about supply chain management (SCM) education. Victoria Taylor is even bold enough to ask if supply chain management is "the next big thing." ["Supply Chain Management: The Next Big Thing? Bloomberg BusinessWeek, 12 September 2011] She reports, "Hiring is strong for supply-chain managers and salaries are rising. No surprise that it's an increasingly popular MBA option." Taylor continues:

"Supply chain management—the acquisition of parts and raw materials, from purchasing to delivery—is not one of the classic B-school majors, for either undergraduates or MBAs. But job openings, comfortable salaries, and the prospect for advancement have caused the academic community to take notice, with more students majoring in the subject and more programs offering courses and concentrations in it. With such companies as H.J. Heinz and AnnTaylor Stores creating C-level supply chain positions in the past few years, more students are seeing career possibilities in the major."

Of course, that comes as no surprise for supply chain professionals; but, it does surprise people who believe that traditional MBAs are the only way to the top. One of the schools that has an active supply chain management program is Arizona State University. In my last post on this subject [Interesting Students in a Career in Supply Chain Management], I mentioned a series of videos explaining supply chain management that was produced by Professor Eddie Davila, a member of the faculty at ASU's Carey School of Business. For her article, Taylor interviewed William Verdini, an associate professor and chairman of the Supply Chain Management Department at Arizona State University’s Carey School of Business. He told her, "Businesses don't compete; supply chains compete. Now, supply chain officers are getting in on the strategic decisions that are being made." Taylor reports that supply chain management courses are getting so popular that students are now being turned away. She continues:

"Lehigh University’s College of Business and Economics is reporting the most undergraduate SCM majors in the program’s 10-year history. One of the major's required courses, Supply and Cost Management, ended up turning students away when it was capped at 45 students last semester. The course’s previous enrollment high, in 2007, was 27 students. SCM has even piqued the interest of accounting students to the point that North Carolina State University’s Poole College of Management is exploring the possibility of establishing a supply chain concentration within its undergraduate accounting program. The number of freshman supply chain majors at the Carey School has doubled since the 2007-08 academic year. This year, there were 211 senior majors and 18 freshman majors. According to the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), the number of undergraduate SCM programs has increased 25 percent since 2006. Almost half that jump happened during the 2009-10 school year."

Those numbers are not large; which could be the reason that there are so many opportunities for graduates holding SCM degrees. Those opportunities are generating student interest. Taylor explains:

"Supply chain jobs are available out there. According to a survey by the National Association of Colleges & Employers, only 45.4 percent of business administration majors and 46.9 percent of accounting majors from the Class of 2010 job applicants received at least one offer. At Carey, 64 percent of undergraduate supply chain majors surveyed who graduated in December 2009 and May 2010 reported having a job at graduation. Supply chain management majors and MBAs are in demand. Carey reports a 100 percent placement rate for the supply chain MBAs who graduated in May, compared with 75 percent for marketing students. This year, more than 40 companies recruited Carey MBA grads specifically for supply chain jobs, and the biyearly SCM career fairs at Penn State University’s Smeal College of Business attract more than 60 different employers."

Not only are jobs available but Taylor reports that are good paying jobs. She writes:

"Salaries are another draw. The Institute for Supply Chain Management’s 2011 survey shows that the average salary for supply chain management professionals is $103,664, up from $98,200 a year earlier. The average entry-level professional supply management salary is about $49,500, but the average salary of those with five or fewer years of experience is $83,689, up from $72,908 in 2010, an increase of nearly 15 percent."

If you are a student thinking about a career in supply chain management, noted supply chain analyst Lora Cecere has some advice for you. ["Yes, Abby, there is a Santa Claus," Supply Chain Shaman, 6 December 2011] First, however, she gives "thanks that academic programs are fueling the wave for the third generation of workers." She notes, however, that "we are unsure what your world will look like" when you graduate. "We think that the forecast entry-level jobs will be rosy, but we are unsure of how SCM practices will evolve." Below are "five pieces of advice" she thinks will help you on your journey to a career in supply chain management:

• "Get good at Math. SCM is a world where math geeks excel. Be proud of it, but learn how to use data to drive value-based outcomes. Think analytically, and use it to influence cross-functional groups. Data for the sake of data or math for the sake of math does us no good.


• "It starts with Clarity of Strategy. I cannot count the times that I hear that it is about 'people, process and technology.' Yawn, I say. I think that the REAL secret to supply chain excellence is alignment on supply chain strategy. If this is done right, it is the foundational building block to aligning people, building processes and selecting technology. Without the clarity on what is supply chain excellence, the world circles, functional organizations cannot align, and the technologies never work. Help to forge clarity in the organizations where you go on supply chain strategy.


• "Take what you have learned in School with a Grain of Salt. No two supply chains are the same, and no one company has it all figured out. Leave school with a solid foundation of the concepts, but realize that these practices are evolving. The real world is not as absolute as the writings of textbooks. Embrace the fact that SCM is ever-changing based on market drivers. Learn to think outside-in. Start first with what is happening in outside markets and then map the possibilities outside-in.


• "Learn to ask the Hard Questions, but nicely. It is not a world for a 'bull in a China Shop', but there are a lot of paradigms that need to be broken. Learn to ask the tough questions, but with respect. Ask how processes evolved, and what they could become if we could improve data quality, reduce latency and build stronger cross-functional processes.


• "Learn to Dance with the World of Gray. In SCM, there are no black and white answers. Success happens when you can take the world of gray and see patterns, build processes and forge bonds cross-functionally."

Good higher education has always been about teaching students how to think and solve problems rather than providing them with rote answers. I think that is what Cecere is trying to say -- learn how to think clearly and solve problems creatively. If you do, you'll be an asset to any company you join.

You should also put a little thought into which school you should attend. In most fields, the reputation of the school often makes a difference to recruiters. Back in 2009, "AMR Research started a bit of SCM collegiate controversy ... when it released a list of the top supply chain university programs." AMR was acquired by Gartner last year and Gartner has revived the practice. ["Let the Debate Begin Anew! Gartner Ranks Top Supply Chain University Programs," Supply Chain Digest, 20 July 2011] The article reports:

"An important and worthwhile change in 2011 is that Gartner this year broke the rankings into US undergraduate and graduate programs. There has been a call in many business circles for more emphasis on undergraduate programs to balance the more expensive hires coming out of the top graduate programs with positions for those with just undergraduate degrees who can begin at lower levels in the organization. The 2009 list was really a ranking of just the graduate university programs. Another change for 2011 is that, 25 graduate and undergraduate programs were ranked, versus just 19 graduate programs in 2009. This is likely both to be consistent in style to Gartner's annual top 25 company supply chain rankings, and also because more universities participated in the program this year than in 2009."

Like most lists that rate institutions of higher education, "a great deal of subjectivity [is] involved in such a ranking." The article states that "Gartner did its best to quantify the process." It explains how they did that for undergraduate programs:

"For undergraduate programs, the ranking used a weighted average of 40% for 'undergraduate industry value' (mentions as a top university program or recruiting spot based on a survey, having an internship requirement, and average starting salary of graduates); 20% on sheer program size (number of professors and students); and 40% for 'program scope' (how many of 11 key knowledge areas according to a Gartner framework does the program include?)."

I'm always skeptical of rankings based on surveys. It would be interesting, for example, to see if there is any correlation between respondents and their alma maters. Alumni can be myopic when it comes to rating their schools. I might have given a little less weight to the surveys and little more weight to content. Here's Gartner's list of the Top 25 Undergraduate Programs:

1. Penn State
2. Georgia Tech
3. Arizona State
4. Rutgers
5. Michigan State
6. University of Texas/Austin
7. Ohio State
8. University of Wisconsin/Madison
9. Texas A&M
10. Tennessee
11. Maryland
12. Western Michigan
13. Stanford
14. Lehigh
15. Marquette
16. Syracuse
17. Indiana
18. South Carolina
19. Auburn
20. Texas Christian
21. University of Nevada/Reno
22. Kansas
23. North Texas
24. Iowa State
25. Rider

As you might imagine, many universities with highly ranked undergraduate programs are also ranked highly for their graduate degree programs. Here's Gartner's list of the Top 25 Graduate Programs:

1. Penn State
2. Michigan
3. Michigan State
4. Rutgers (tied for 3rd)
5. Arizona State
6. Syracuse
7. MIT
8. Ohio State
9. Georgia Tech
10. Tennessee
11. Stanford
12. Lehigh
13. University of Texas/Dallas
14. University of Wisconsin/Madison
15. University of Texas/Austin
16. Texas A&M
17. Indiana
18. South Carolina
19. San Diego
20. Florida
21. Maryland
22. North Carolina State
23. Oklahoma
24. Kansas
25. Auburn

The Supply Chain Digest editorial staff concludes, "Accurate or not (and of course, the reality is that it is not measurable, though Gartner follows a pretty good methodology), universities will want to be seen as top programs regardless. We'd like to see some weight given to the level of actual productive research (not just academic papers) coming out of the faculty." In Part 2 of this series, I'll look at what some other supply chain professionals have to say about SCM education and what should be taught to students entering the field.

