"Live as if you were living already for the second time and as if you
had acted the first time as wrongly as you are about to act now," the
world-renown psychiatrist and author of the classic bestseller, Man's Search for Meaning, Dr. Viktor Frankl, advises us.
For several months now, I've been in direct communication with a number
of prison inmates in both the USA and Europe who have shared with me
their personal search for meaning during their incarceration.
Minus evidence to the contrary, I can only assume that their intentions
are sincere and that they are demonstrating an authentic commitment to
meaningful values and goals--what I describe in my book, Prisoners of Our Thoughts, as the "will to meaning."
It can be said that these particular individuals, while they may be
actual prisoners in a physical sense (in some cases, they are serving
life sentences), are seeking release from the "inner mental prison"
that has held them captive for many years and which, in most instances,
was an accomplice in landing them behind bars!
With so much of their personal freedom taken away as a consequence
of their actions, these human beings are not only seeking redemption,
but are also trying to discover the deeper meaning behind their
predicament. With obvious time on their hands for self-reflection and
self-discovery, each of these prisoners sought to describe for me their
very personal path to meaning. They wrote about their individualized
approach to what is effectively a form of existential analysis, and
about their prognosis for living and working with meaning in the
future--whether or not they expected to be released from prison itself.
I'm humbled to say that each of these prisoners has read my book, Prisoners of Our Thoughts,
the title of which is an especially apt and meaningful message under
such circumstances. In this regard, one inmate serving a life sentence
who says he wants to use his experience to help others wrote me the
following: "For a long time, I was very bitter and angry about my
situation. Then I read your book and really started to look at life
with a different perspective. I had been misinterpreting life all
along, and am now free of the prison I had created in my own mind."
Another prison inmate also serving a life sentence shared the following
thoughts: "I have spent my time whilst in custody learning to improve
my own life and becoming a better person. I am working hard to address
the deeper meaning behind my offending and change my life, as well as
gain answers to questions I need from my inner self."
What is common and revealing in these quotations is that, even
though they are facing a formidable challenge in life that none of us
would ever like to endure, both inmates are able and willing to explore
the meaning of their respective lives' moments, including those
"moments" that are not so pleasant and may actually be extremely
painful for them. Moreover, the inmates are demonstrating their
willingness to own up to their own lives by discovering the meaning of
any given moment, including those that came during their imprisonment.
They are assuming responsibility for weaving their unique tapestry of
existence, that is, what is their own life.
Now let me ask you: if inmates in a real prison are
able and willing to search for meaning in their lives, as well as
exploring ways to change and grow, are you? Remember, we don't
really create meaning; we find it. And we can't find it unless we look
for it. Although we are not always aware of it, meaning is present in
every moment, even in what may be viewed as the darkest hours of our
lives.
There are as many shades of meaning as there are colors. And nobody
can determine meaning for someone else. Detecting the meaning of life's
moments is a personal responsibility, one that cannot be
simply delegated to another. This is the case no matter how much we
would like to do so. If we open ourselves to being aware of the many
possibilities, like the prison inmates with whom I've been
communicating, we open ourselves to meaning. Indeed, even the most
profound grief and intolerable circumstances can open us to meaning.
And, to be sure, so can even the smallest, seemingly "insignificant" of
moments in our lives.
To get you started on the path to detecting the meaning of life's
moments, I would like to introduce you to a process that I call
"existential digging." I have found this procedure to be especially
helpful as both a catalyst and guide for putting this meaning-centered
principle into everyday practice. Simply put, for every situation or
life experience, especially those that may be important to you and your
life, I would like you to do some "existential digging" by reflecting
and making note of your responses to the following four questions: (1)
How did you respond/react (behaviorally, that is) to the situation? (2) How did/do you feel about the situation? (3) What did you learn from the situation? And, importantly, (4) How did you grow (are you growing) from the situation?
Now listen carefully to the following lyrics by Rodney Crowell in his song, "Time to Go Inward," from his album, Fate's Right Hand:
"It's
time to go inward, take a look at myself. Time to make the most of the
time that I've got left. Prison bars imagined are no less solid steel."