Thanksgiving 2011

Today is the Thanksgiving Day holiday in the United States. Like the past several years, it finds many people in need living in an economy that gives them little reason to hope. Yet, even in dire circumstances, a person should be able to find something for which to be thankful. I truly believe that having a thankful heart can make even the most miserable conditions more tolerable. Thanksgiving Day was set aside for people to pause and give thanks to a higher power; but, even individuals who don't believe in a higher power have reason to give thanks to someone. Henry van Dyke wrote:

"Gratitude is the inward feeling of kindness received. Thankfulness is the natural impulse to express that feeling. Thanksgiving is the following of that impulse."

Wherever you might find yourselves, and in whatever circumstances, I hope that on this day you will be able to search your heart and find something for which to be thankful. If you find yourselves with much to be grateful for, then I suggest that you ponder about what you can do to make someone else's life better. You may be the person for whom those individuals offer thanks next year. From all us at Enterra Solutions, Happy Thanksgiving.

Rebranding Your Company

Today, my company, Enterra Solutions, LLC, officially announced the launch of its new web site and a new slogan, "Welcome to the mind of Enterra." The new web site is first step in a rebranding campaign to let potential clients that Enterra's focus is primarily on supply chain optimization. The press release announcing this rebranding effort reads:

"Enterra Solutions, LLC, announced today that it has launched its new website and Facebook page to focus on its commercial and critical infrastructure businesses. Enterra has introduced a new, clean look and feel that reflects the cutting edge technology used in its product offerings. Based around the slogan, 'Welcome to the Mind of Enterra,' the new web site and Facebook page underscore the unique, capability that allows organizations and global supply chains to 'Sense, Think/Learn, and Act.'

'We are extremely excited about these first steps in our new corporate branding and marketing campaign,' said Stephen DeAngelis, Enterra's President and CEO. 'We wanted our website and Facebook page to be the first elements brought to market that help us more clearly and simply describe our technological innovations. We also wanted a venue to describe to a broad audience how Enterra's Core Sense, Think/Learn, Act Kernel™ offers intelligence through the use of an automated ontology and rules, combined with probabilistic logic and reasoning that enable real-time insights and agile responses, as well as systemic experiential learning.'

Because the Kernel combines large and complex data ingestion capabilities with artificial intelligence to sense, think/learn and act in real time, it helps decision makers identify challenges and take appropriate actions within established decision cycles. Enterra currently applies this technology to service manufacturers and their supply chain partners in the consumer products and retail sectors. The value of this new approach was recognized earlier this year when Enterra was selected as one of 25 companies featured in the Editors’ Pick section of Consumer Goods Technology (CGT) 2011 Readers’ Choice Issue.

Mr. DeAngelis stated that Enterra offers cloud-based, Solution-as-a-Service (SaaS) products because they provide real-time intelligence, 24-hour control, and large-scale results. In what supply chain analysts are calling the coming era of 'big data,' only cloud-based solutions can provide the necessary scalability for clients of all sizes.

The website launch is the first phase of the company’s new marketing and branding campaign, Enterra is positioning itself to be premier provider of leading supply chain solution in consumer products and retail industries. Enterra will soon launch its Twitter capability which will be linked to Mr. DeAngelis’ blog as well."

As the news release states, in the near future this blog will connect to social media outlets that as a part of the rebranding effort. The blog will probably get a new look as well. Wikipedia states, "Rebranding is the creation of a new name, term, symbol, design, or a combination of them for an established brand with the intention of developing a differentiated (new) position in the mind of stakeholders and competitors." Enterra's rebranding activities don't involve a name or logo change, but they do include elements of design. As the Wikipedia articles notes, "Far from just a change of visual identity, rebranding should be part of an overall brand strategy for a product or service."

Readers who have followed this blog over the past few years know that Enterra has worked in a number of areas (from security to international development). With the success of our supply chain optimization solutions, however, we've decided to concentrate primarily making them even better for our clients. As the Wikipedia article states, "The main reason for a re-brand is to communicate a new message for a company, something that has evolved." That certainly describes why my company has undertaken its rebranding effort.

Several years ago, John Williams, founder and president of LogoYes.com, a do-it-yourself logo design website, wrote, "There are just about as many reasons to rebrand a business as there are ways to do it." ["The Art of Rebranding," Entrepreneur, 3 July 2006] Even though there a number of ways to rebrand, Williams insisted that "there are right and wrong ways to go about it." REBRAND, a company "focused on effective brand transformations," agrees that there are at a lot of mistakes that companies can make. ["The Top 20 Mistakes Marketers Make When Rebranding — And How to Avoid Them," Rebrand.com] REBRAND asserts that smart companies "evolve their brands over time to keep them relevant. Some do it well, while others become the target of cynical bloggers." Williams reminds us, for example, about how New Coke flopped. One of the re-branding missteps that the REBRAND article indicates companies should avoid is "clinging to history." It states:

"Rebranding well means staying relevant. Assumptions made when the brand was established may no longer hold true. Analyze changes in target markets when exploring opportunities for brand expansion, repositioning and revitalization."

The first thought that comes to my mind are cereal companies that have changed from trying to sell their products based on sugary taste to selling them on their healthy side effects. That doesn't mean that sugary cereals have disappeared, but branding has certainly changed. The next mistake that companies make, according to REBRAND, is "thinking the brand is the logo, stationery or corporate colors. Brands encompass everything from customer perception and experience to quality, look and feel, customer care, retail and web environments, the tone and voice of communications, and more." Williams, for example, pointed out how Sprint rebranded itself after it merged with Nextel. He wrote:

"The company eliminated the angular logo (and red corporate color) that seemed indicative of inflexibility and replaced it with a more fluid logo--placed on a cheerful gold background--that reflects the company's friendliness and flexibility."

Sprint soon discovered, however, that customers were becoming more aware of network capabilities and it began losing ground to companies like AT&T and Verizon that had better coverage. Today, Sprint is stressing the value of its networks. The next mistake that companies make, REBRAND claims, is trying to navigate the rebranding process "without a plan." As Lewis Carroll wrote, "If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there." When a company sets out to rebrand itself, it obviously has a reason and an objective. To reach that objective, make and follow a plan.

Another mistake that companies make, according to REBRAND, is "not leveraging existing brand equity and goodwill." The article states:

"Dismissing brand equity when rebranding alienates established customers, while unnecessary overhauls can irreparably damage a brand’s perception. Consider the needs and mindset of the target market carefully before digging into the process. Sometimes a small evolution – or a new coat of paint – is all that’s needed to rejuvenate and make a brand relevant."

I recently read an article that indicated that a number of companies that sell products that have been around for generation are repackaging those products to look more "retro." They are rebranding with an old coat of paint rather than a new one. They may have adopted that idea from the National Football League, whose teams have played a number of games in retro uniforms. On the other hand, REBRAND states that a true rebranding can't be just a "superficial facelift. The rebrand’s story must be believable given the existing brand experience and customer perception. It must also hold credibility internally. If employees who live the brand day-to-day don’t believe, the target audience won't either." Another mistake companies make is failing to include improved customer service along with rebranding. The article states:

"Simply calling your own 800-number or receptionist may reveal challenges customers face and inform your rebranding strategy. Take the time to navigate your own website, buy your products and return something. Better yet, ask a friend or family member to do so and learn from their experiences."

We spent a lot of time navigating our new web site before we launched it. Obviously we want our customers to have a good experience when they go there. For more on customer service, read my post entitled To Survive the Current Economic Malaise Retailers Should Try a Little Customer Service. Another big mistake companies make, REBRAND says, is "forgetting that people don't do what they say. (They do what they do.)" The article states:

"Use caution when basing rebranding strategies on focus group-type research. Unless you're physically in the customer's environment observing them using your product or service, you're not getting the full story. Actual observation, while not perfect, will get you a lot closer to the right solution."

The folks at IDEO call this taking the "The Deep Dive." I would go even further than the folks at REBRAND and state that sometimes listening to the customer is simply wrong. Luke Johnson pointed out that Henry Ford, at the launch of the Model T, stated: "If I'd asked the customer, he'd have asked for a faster horse." ["Why focus groups tell you the obvious," Financial Times, 24 March 2010] Johnson and the folks at REBRAND have a different perspective on the value of research. REBRAND asserts that you shouldn't rebrand without research. Johnson claims, "Over-reliance on researchers means owners and managers are separated from the consumer. Successful [business people] I know put more effort in talking to customers themselves, than they do working with costly experts who tell them what they should have learned long before." Personally, I have found that industry experts can be very helpful.

Earlier this year, Judith Aquino, from Business Insider, provided her list of The 10 Most Successful Rebranding Campaigns Ever. The companies she singled out were: J. Crew, Burberry, Pabst Blue Ribbon, Harley-Davidson, McDonald's, Target, Walmart, Old Spice, Apple, and UPS. Click on her article to read why she believed these were great rebranding campaigns. Aquino concluded, "A successful campaign requires more than a revamped logo. It demands a vision that inspires customers, investors, and others to see the company in a new light." At Enterra, we hope that our efforts do just that.

Friendship, Happiness, and Courage in the Workplace

As an employer, I'm aware that job satisfaction is critical for retaining great employees. Employers would love to be able to control all of the factors that lead to job satisfaction; but, as we all know, they can't. Many things factor into what makes an employee happy and satisfied. In this post, I would like to discuss a few articles that with deal some of those factors. Let's begin with the topic of friendship. Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote, "A man's growth is seen in the successive choirs of his friends." My guess is that if you ask people on the street, "Does your happiness increase with the number of friends you have," the majority of people would answer, "Yes." After all, who doesn't like to be popular and popularity is measured by volume rather than depth.

A recent study, however, claims that the size of the social network you have may be determined by your genetic make-up rather than your sparkling personality. An article about the study asserts, "The number of friends you have can be accurately predicted by the size of a small almond-shaped part of the brain called the amygdala." ["How many friends you have can be predicted by the size of your ...," Gizmag, 27 December 2010]. Actually, the study's authors use the terms "social life" and "social networks" rather than "friends." The article reports:

"According to a university study, ... the strong correlation between a larger amygdala and a full social life holds true regardless of age or gender. Scientists have discovered that the amygdala, deep within the temporal lobe, is important to a rich and varied social life among humans. 'We know that primates who live in larger social groups have a larger amygdala, even when controlling for overall brain size and body size,' says Lisa Feldman Barrett, PhD, of the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) Psychiatric Neuroimaging Research Program and a Distinguished Professor of Psychology at Northeastern University, who led the study. 'We considered a single primate species, humans, and found that the amygdala volume positively correlated with the size and complexity of social networks in adult humans.' The researchers also performed an exploratory analysis of all the subcortical structures within the brain and found no compelling evidence of a similar relationship between any other subcortical structure and the social life of humans. The volume of the amygdala was not related to other social variables in the life of humans, such as life support or social satisfaction. 'This link between amygdala size and social network size and complexity was observed for both older and younger individuals and for both men and women,' says Bradford C. Dickerson, MD, of the MGH Department of Neurology and the Martinos Center for Biomedical Research. 'This link was specific to the amygdala, because social network size and complexity were not associated with the size of other brain structures.' Dickerson is an associate professor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School, and co-led the study with Dr. Barrett."

If, in the hypothetical question I posed above, you replaced the words "numbers of friends you have" with the "size of your social network," my guess is that the majority of people would answer, "No." Friends and social networks are not equivalent. As George Washington put it, "Be courteous to all, but intimate with few, and let those few be well tried before you give them your confidence." As an employer, it would be interesting to have access to data indicating the size of a person's amygdala before hiring them as sales or marketing people. The larger a person's social network, the better they should be at those tasks. But, as far as happiness and job satisfaction go, it would tell employers nothing.

People can and, hopefully do, have friends at work; but, that is not always the case. So what else can affect a person's happiness and sense of well-being either at or away from work. In a book entitled The Happiness Equation, author Nick Powdthavee, an economist at the University of York, attempts to share what economists and psychologists have learned about "the secrets of human happiness." ["Lessons From Cloud Nine," by Bryan Caplan, Wall Street Journal, 16 August 2011] In his book review, Caplan, a professor at George Mason University, writes:

"Powdthavee ... deftly explains the main determinants of happiness: the small effect of money, the great effect of marriage and friends, the massive effect of personality. Even extremely good news (such as winning the lottery) and extremely bad news (such as losing a spouse) rarely changes an individual's happiness for more than a couple of years. Mr. Powdthavee also explores the effect of happiness on success: Happiness today predicts higher job performance, better relationships and more years of health in the future."

Based on that brief abstract of Powdthavee's book, you can understand why employers should be concerned with the employee's happiness -- even if there doesn't seem to be a lot they can do about it. Caplan continues:

"In his discussions of money, Mr. Powdthavee puts special emphasis on relative income. People don't care only about the numbers on their paychecks, he writes; their happiness also depends on whether they make more or less money than their peers. Yet Mr. Powdthavee's explanation of the income-happiness connection is both misleading and confusing. He suggests that large differences in relative income can have a large influence on happiness, basing this claim on Richard Easterlin's atypical, somewhat dated finding that the richest Americans are twice as likely to be 'very happy' as the poorest. Yet he buries the standard, lower estimates after a long discussion of statistical methods that only an expert could understand, and he relegates to an endnote the powerful international evidence against the importance of relative income that has been gathered by Justin Wolfers and Betsey Stevenson. While absolute poverty can have a powerful negative affect on happiness, in First World countries there is little connection between either absolute or relative income and happiness."

Despite deep analysis that "only an expert could understand," common sense tells you that within a company peers getting significantly different salaries could be a source of conflict and unhappiness. Certainly a person's self-esteem could affected by knowing that he or she makes less than a peer for performing similar work. That's the reason that so many companies have policies that prohibit employees from sharing salary data. Caplan, who is an economics professor, is a bit offended by Powdthavee's book because it "unjustly caricatures the economics profession as dogmatically hostile to the very concept of 'happiness'." Caplan claims, "The topic has been mainstream for more than a decade, and only a tired minority continues to insist that if you can't objectively measure it, it doesn't exist." It shouldn't surprise you, then, that Caplan concludes:

"If you've never read another book on happiness, you may learn a lot from 'The Happiness Equation.' But better books on the same subject already exist—most notably, Daniel Gilbert's 'Stumbling on Happiness' and Arthur Brooks's 'Gross National Happiness.' Mr. Gilbert, a Harvard psychologist, is a virtuoso writer, while Mr. Brooks, the president of the American Enterprise Institute, seamlessly interweaves the data with reflections on the human condition. 'The Happiness Equation' can only really be recommended to those with a deep interest in the subject who have read other books on the topic and plan to read more. Mr. Powdthavee deserves credit for concluding his book with some of the big questions: 'Is happiness overrated?' 'Should government force people to be happy?' But he neglects the many ways in which government could sharply increase happiness by intervening less."

I would like to conclude with the discussion of two interrelated topics: fear and courage. There are people, I suppose, who never doubt their abilities or chosen course in life. But indications are, those people are rare. I think it's both appropriate and useful to question yourself on occasion. But, according to Melinda Beck, doubts can be taken to the extreme with the result being unfounded fear. ["Conquering Fear," Wall Street Journal, 2 January 2011] She writes:

"The boss loves your work. Your spouse thinks you're sexy. The kids—and even the cat—shower you with affection. But then there's the Voice, the nagging presence in your head that tells you you're a homely, heartless slacker. Even people who appear supremely fit, highly successful and hyper-organized are sometimes riddled with debilitating doubts, fears and self-criticisms."

Beck reports that the nagging doubts aren't really the problem, it's making sure that they don't become debilitating that matters. According to her article, a new "wave of cognitive-behavioral therapy is catching on in psychology and self-help circles. It holds that simply observing your critical thoughts without judging them is a more effective way to tame them than pressuring yourself to change or denying their validity." She continues:

"'Tame' is an interesting word," says Dr. [Steven C.] Hayes, who pioneered one approach, called Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. 'How would you go about taming a wild horse? You wouldn't whip it back into a corner. You'd pat it on the nose and give it some carrots and eventually try to ride it.' This new psychology movement centers on mindfulness—the increasing popular emphasis on paying attention to the present moment. One of its key tenets is that urging people to stop thinking negative thoughts only tightens their grip—'like struggling with quicksand,' Dr. Hayes says. But simply observing them like passing clouds can diffuse their emotional power, proponents say, and open up more options."

Although this "mindfulness" therapy remains controversial, employers should be aware of it because they may have employees who suffer from debilitating self-doubts. If you know someone who fits the description, point them to the article. The opposite of fear is courage. Natalie Angier writes, "Courage is something that we want for ourselves in gluttonous portions and adore in others without qualification. Yet for all the longstanding centrality of courage to any standard narrative of human greatness, only lately have researchers begun to study it systematically, to try to define what it is and is not, where it comes from, how it manifests itself in the body and brain, who we might share it with among nonhuman animals, and why we love it so much." ["Searching for the Source of a Fountain of Courage," New York Times, 3 January 2011] She continues:

"A new report in the journal Current Biology describes the case of a woman whose rare congenital syndrome has left her completely, outrageously fearless, raising the question of whether it's better to conquer one's fears, or to never feel them in the first place. In another recent study, neuroscientists scanned the brains of subjects as they struggled successfully to overcome their terror of snakes, identifying regions of the brain that may be key to our everyday heroics. Researchers in the Netherlands are exploring courage among children, to see when the urge for courage first arises, and what children mean when they call themselves brave. The theme of courage claims a long and gilded ancestry. Plato included courage among the four cardinal or principal virtues, along with wisdom, justice and moderation. 'As a major virtue, courage helps to define the excellent person and is no mere optional trait,' writes George Kateb, a political theorist and emeritus professor at Princeton University. 'One of the worst reproaches in the world is to be called a coward.' Yet defining what it means to be courageous has often proved as thistly as distinguishing the wise ones from the fools. For Plato and many other authorities, courage is above all a martial art, most readily displayed on the battlefield — the iconic brave solder running into the line of fire to retrieve an injured comrade. But Dr. Kateb points out that if courage finds its highest expression in war, then the trait paradoxically becomes an immoral virtue, ennobling war and carnage by insisting that only in battle can men — and it usually is men — discover the depths of their nobility. Marilynne Robinson, the novelist and social critic, has observed that courage is 'dependent on cultural definition' and 'rarely expressed except where there is sufficient consensus to support it.' Where religious martyrdom is lionized, there will be martyrs; where social or political protest is seen as glorious warfare in civvies, there will be a rash of red-faced declaimers, soapboxes on every street."