By remaining aware of the need to detect, learn, and grow from the
meaning of life's moments, you ensure that you do not become a
"prisoner of your thoughts" and get locked away in your own inner
mental prison!
Bob Hallam is in hot water, and he likes it that way.Hallam founded Dimension One Spas 32 years ago and has grown it into a $60 million business that designs and produces luxury hot tubs sold throughout the United States and in 35 countries worldwide.Over the years this forward-thinking company has continued to create innovative products that fuse savvy design and technological advancements with energy-efficiency.For D1 Spas and Hallam, having green products and great products increasingly mean the same thing.
While most people are not opposed to buying green products, environmental attributes are not the only thing they consider, and are not usually the first thing on their list.Most consumers are looking for products that are attractive, cool (or hot), fill a need, and make them feel good.In the case of hot tubs, I’m pretty sure people look for tubs that deliver a fun, relaxing experience that fits in their budget.“Hot tubs are a good product, great for relaxation,” says Hallam.“You can’t argue in a hot tub because you’re relaxed, and they’re also good for your health.”If a hot tub is also more eco-friendly than its competitors, all the better as long as it still delivers the tubbing experience they’re after.
Over the years, D1 Spas has worked to deliver not just state-of-the-art hot tubs with patented design and comfort technologies, but also products that are increasingly durable, efficient, and with less impact on the environment.In the 1980s D1 Spas began to enclose their hot tubs in foam to provide insulation and reduce energy losses.They also rethought the mahogany skirts they were using for tubs and realized this wood was expensive, prone to damage, and not generally sustainably grown.To change this they started making the skirts from recycled plastic made from milk bottles, which is cheaper, more durable, and with less of an eco-footprint.Any remaining wood components were mostly switched to FSC-certified wood, and most of the waste produced during manufacturing was recycled.
Sometimes going green is not enough though.Despite the improvements made in their products over the years, sales for D1 Spas plummeted in 2007 and 2008 along with others in the luxury market as the economy sank.Hot tubs are often considered a luxury item, with prices for some models ranging into tens of thousands of dollars.In the Great Recession of 2008-2009 many luxury items have been hard hit.
To get things back on a new and better track, Hallam created the “007” project in 2007, brainstorming with employees to find ways for D1 Spas to weather the storm by using their unique expertise in new ways.The results are taking the business in new directions.
One new initiative they have undertaken is a collaboration with VisionWerx of Canada to produce the SpaBerry, a bright, portable two-seater spa with lower price points than Dimension One’s signature hot tubs with all the bells and whistles.The SpaBerry comes in fun colors like cherry red and bright yellow and its small compact shape facilitates communication, always a good thing.In addition, its lower cost compared to most spas has helped it to do well even as other hot tubs have trouble in the down economy.They call it the “iMac of home spas”, a plug and play product that is powered by any standard 110V outlet and has possible broad consumer appeal.Even some people who might not have considered getting a hot tub may consider buying a product like this.
The brainstorming has also led D1 Spas to leverage their expertise to produce other types of products, expanding into new fields other than spas. “We are looking for things that are a good business to be in, making better products, often green, for a lower cost,” says Hallam.
One of the new fields D1 Spas is exploring is producing components for the wind energy industry.The materials they work with produce parts that are lightweight and yet strong, key attributes for materials like the lightweight, super-strong blades needed for wind turbines.Production of wind energy is expected to grow rapidly for years to come, but the field still faces many challenges and opportunities.Some wind turbine blades are so large that they are difficult to transport.If the blades could be produced in pieces and then assembled on site and bolted together, this would allow much greater flexibility in building wind farms.The processes D1 Spas uses in manufacturing may allow them to do just this.
Although news organizations have recently trumpeted the end of the Great Recession, there are still many businesses challenged by slow consumer spending and looking for strategies to reinvent themselves.Getting lean, innovative, and green like D1 Spas may be the key to surviving and thriving in the new economy, and opening the door to new opportunities in the future.
Glenn Croston is the founder of StartingUpGreen.com and the Green Biz Blast, helping green businesses to get started and grow. He is also the author of "75 Green Businesses You Can Start to Make Money and Make a Difference", and "Starting Green", a nuts and bolts guide to starting and growing a successful green business.