That brief history of studies and thoughts about courage is interesting, but has only tangential interest to happiness and satisfaction in the workplace. The following study noted by Angier is more pertinent. She writes:

"In pioneering work from 1970s and beyond, Stanley J. Rachman of the University of British Columbia and others studied the physiology and behavior of paratroopers as they prepared for their first parachute jump. The work revealed three basic groups: the preternaturally fearless, who displayed scant signs of the racing heart, sweaty palms, spike in blood pressure and other fight-or-flight responses associated with ordinary fear, and who jumped without hesitation; the handwringers, whose powerful fear response at the critical moment kept them from jumping; and finally, the ones who reacted physiologically like the handwringers but who acted like the fearless leapers, and, down the hatch."

Of those three groups, only the "jumping handwringers" were judged to be courageous. Expanding on that definition of courage, Angier writes, "Courage becomes democratized and demilitarized, the property of any wallflower who manages to give the convention speech, or the math phobe who decides to take calculus." That doesn't mean that the "fearless" group won't be good paratroopers or good employees, quite the opposite. A business needs both the fearless and the courageous. But courageous employees are important because they can help point out uncertainties and challenges that a fearless person might not. They are courageous because they "are aware of a danger but proceed in the face of it." What you don't need in your business is someone who is stupidly courageous (i.e., someone who proceeds with an activity that can have devastating effects on your business with little upside potential). The rogue traders in European banks come to mind. Rewarding courageous employees with a bit a praise or a bonus goes a long way to increasing their self-esteem and satisfaction at work.

The bottom line of this discussion is that employers must be cognizant of a lot more than job performance to extract the best from employees. In situations where inattention can result in serious injury or death, being aware of an employee's needs or predilections and recognizing changes in behavior or mood are even more important. Happiness, fear, and courage all play their role in the workplace and the more we understand about them the better.

Labor Day 2011

I would have liked to have titled this post "Happy Labor Day"; but, with an unemployment rate hovering over 9 percent and few prospects of it diminishing in the near term, I decided "happy" probably wasn't a very good modifier for a day dedicated to labor. Happy or not, I hope you find a way to enjoy the holiday. The following history of the holiday is taken from U.S. Department of Labor site:

Labor Day: How it Came About; What it Means

Labor Day, the first Monday in September, is a creation of the labor movement and is dedicated to the social and economic achievements of American workers. It constitutes a yearly national tribute to the contributions workers have made to the strength, prosperity, and well-being of our country.

Founder of Labor Day

More than 100 years after the first Labor Day observance, there is still some doubt as to who first proposed the holiday for workers. Some records show that Peter J. McGuire, general secretary of the Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners and a cofounder of the American Federation of Labor, was first in suggesting a day to honor those "who from rude nature have delved and carved all the grandeur we behold." But Peter McGuire's place in Labor Day history has not gone unchallenged. Many believe that Matthew Maguire, a machinist, not Peter McGuire, founded the holiday. Recent research seems to support the contention that Matthew Maguire, later the secretary of Local 344 of the International Association of Machinists in Paterson, N.J., proposed the holiday in 1882 while serving as secretary of the Central Labor Union in New York. What is clear is that the Central Labor Union adopted a Labor Day proposal and appointed a committee to plan a demonstration and picnic.

The First Labor Day

The first Labor Day holiday was celebrated on Tuesday, September 5, 1882, in New York City, in accordance with the plans of the Central Labor Union. The Central Labor Union held its second Labor Day holiday just a year later, on September 5, 1883. In 1884 the first Monday in September was selected as the holiday, as originally proposed, and the Central Labor Union urged similar organizations in other cities to follow the example of New York and celebrate a "workingmen's holiday" on that date. The idea spread with the growth of labor organizations, and in 1885 Labor Day was celebrated in many industrial centers of the country.

Labor Day Legislation

Through the years the nation gave increasing emphasis to Labor Day. The first governmental recognition came through municipal ordinances passed during 1885 and 1886. From them developed the movement to secure state legislation. The first state bill was introduced into the New York legislature, but the first to become law was passed by Oregon on February 21, 1887. During the year four more states — Colorado, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York — created the Labor Day holiday by legislative enactment. By the end of the decade Connecticut, Nebraska, and Pennsylvania had followed suit. By 1894, 23 other states had adopted the holiday in honor of workers, and on June 28 of that year, Congress passed an act making the first Monday in September of each year a legal holiday in the District of Columbia and the territories.

A Nationwide Holiday

The form that the observance and celebration of Labor Day should take were outlined in the first proposal of the holiday — a street parade to exhibit to the public "the strength and esprit de corps of the trade and labor organizations" of the community, followed by a festival for the recreation and amusement of the workers and their families. This became the pattern for the celebrations of Labor Day. Speeches by prominent men and women were introduced later, as more emphasis was placed upon the economic and civic significance of the holiday. Still later, by a resolution of the American Federation of Labor convention of 1909, the Sunday preceding Labor Day was adopted as Labor Sunday and dedicated to the spiritual and educational aspects of the labor movement. The character of the Labor Day celebration has undergone a change in recent years, especially in large industrial centers where mass displays and huge parades have proved a problem. This change, however, is more a shift in emphasis and medium of expression. Labor Day addresses by leading union officials, industrialists, educators, clerics and government officials are given wide coverage in newspapers, radio, and television.

The vital force of labor added materially to the highest standard of living and the greatest production the world has ever known and has brought us closer to the realization of our traditional ideals of economic and political democracy. It is appropriate, therefore, that the nation pay tribute on Labor Day to the creator of so much of the nation's strength, freedom, and leadership — the American worker.

Although I agree with those last sentiments, I believe the best way to pay tribute to the American worker is to provide him or her with a decent job. I believe that labor, management, and government leaders need to work together to foster the conditions that generate more jobs. Private sector job creation is critical for ensuring the health of the American economy. But jobs must come neither as gifts nor as part of a welfare program. Workers need to shoulder the responsibility of preparing themselves for the jobs that are available. In the coming days, the President and his Republican rivals are going to present their recommended programs for job creation. The philosophical foundations of those plans are likely to be very different; however, no good idea should be discarded or discredited because of basic ideological differences. Job creation is too important a matter for bipartisan bickering. The polls continue to show that the American public is tired of politicians putting partisanship and ideology ahead of principled leadership. Americans want what's best for America, not what's best for the Democratic or Republican parties. Neither party can stake claim to having all of the good ideas or programs. It would be refreshing if politicians would listen intently to one another looking for an idea they can work on together. Unfortunately, it's hard to listen if you never stop talking and it's hard to agree if you are only looking to be disagreeable. I hope this Labor Day provokes politicians to remember that unemployment saps the strength of individuals, of families, and of the nation itself. Let's hope next Labor Day can be a happier one.

Happy Fourth of July

Almost every country in the world sets aside a day to celebrate its heritage and history. For the United States, that day is the Fourth of July. For Americans, the Fourth of July represents more than a day to celebrate culture and heritage; it's a day to remember some of the higher ideals -- like freedom and democracy -- that motivated its founding fathers to form the nation. America's first president, George Washington, once said, "As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality." It's perhaps a bit ironic that, given the fact that he used the term "liberal," George Washington might have a difficult time getting elected president in the current political climate.

Amidst our celebrations I would hope that we would look for those things that we cherish in common rather than the issues that divide us. Someone once said, "Liberty is the right to choose. Freedom is the result of the right choice." The implication, of course, is that we can make wrong choices. Millions of people around the world are suffering because wrong choices have been made in the past. Albert Camus asserted, "Freedom is nothing but a chance to be better." Unfortunately, freedom also allows us to be worse. Extremely hard choices must be faced in the days and years to come. They are choices that will affect the futures of children, grandchildren and great grandchildren. We need to choose leaders with the courage and good sense to address them. We haven't done all that well in the past.

On 7 March 1985, midway through Ronald Reagan's tenure and president, a conservative columnist with libertarian leanings named Charlie Reese wrote a column for the Orlando Sentinal entitled "Looking For Someone To Blame? Congress Is Good Place To Start." During the last presidential election, the column was widely distributed by Tea Party advocates. Despite Reese's conservative leanings, the column takes swipes at both sides of the aisle. Reese wrote:

"Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them. Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, Why do we have deficits? Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, Why do we have inflation and high taxes? You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does. You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does. You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does. You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does. One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country."