As the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee began hearings on carbon regulation, debate ran along traditional battle lines, but with a new script. Democrats Barbara Boxer (CA) and John Kerry (MA) moved away from discussing the environmental impacts of climate change - - and the reason, therefore, to take action to reduce carbon emissions - - and focused instead on the economic benefits of a domestic clean energy economy. Meanwhile, Republicans James Inhofe (OK) and Lamar Alexander (TN) complained that energy bills would rise and Americans would lose jobs.
It’s a good thing that Congress is finally looking at the economics of climate change and carbon reductions, because the overwhelming amount of data - - buttressed by common sense - - shows that reducing carbon will be very good for our economy overall. One of the biggest sources of carbon reductions will be in the area of energy efficiency and that doest cost money, it saves money. Walmart, for example, said that if each of their 100 million customers bought just one compact florescent light bulb to replace an incandescent bulb, those consumers would save over $3 billion in electricity costs over the life of the bulbs (after deducting the higher up-front cost of the new bulbs).
Renewable energy, another carbon-reducing technology, creates jobs in the US and saves money too. Alan Horn, President and CEO of Warner Brothers, told me recently that his studio is covering large soundstages with enough solar to provide up to 10% of their massive energy needs. After a 7 to 10 year payback, they will get that amount of their electricity free for decades to come. Moreover, that multi-million dollar project put people to work in Burbank, California, not China or India, and didn’t take away a single job from anyone.
It’s misleading when some Senators focus on trivial or entirely bogus costs, but especially troubling when their carbon smokescreen obscures a bigger truth - - inaction will cost far more than tackling the problem. No better example of the mammoth costs associated with denial can be found along our coastlines.
As discussed at a the recent H209 Water Forum in New York, cities around the world are building barriers to protect against rising sea level and increased storm activity that is related to the impacts of climate change and it costs real money - - Venice: $7 billion; London: $8 billion; New Orleans: $700 million; the California coast: $14 billion, plus $1.4 billion a year for maintenance.
In New York itself, $400 million was just spent to upgrade pumps that remove rising waters out of subways. Experts at the conference predicted billions more will be needed to protect telecommunications, power lines, and other NY infrastructure that sits below sea level. Even at the lowest end of the range of catastrophic climate impacts predicted, NY will suffer massive street flooding and property damage unless more protections are built. Further inaction on reducing carbon will only drive these costs higher.
“I'm sure the worker at a cement plant, when he loses his job, won't find much consolation in green welfare programs," said Senator Inhofe at the hearing. Ironically, building this entire additional infrastructure to deal with rising waters will use a lot of cement, so Inhofe was aimed in the wrong direction again. In fact, companies like W.L. Gore make devices to scrub carbon and other pollution from cement kiln smokestacks and create lots of American jobs in the process (and valuable exports too!).
Given all of the obvious economic benefit of evolving to energy that is considerably more efficient/clean/domestic, one can only be left to wonder if Inhofe’s positions mean that Oklahoma just doesn’t like New York? Or California? Or Venice? Maybe the Senator is just jealous that his state doesn’t have a coastline, but unless he and his colleagues start making decisions based on real economic data, his state may also be left without a share of the 21st century industries that will power the globe and lead us out of the current recession.
A
while back I wrote about how angry America seems to be and how as
business people, we need to make sure our products don’t wind up on the
forefront of consumer rage. The piece got me thinking about another
question – why are we so angry?
I can’t help but be startled by the
mass frustration that is strewn across the television and web. And
maybe that’s the problem – maybe we are seeing so much rage and then in
turn are becoming angrier.
Iacoboni’s research has shown that we see other people as ourselves reflected as if in a mirror. In other words, I will understand a situation or an individual’s feelings because my mirror neurons pretend that I am going through the same thing.
The
traditional humanistic view is that we are all individualists, and we
only care about ourselves and our self-preservation. The discovery of
mirror neurons clearly shows that this isn’t the case, and instead, we
are wired to feel empathy.