Reese was correct as far as he went; however, laying off the blame on those who were elected lets those who elected them avoid blame too easily. In the nearly three decades since Reese first penned his column, things haven't gotten any better -- and voters are to blame as much as politicians. In one of his plays, George Bernard Shaw wrote, "Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it." During this celebration of the Fourth of July, Americans should recommit themselves to shoulder the responsibility that freedom places on their shoulders. In doing so, we needn't be mean-spirited nor cold-hearted. There are still those to whom we must reach out. Greatness lies in rising to challenges, not shirking from them. I believe America remains a great nation. Happy Fourth of July!

Search for Resources at the Top of the World

Joseph Spears reports that the Arctic region "includes a rich basket of natural resources." ["The Snow Dragon Moves into the Arctic Ocean Basin," The Global Realm, 8 February 2011] He continues:

"The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that 25 percent of the world's undiscovered hydrocarbon resources are found in the Arctic region along with 9 percent of the world's coal along with other economically critical minerals."

Although this is not breaking news, Arctic resources are a hot topic because climate change is making access to them much easier. The focus of Spears article is China's interest in those resources. He notes, "In a warming and changing Arctic, China is stepping up its activities in the Arctic Ocean Basin." He continues:

"While China’s interests and policy objectives in the Arctic Ocean Basin remain unclear, Beijing is increasingly active and vocal on the international stage on issues that concern the region. To that end, China is actively seeking to develop relationships with Arctic states and participate in Arctic multilateral organizations such as the Arctic Council. ... The Arctic Council, is a high-level intergovernmental forum which addresses issues faced by the Arctic governments and the indigenous people The Arctic Council states include Canada, Iceland, Russia, Denmark, the United States and Norway Finland and Sweden. The Arctic Council allows [a] number of observers to attend the Arctic Council and [China] almost became an observer in 2008. Since that time China, Korea Japan and Italy [have attended as] ad hoc observers. Full membership is reserved for Arctic countries and indigenous groups."

Spears draws the headline for his article from the name of "the world's largest non-nuclear research icebreaker, Xue Long (Snow Dragon)." He reports that the icebreaker "has embarked on four Arctic research expeditions in recent years into Arctic waters." Spears writes, "This is part of China's larger polar scientific research effort which has seen 26 expeditions in the Arctic and Antarctic since 1984." In a more recent article, Wenell Minnick reported, "As polar ice caps melt, China is preparing to take advan­tage of potential opportunities that have broad national security im­plications, including new shipping routes along the Arctic rim and massive hydrocarbon reserves of oil and gas under the Arctic." ["Ice Station Dragon: China's Strategic Arctic Interest," Defense News, 16 May 2011]. Minnick continues:

"Though most international envi­ronmental groups see the melting of the polar ice caps as a disaster, China is seeing an opportunity, said Wang Kuan-Hsiung, a re­searcher at National Taiwan Nor­mal University. The Arctic will be largely ice-free in the summers within a decade, he said, and China views potential new shipping routes along the Arc­tic rim as a way of avoiding maritime piracy and cutting costs with shorter routes to Europe. Beijing has had security con­cerns over the sea lanes of com­munication. China is dependent on oil and gas shipments from the Middle East. Potential choke points in the Malacca Strait and territorial disputes in the South China Sea have added to the con­cern. For the first time in China’s modern naval history, it has taken up anti-piracy patrols in the Gulf of Aden to ward off Somali pirates. Though an Arctic passage would do little to solve security concerns over oil and gas shipments from the Middle East, it would provide a shorter route for China’s exports to Europe. It is estimated that the maritime route between Asia and Europe could be reduced from 15,000 miles to less than 8,000 miles, Wang said."

To learn more about potential northern shipping routes, read my post entitled Supply Chains and the Northwest Passage. To learn more about the piracy challenge, read my post entitled Shiver Me Timbers -- A New Age of Piracy. Minnick notes that, even if new northern trade routes open, "it is un­clear whether Chinese vessels will be allowed access to both the Northwest Passage, controlled by Canada and the U.S., and the Northeast Passage, controlled by Russia." China's larger goal is to maintain the Arctic as an international resource and it could "challenge Canadian claims of historical sov­ereignty over the Arctic in general and the Northwest Passage in particular." Minnick continues:

"In an effort to enhance its inter­national position, China has estab­lished three polar research sta­tions: the Great Wall Station and the Zhongshan Station in the Antarctic, and Yellow River Station at Ny-Alesund in Norway's Sval­bard archipelago in the Arctic. China also operates the MV Xue­long (Snow Dragon) polar re­search vessel, which has come un­der scrutiny by Taiwan authorities. In 2005, Taiwan frigates chased the Snow Dragon out of the island's territorial waters for alleged spy­ing. The vessel was allowed a goodwill visit to Taiwan in 2009, but ordered to turn off electronic monitoring equipment before en­tering Kaohsiung harbor. China has also been paying close attention to Iceland, where Beijing has established a large embassy and has been in discussions with Reykjavik officials about the cre­ation of a major Arctic shipping hub on Iceland, Wang said. China wants the Arctic sea pas­sages declared 'international terri­tory' or the 'shared heritage of hu­mankind,' Wright said. Beijing's 'nightmare scenario' is that the A5 or five Arctic littoral states — Canada, Denmark, Norway, Russia and the United States — will agree to exclude China and 'divvy up the region’s resources.'"

As noted earlier, those resources include: oil, natural gas, coal, iron, phosphate, peat, and non-ferrous metals." It's not just China that could create controversy in the region. Joby Warrick and Juliet Eilperin report, "As glaciers defrost and ice floes diminish, the North is being viewed as a source of not only great wealth but also conflict, diplomats and policy experts say." ["Warming Arctic opens way to competition for resources," Washington Post, 15 May 2011] Warrick and Eilperin continue:

"In recent months, oil companies have begun lining up for exploration rights to Baffin Bay, a hydrocarbon-rich region on Greenland's western coast that until recently was too ice-choked for drilling. U.S. and Canadian diplomats have reopened a spat over navigation rights to a sea route through the Canadian Arctic that could cut shipping time and costs for long-haul tankers. Even ownership of the North Pole has come into dispute, as Russia and Denmark pursue rival claims to the underlying seabed in hopes of locking up access to everything from fisheries to natural gas deposits. The intense rivalry over Arctic development was highlighted in diplomatic cables released last week by the anti-secrecy Web site Wikileaks. Messages between U.S. diplomats revealed how northern nations, including the United States and Russia, have been maneuvering to ensure access to shipping lanes as well as undersea oil and gas deposits that are estimated to contain up to 25 percent of the world's untapped reserves. In the cables, U.S. officials worried that bickering over resources might even lead to an arming of the Arctic."

The Arctic Ocean is the smallest of the world's oceans. A quick glance at a map from a top-of-the-world perspective highlights why a northern passage and access to resources there would be game changing. Warrick and Eilperin report that one leaked 2009 State Department cable quoted a Russian ambassador as saying, "While in the Arctic there is peace and stability, however, one cannot exclude that in the future there will be a redistribution of power, up to armed intervention."

It was exactly that kind of talk that led to "an extraordinary diplomatic gathering ... in Greenland's tiny capital Nuuk" in early May. Although it was the annual meeting of the Arctic Council, it was extraordinary in that it was attended by two U.S. cabinet members, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Secretary of the Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, and resulted in "the first legally binding treaty in its history, a pact that sets the rules for maritime search and rescue in the region." Warrick and Eilperin report, "Although modest in scope, the treaty, authored mainly by Russia and the United States, was hailed as a template for future agreements on issues ranging from oil-spill cleanup to territorial disputes." Following the meeting, Secretary Clinton stated, "The challenges in the region are not just environmental. The melting of sea ice, for example, will result in more shipping, fishing and tourism, and the possibility to develop newly accessible oil and gas reserves. We seek to pursue these opportunities in a smart, sustainable way that preserves the Arctic environment and ecosystem."

According to Warrick and Eilperin, another significant outcome from the meeting was the vote "to establish a permanent secretariat to the council, to be located in Tronso, Norway. Clinton asserted that the region's powers must recognize the council as the 'preeminent intergovernmental body, where we can solve shared problems and pursue shared opportunities.'" From China's perspective, the move to establish a permanent secretariat is probably viewed as a power grab to ensure that Arctic sea pas­sages don't become international terri­tory and/or that the region's resources aren't declared a shared heritage of hu­mankind.

With so much attention now being given to the Arctic region, retired General Joe Ralston insists that the U.S. should no longer view itself "as a nation bounded by two great oceans." He writes, "The world has changed. The Arctic Ocean is no longer optional. In fact, it has become our nation's third great ocean border - and the opportunity of a lifetime." ["From sea to shining sea to Arctic Ocean," Washington Times, 13 May 2011] He continues:

"The Arctic is of strategic importance to national security, global commerce and climate, and in meeting the world's energy needs. Cooperation in the neighborhood now can prevent conflicts later over sovereignty, shipping, the environment, energy and national security. ... The Arctic nations are preparing claims to take control of extended continental shelves that could carve up the Arctic Ocean floor - almost to the North Pole. Shipping is expanding exponentially. Russia's northern-route shipping volume is predicted to increase 500 percent this year over last, and Russia is granting permits for foreign vessels to transit its northern route. Eager to show its interest, China is allocating more to polar research, even going so far as to send an icebreaker north of Alaska last summer and north of Iceland this summer to do reconnaissance on shipping routes. Other nations, such as South Korea, also are gearing up because the northern routes can save billions of dollars in time, fuel and piracy problems."

The General concludes, "We're watching history being made." Because there is so much at stake, the Arctic region is going to be an interesting hot spot to watch over the coming decades.

Memorial Day 2011

Each year America celebrates the start of the summer season by remembering those who have fallen during the conflicts in which it has engaged. Unfortunately, each year there are more men and women to remember. As I noted in past posts, the day was officially proclaimed on 5 May 1868 by General John Logan, national commander of the Grand Army of the Republic, in his General Order No. 11, and was first observed on 30 May 1868, when flowers were placed on the graves of Union and Confederate soldiers at Arlington National Cemetery. Each year ceremonies remembering fallen soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen are held around the world in places where they fought and died. One such ceremony takes place in a small English village in Devonshire called Dunkeswell. There, in a lovely little Anglican church built in 1868, a memorial service is held and wreaths are laid in front of plaques honoring those who died while serving at the small airfield just outside of town. The attached image was taken of the Church of Saint Nicolas back in 1944. Yesterday marked the 66th service honoring the war dead.

The airfield was built during the Second World War (from 1941 to 1943) for the British Royal Air Force and named RAF Dunkeswell. According to Wikipedia, "the station was originally planned as a RAF Fighter Command, then a RAF Coastal Command airfield, but was transferred for use by American units. It was first used by the American United States Army Air Force Antisubmarine Command 479th Antisubmarine Group as a base of operations to fly antisubmarine missions over the Bay of Biscay using specialized B-24 Liberator bombers from August until November 1943. In November the United States Army Air Force turned over the antisubmarine mission to the United States Navy and its Liberators were reassigned to Navy Patrol Bomber Squadron VPB-103, Fleet Air Wing 7, which continued aerial antisubmarine operations from the station. This was the first United States Navy unit to train with the RAF, later followed by VB-105 and VB-110. The Naval antisubmarine squadrons moved to RAF Upottery in November 1944. With the departure of the Americans, the RAF used the airfield from August 1945 to April 1946 for ferrying aircraft to the Middle East by 16 Ferry Unit, RAF Transport Command. After September 1946 the station was put on care and maintenance status until the end of 1948, when it was sold by the Ministry of Defence."

In addition to the annual memorial service, there is a Dunkeswell Memorial Museum whose motto is: "Many returned home, some stayed forever, none will be forgotten." The museum "is dedicated to all the Veterans of United States Fleet Air Wing 7 and RAF personnel who served on the only American Navy air base commissioned on UK soil during World War II." RAF Dunkeswell may well have ended up as an obscure footnote in history had it not been for one of the men whose name can be found on the plaque at the back of the town's church. That man was Lieutenant Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr., USN, older brother of President John F. Kennedy. The following information about Lt. Kennedy comes from a biographical sketch found on the website of The Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr., Foundation:

"Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr., ... attended Harvard Law School, but left before his final year to volunteer as a Navy flier. Awarded his wings in May 1942, he flew Caribbean patrols and in September 1943 was sent to England with the first naval squadron to fly B-24's with the British Naval Command. His military service, which ended with his death on August 12, 1944, was described as follows by his brother, John F. Kennedy:

'His squadron, flying in the bitter winter over the Bay of Biscay, suffered heavy casualties, and by the time Joe had completed his designated number of missions in May, he had lost his former co-pilot and a number of close friends. Joe refused his proffered leave and persuaded his crew to remain on for D-day. They flew frequently during June and July, and at the end of July they were given another opportunity to go home. He felt it unfair to ask his crew to stay on longer, and they returned to the United States. He remained. For he had heard of a new and special assignment for which volunteers had been requested which would require another month of the most dangerous type of flying. ... It may be felt, perhaps, that Joe should not have pushed his luck so far and should have accepted his leave and come home. But two facts must be borne in mind. First, at the time of his death, he had completed probably more combat missions in heavy bombers than any other pilot of his rank in the Navy and therefore was preeminently qualified, and secondly, as he told a friend early in August, he considered the odds at least fifty-fifty, and Joe never asked for any better odds than that.'

"The Secret mission on which he lost his life was described by a fellow officer after it was declassified:

'Joe, regarded as an experienced Patrol Plane Commander, and a fellow-officer, an expert in radio control projects, was to take a 'drone' Liberator bomber loaded with 21,170 pounds of high explosives into the air and to stay with it until two 'mother' planes had achieved complete radio control over the 'drone.' They were then to bail out over England; the 'drone,' under the control of the 'mother' planes, was to proceed on the mission which was to culminate in a crash-dive on the target, a V-2 rocket launching site in Normandy. The airplane ... was in flight with routine checking of the radio controls proceeding satisfactorily, when at 6:20 p.m. on August 12, 1944, two explosions blasted the 'drone' resulting in the death of its two pilots. No final conclusions as to the cause of the explosions has ever been reached.'

"Joe was posthumously awarded the Navy Cross ... and also the Air Medal ... In 1946 a destroyer, the USS Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr., destroyer No. 850, was launched at the Fore River shipyards as the Navy's final tribute to a gallant officer and his heroic devotion to duty."

Lt. Kennedy was among the Second World War's most noted casualties; but, he is mourned neither more nor less than others who died in the service of their country. We cannot sufficiently honor their sacrifice. We can only carry on the effort to secure the liberty and peace for which they died. The late President Ronald Reagan once said, "A people free to choose will always choose peace." The greatest Memorial Day tribute we could give fallen heroes is a world at peace. Unfortunately, that day looks far off and remains more of a hope than a possibility.

Ethically Speaking

Do ethics matter in business? The obvious (and correct) answer is: "Of course they do." A good follow-up question, then, is: "What are ethics?" An article in the journal Issues in Ethics, developed by Manuel Velasquez, Claire Andre, Thomas Shanks, S.J., and Michael J. Meyer, reports that "some years ago, sociologist Raymond Baumhart asked business people, 'What does ethics mean to you?'" ["What is Ethics?" IIE V1 N1, Fall 1987, Revised 2010] Their responses are probably similar to responses you would receive if you polled a number of business executives today. "Among their replies were the following":

"'Ethics has to do with what my feelings tell me is right or wrong.'
"'Ethics has to do with my religious beliefs.'
"'Being ethical is doing what the law requires.'
"'Ethics consists of the standards of behavior our society accepts.'
"'I don't know what the word means.'"

The authors note, "These replies might be typical of our own. The meaning of 'ethics' is hard to pin down, and the views many people have about ethics are shaky." If we want people to act ethically (in business, politics, or any other sector of human activity), we don't want them to have "shaky" views on the subject. The problem, according to Velasquez and his colleagues, is that "many people tend to equate ethics with their feelings." They insist, "Being ethical is clearly not a matter of following one's feelings. A person following his or her feelings may recoil from doing what is right. In fact, feelings frequently deviate from what is ethical." This assertion is one I will return to later.

Velasquez and his colleagues go on to explain a few other things that ethics are not. For example, they are not based in religion. Atheists need to be as ethical as believers. Ethics are not the same "as following the law." People can do some pretty unethical things while staying within the letter of the law (they point out, for example, that slavery was once legal). They continue:

"Finally, being ethical is not the same as doing 'whatever society accepts.' In any society, most people accept standards that are, in fact, ethical. But standards of behavior in society can deviate from what is ethical. An entire society can become ethically corrupt. Nazi Germany is a good example of a morally corrupt society. Moreover, if being ethical were doing 'whatever society accepts,' then to find out what is ethical, one would have to find out what society accepts. ... But no one ever tries to decide an ethical issue by doing a survey. Further, the lack of social consensus on many issues makes it impossible to equate ethics with whatever society accepts. ... If being ethical were doing whatever society accepts, one would have to find an agreement on issues which does not, in fact, exist."

Of course, explaining what ethics are not gets us no closer to explaining what ethics are. Fortunately, Velasquez and his colleagues do not leave us hanging. They continue:

"Ethics is two things. First, ethics refers to well-founded standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ought to do, usually in terms of rights, obligations, benefits to society, fairness, or specific virtues. Ethics, for example, refers to those standards that impose the reasonable obligations to refrain from rape, stealing, murder, assault, slander, and fraud. Ethical standards also include those that enjoin virtues of honesty, compassion, and loyalty. And, ethical standards include standards relating to rights, such as the right to life, the right to freedom from injury, and the right to privacy. Such standards are adequate standards of ethics because they are supported by consistent and well-founded reasons. Secondly, ethics refers to the study and development of one's ethical standards. As mentioned above, feelings, laws, and social norms can deviate from what is ethical. So it is necessary to constantly examine one's standards to ensure that they are reasonable and well-founded. Ethics also means, then, the continuous effort of studying our own moral beliefs and our moral conduct, and striving to ensure that we, and the institutions we help to shape, live up to standards that are reasonable and solidly-based."

Since this is a corporate blog, I want to discuss ethics in the business setting. Professor Mary Gentile, director of the Giving Voice To Values curriculum at Babson College, indicates that she once wondered whether there was such a thing as business ethics. ["Ethics teaching asks the wrong questions," Financial Times, 13 September 2010] She writes:

"A few years ago, I suffered a crisis of faith. After working in the field of business ethics at Harvard Business School and later as a consultant on global MBA education, I began to wonder if it was even ethical to try to teach the subject. I laboured to persuade faculty to raise the topic, but then, the conversation typically went as follows: some students argued we should all 'do the right thing'. These individuals typically broke into two groups: those who were saying what they thought was expected and those who really wanted to believe they could be ethical business people. And then there was another group who felt the class was an exercise in political correctness. What did it have to do with learning how to be successful? They were cynical and sometimes slightly resentful; what right did a business school have to be preaching at them? Given this particular recipe, coupled with faculty who understandably did not want to argue that students behave in a naively self-destructive fashion, the ethics discussion was less than empowering. Classes were typically based on thorny ethical dilemmas: the ones we termed 'right versus right' discussions, although they often amounted to more of a search for the lesser evil. Students who argued for 'ethical' positions would often appear to be less sophisticated; the way to demonstrate you were worldly wise was to argue that the competitive marketplace did not allow for self-serving morality, or even more cleverly, that it was wrong to behave in such a selfish way, putting one's own conscience over the good of the enterprise and shareholders. It seemed that despite faculty's good intentions, these conversations were something of a charade and I questioned the whole endeavour."

It is easy to see how one could start questioning the value of ethics if all you ever focus on are "right versus right" discussions. Searching for the lesser evil in morally ambivalent situations is never going to give students a sense of what is right and what is wrong. Armed with some basic standards, I suspect that most people will do their best to work through the tough cases. Without such standards, they appeared to be unprepared to deal with situations where clear ethical breaches are being made. Gentile continues:

"I realised that the MBA graduates pictured in handcuffs were typically those who had been engaged in more clear-cut offences; rather than right versus right scenarios, their offences were not only unethical but illegal. And I wondered if our focus on distinguishing right from wrong was actually creating a kind of 'school for scandal'. Students were practising the very rationalisations that led them to question whether values-driven behaviour was even possible or right in the first place. It was this kind of thinking that later led some of their number into such deep litigious waters. Were we asking the wrong questions? Shouldn't we invite students to think about how to do what was ethical and legal, rather than whether it was possible (or profitable) to do so? What if we looked at what had worked in the past for those individuals who had found ways to voice their values in the workplace? And what if we asked students to develop action plans and 'scripts' for what they would say and do when they encountered the very predictable pressures to behave unethically?"

All parents eventually learn that the best thing they can do for their children is teach them correct principles and then hope they use them to guide their behavior throughout the rest of their lives. Gentile eventually came to the realization that a similar direction was also the best one for educators to take with their students as well. She concludes:

"We could then tell them to practice these scripts with each other – not as adversarial role play but as peer coaching exercises. Students would prove their sophistication with the most feasible arguments and methods to do the seemingly impossible, that is behave in accordance with their highest values in the workplace. Just think what might have happened at BP if individuals there not only knew what the right thing to do was (we know there was more than one engineer who tried to speak up about safety violations), but also knew how to do so effectively. This idea is not rocket science. It amounts to educators asking students and business leaders asking employees to bring their insights, their critical thinking and innovative ideas to the task of getting the right thing done. We know that the heroes of business history comprise individuals who made 'do-able' what previously seemed impossible. Let's invite students to apply that same passion and entrepreneurial spirit to building a values-driven economy."

If all business schools would take this approach to teaching ethics, a generation or two from now we might find a more ethical global business climate. To learn more about today's global business climate, read my post entitled Corruption Around the World. Since the Corruption Perceptions Index was published last year, not much has changed. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development recently reported "that only five of the 38 nations that have committed to stamp out bribery of foreign officials imposed penalties during 2010." ["Few Nations Are Punishing Bribery," by Paul Hannon, The Wall Street Journal, 21 April 2011] Will the business world ever be ethically perfect -- of course not. Even business people with sterling reputations like Warren Buffet can find themselves unwittingly caught in ethical dilemmas ["Stumbling Into Bad Behavior," by Max H. Bazerman and Ann E. Tenbrunsel, The New York Times, 20 April 2011]. Bazerman, a professor of business administration at Harvard, and Tenbrunsel, a professor of management at the University of Notre Dame, write:

"It's easy to look at big names like Warren E. Buffett, and big companies like Ernst and Young, and be judgmental. Of course they overlooked ethical lapses. Why wouldn't they? That's business. Regulators, prosecutors and journalists tend to focus on corruption caused by willful actions or ignorance. But in our research, and in the work of other scholars who study the psychology of behavioral ethics, we have found that much unethical conduct that goes on, whether in social life or work life, happens because people are unconsciously fooling themselves. They overlook transgressions — bending a rule to help a colleague, overlooking information that might damage the reputation of a client — because it is in their interest to do so."

Do such ethical transgressions make a person evil? Do people committing them see themselves as unethical? Bazerman and Tenbrunsel assert, "When we fail to notice that a decision has an ethical component, we are able to behave unethically while maintaining a positive self-image. No wonder, then, that our research shows that people consistently believe themselves to be more ethical than they are." They appear to be agreeing with Gentile that helping make people more aware of what constitutes ethical behavior in a positive way could help create a less corrupt business environment. Unfortunately, I'm not holding my breath that it will happen any time soon. Bazerman and Tenbrunsel believe that conflicts of interest are behind most of the business world's "unintentional" as well as "intentional" acts of unethical behavior. They conclude:

"Our legal system often focuses on whether unethical behavior represents 'willful misconduct' or 'gross negligence.' Typically people are only held accountable if their unethical decisions appear to have been intentional — and of course, if they consciously make such decisions, they should be. But unintentional influences on unethical behavior can have equally damaging outcomes. Our confidence in our own integrity is frequently overrated. Good people unknowingly contribute to unethical actions, so reforms need to address the often hidden influences on our behavior. Auditors should only audit; they should not be allowed to sell other services or profit from pleasing their customers. Similarly, if we want credit-rating agencies to be objective, they need to keep an appropriate distance from the issuers of the securities they assess. True reform needs to go beyond fines and disclosures; if we are to truly eliminate conflicts of interest we must understand the psychology behind them."

Philosophers and theologians will forever debate whether humankind's nature is basically bad or good. My suspicion is that where you sit in that debate determines much of your thinking about how ethics are taught (or even if it is an appropriate subject for business schools). As an optimist, I fall into the camp that says people need to be exposed to the subject. I like Professor Gentile's approach. On the other hand, as a realist, I want legislators to enact and regulators to enforce laws dealing with unethical behavior. We need both carrots and sticks in order to protect society as a whole. The late Nobel Prize laureate Albert Camus once said, "A man without ethics is a wild beast loosed upon this world." It's time to tame the beast.

Life a Hundred Years from Now: Part 1

Earlier this year I posted a few blogs dealing with short-term predictions about the future. A few daring souls have taken the long view and predicted what life might look like some hundred years from now. The thing that always strikes me about early science fiction movies that depict the future is that completely missed miniaturization except perhaps for "ray guns." So I'm not too sanguine about anybody's ability to predict things very far into the future. Before looking forward, however, let's look to past. A hundred years ago:

• The average life expectancy in the United States was forty-seven.
• Only 14 percent of the homes in the United States had a bathtub.
• Only 8 percent of the homes had a telephone. A three minute call from Denver to New York City cost eleven dollars.
• There were only 8,000 cars in the US and only 144 miles of paved roads.
• The tallest structure in the world was the Eiffel Tower.
• The five leading causes of death in the U.S. were: 1. Pneumonia and influenza 2. Tuberculosis 3. Diarrhea 4. Heart disease 5. Stroke
• Plutonium, insulin, and antibiotics hadn't been discovered yet. Scotch tape, crossword puzzles, canned beer, and iced tea hadn't been invented.
• Punch card data processing had recently been developed, and early predecessors of the modern computer were used for the first time by the government to help compile the 1900 census.

Based on what has happened over the past hundred years, it doesn't take a seer to predict that life expectancy is likely to increase, communications will improve, transportation will change, medical care will evolve, and new products will be invented. Specifics in each of those areas are much more difficult to predict. In this first part of this two-part series, I'll look at articles written in 2006 and 2008 -- before the Great Recession. The first article I discovered doesn't just leap a century ahead; rather, it provides headlines along the way. ["What will life be like 100 years from now?" by Patrick Moore, The Independent, 8 November 2006] "Speculation can be dangerous," Moore writes, "especially when science is at the mercy of power-drunk politicians. I have done my best here to indicate what I think may happen, provided that there are no more global wars." He also notes that no one can predict when natural disasters may hit or the consequences that may follow. By looking at events Moore predicted were going to take place between 2007 and now, he demonstrates how difficult it is to predict the future -- even the near-term future.

Moore predicted, for example, the "discovery of a Neptune-sized planet far beyond the Kuiper Belt" in 2007 that would explain "the Pioneer Anomaly - the unexpected deviation from the expected trajectory for very distant spacecraft - as well as the highly eccentric orbits of certain minor astronomical bodies such as Sedna." It didn't happen. He predicted that in 2008, "dark matter" would be "partly explained." It didn't happen [see "Ambitious search fails to find dark matter," World Science, 11 April 2011]. He predicted that in 2010 "Britain's newly elected government looks at restoring the Royal Greenwich Observatory" and that a consortium of developed nations would build "the Incredibly Large Telescope." Britain did get a new government, but the other predictions didn't happen. Although Moore gets off to a shaky start, we will bravely press on with the rest of his predictions:

• 2016 Preliminary lunar base set up in the Mare Frigoris of the Moon, in preparation for permanent human habitation; first a medical centre is established there. The first radio telescope is set up on the far side of the Moon, where conditions are totally radio-quiet. It soon begins to identify quasars and starburst galaxies at distances of over 13.6 thousand million light years away from Earth - objects from a time not that long after the Big Bang.
• 2018 Completion of the ILT set up at the Fred Hoyle Observatory in Tibet. During initial testing it identifies Earth-mass planets around the stars Epsilon Eridani and Delta Pavonis, providing direct images and showing that their atmospheres are oxygen-rich. The presence of oxygen is a strong indicator of the presence of life.
• 2019 Rho Cassiopeiae explodes as a hypernova and peaks at magnitude -8. X-ray emissions and neutrino showers are picked up by observatories on Earth, in space and on the Moon. A search for gravitational waves is initiated - they were predicted by Albert Einstein's General Theory of Relativity in 1915 but remained largely theoretical. In most northern-hemisphere observatories, routine work is suspended so that attention can be focused upon Rho Cassiopeiae.
• 2022 Gravitational waves detected. Theorists in London, Cambridge and Tokyo show that the acceleration of the expanding Universe is due to slight variations in the value of the gravitational constant, and that the present phase of expansion is likely to be succeeded by a period of contraction ending in what may be called a new Big Bang.
• 2028 Nuclear device deliberately exploded close to the asteroid Apophis, in order to divert the space-based object and prevent its collision with the Earth in 2036. Though this experiment is successful, the future movements of Apophis will be carefully monitored by the Lunar Observatory and by the VLT and ILT. Apophis seems to be a monolithic body, making it even more of a threat.
• 2033 First manned expedition to Mars; there is a controlled landing on its moon Deimos (a natural space station) followed by the astronauts' descent to Mars itself in the Martian Module. Rovers Spirit and Opportunity found to be fully functional once given new batteries. Solar radiation levels are found to be tolerable.
• 2039 Onset of prolonged solar minimum with few sunspots or coronal mass ejections (CMEs). This marks the start of the end of global warming on Earth. Theory predicts an interim period, followed by a phase of global cooling. Conditions similar to those of the Little Ice Age (1645-1715) are expected towards the end of the century.
• 2060 First major 'city' on Mars (Port Lowell) leads to plans for new settlements. Life is found in newly discovered seas below the Martian surface. The most advanced life forms resemble jellyfish that were common in Earth's oceans hundreds of millions of years ago. Tests show that the Martian jellyfish are not poisonous; indeed, they are, in fact, edible - a rich source of nutrition for the human colony.
• 2064 Manned landings on Halley's Comet at the time of perihelion - its closest approach to the Sun. No bacteria are found, weakening Fred Hoyle's argument that new diseases and epidemics on Earth could have been spread by rocks entering the Earth's atmosphere from space. Transmitters attached to the comet will allow tracking all around its orbit; recording devices will send back data about Kuiper Belt objects and the remote planet Thanatos, with its three known satellites.
• 2075 New settlement completed in the Hellas basin on Mars (Port Antoniadi), including an observatory equipped with the ULT (Unbelievably Large Telescope). Martian scientists receive the first artificial signal from space found to come from a planet orbiting Epsilon Eridani. Attempts to interpret the signal are not successful. Reply sent.
• 2099 Space elevator completed and linked with the orbiting ACS (Arthur Clarke Station). Fossil fuels are now almost obsolete and monitoring by the ACS shows that atmospheric pollution has been dramatically reduced.
• 2107 Celebrations to mark the 150th anniversary of the start of the space age (4 October 1957 according to the Earth calendar) are followed by hostilities between the American Federation and the Sino-Japanese Confederacy. The crisis was sparked by a dispute regarding the issue of licences for mining rights of asteroids. Martian colonists declare a UDI (Universal Declaration of Independence).

Frankly, I'm not sure that the rest of Moore's predictions have any greater chance of coming true than the predictions he made about years past. He is not alone, however, in predicting things like space tourism and space elevators or the continuation of conflict.

A couple of years after Moore made his predictions, a site called Shvoong.com, which advertises itself as "the global source for summaries & reviews," published a summary of predictions made by Professor Prof. P. A. Varghese ["Life After 100 Years!"] The summary starts out with a prediction with which Moore would probably agree. "In about 100 years, organized tours will be frequent to the space and moon." On a more pragmatic level, Varghese predicts that "the internet would have already taken every nook and corner of the earth in detail to the drawing rooms of peoples' homes." I don't really have a problem with the latter prediction. I believe the Internet will reach all corners of the earth sooner rather than later and it will probably be delivered through a smartphone or other personal communication device rather than a PC.

Varghese sees a very dark future for the nuclear family. He believes that women will spearhead this decline as they opt out of traditional marriage arrangements and forego child bearing. As a result, Varghese predicts that in a hundred years "the population will dwindle in all the advanced countries." That's a pretty safe prediction since we are already seeing that trend unfold. Most demographic forecasts predict the global population will stabilize or start decreasing around 2050. Another development that he believes will accelerate the decline of the traditional family and marriage is the widespread use of "gene banks" that will help create "super-intelligent and disease free kids." In a hundred years he believes that scientists will have perfected "genetic engineering."

Like Ray Kurzweil, Varghese believes that over the next century "biomedicine and biotechnology will advance fast. Man would have succeeded in conquering the ageing process and the average age of man will cross hundred and ten in all the advanced countries." For more on Kurzweil's thoughts about the future, read my post entitled Looking towards the Future with Ray Kurzweil. When man finally conquers death, something both Varghese and Kurzweil think possible, Varghese believes that organized religion will collapse. As he writes, "The moment man conquers death, the death of god is certain."

When it comes to financial activity, I believe Varghese's predictions are already outmoded. He predicts that "credit cards will replace the medium of exchange. Currency notes will be on the wane." In many developing countries, cellphone transactions are already replacing many traditional currency or credit card transactions. Varghese apparently believes that scientists and agronomists will figure out how to feed the global population. He predicts:

"A revolution can be expected in the food habits and food production. The elaborate cooking now seen commonly will be gone. Ready made foods that will tickle the taste buds of man will replace the traditionally cooked meals. Food making and consumption will undergo drastic changes."

One prediction that surprised me -- and with which I strongly disagree -- is that "the poor nations of the world will be still be a century or two behind." I'm not willing to concede that poor nations are currently "a century or two behind" let alone that they will be in a hundred years. It is hard to find a place on the planet where cellphones are not already present. Most analysts see a much better world for emerging and frontier market nations. On a brighter note, Varghese sees a greener world. He writes:

"Solar energy would have replaced conventional fossil-fuel based sources. Wind energy would be tapped too. Attempts would be made too at the tidal resources. The roads would be less polluted with solar powered automobiles. Homes would be using solar power. No appreciable climate change is expected as this large earth has the resilient power to absorb minor changes in the content of its atmospheric gases. There will no serious warming nor any flooding of low areas. The eco system will go on undisturbed. Some more species will go extinct and new ones would be discovered."

When it comes to forms of transportation other than automobiles, Varghese predicts, "Pilot-less aircraft, submarines and ships will ply in their respective areas." Finally, he doesn't see an end to war or the emergence of world government (conspiracy theorists rest easy!). From my perspective, Varghese goes too far in some of his predictions and not far enough in others. Often he is so vague or general that he reminds me of Nostradamus. In the second part of this two-part series, I will look at a more recent article that provides predictions that the author claims are based in proven principles of physics. Perhaps surprisingly, you will see some of the predictions mentioned above mentioned again.