So if we smile when we see smiling people, then doesn’t the same thing happen when we see rage? When we are surrounded by anger, then we become angrier. So despite the fact that we are actually wired to be empathetic and good, the bombardment of negative images makes us more negative.
Think
about it – there is rage everywhere. The news keeps showing angry town
hall protests, people are booing at the Opera, and pundits scream at
one another on television. It’s no wonder people are so angry. Add in genuine fear
– fear of losing jobs, fear of growing national debt, and fear of
terrorist nations – and we are a melting pot of water getting ready to
boil.
So
how do we fix this? Well, we could start with remembering what’s good
about our society as a whole. The news could show a few positive
stories for a change, and maybe President Obama can use some of that
calm charm to remind us that we are in this fight as one country, one
people.
Iacoboni
says that “labels” are what drive people apart. Because humans tend to
separate each other into groups, we lose some ability to empathize with
people on a humanistic level.
And
he's right. For example, let’s look at the healthcare debate. What’s
interesting is that almost everyone out there can agree that some
healthcare reform is necessary. But our leaders cannot find common
ground. Democrats took tort reform off the table from the beginning and
Republicans won’t even discuss a public option. The refusal to see the
debate from multiple perspectives will cause none of us to win.
So
let’s get on the same page. Let’s bend a little so that the country
doesn’t break. Let’s remember that this is our home, our nation, and
that our diversity and work ethic make us great. And ask yourself the questions below to see how you can do a better job of uniting your office, family or community.
What activities can we perform to make our office or family feel more like a team?
Is there a new product, service or discount that my company can provide to spread the message of inclusion?
Can I partner with other local companies to strengthen my local community and economy?
In my last blog entry, I wrote about the 2009 Newsweek Green Corporate Rankings. Soon after this issue was published, I had the good fortune of spending some time with HP's Director of Environmental Sustainability, Bonnie Nixon, on a recent trip to Northern California. After seeing HP on the "Newsweek" list at number one, I was very interested to learn about the woman behind its corporate shift. What was confirmed to me is that behind every major corporate transformation story is a truly heroic man or woman. While I am sure HP has a team of hundreds who have contributed strongly to this position as number one on the "Newsweek" list, I was certain after spending more time with Nixon that she was an integral part of it.
According to "Newsweek," HP leads the pack because of its "strong programs to reduce GHG emissions. The first major IT company to report GHG emissions associated with its supply chain." As more companies review the impact of GHG across their entire supply chains and learn how to make significant reductions, we can expect companies such as HP to serve as a road map to how to best transition their processes to lower emissions. What makes Nixon's story so interesting is that not only was she responsible for HP's transformation, but she has had an enormously positive influence on many other industry sectors as an active participant in multiple cross-sector consortiums. When she was given the reigns at HP for supply chain social and environmental sustainability, she deeply analyzed the practices of companies such as Nike, Levi Strauss, Gap, Disney, McDonalds, Tylenol, Nestles and Exxon.
She was able to define their sustainability stories and also acquire a deeper understanding of what was required of companies who had to manage stakeholders' expectations during difficult times. To avoid HP falling down the same path, Nixon leaned on her previous professional experiences to guide her through her current challenges. While HP was not in a crisis mode, Nixon had the foresight to see that HP could face a crisis regarding the GHG impact, toxic materials in products or global manufacturing practices if it did not prepare to address these issues.
Bonnie's experiences in environmental work run deeper than her time with major corporations. During our meeting Bonnie shared that during her collegiate years in Pennsylvania she experienced the 3 Mile Island event of 1979. This incident marked her significantly and she spent the next 20 years of her career fighting social and environmental injustices - first for the Boston Harbor Clean Up and then by creating her own environmental mediation, planning and communication firm in California. Along with her partner, she was instrumental in tackling major issues in transportation, utilities, hazardous waste and the protection of California's water systems. She was recently asked to represent the Institute of Business and Human Rights as their lead for Global Water Justice. This experience with large public sector environmental projects allowed her to better understand the impact of all forms of energy - hydro, natural gas, oil, nuclear and transportation - knowledge that would later help her drive HP's macro understanding of its GHG emissions impact.
"Fast Company" has always been my favorite business magazine as it highlights innovations in corporate design, leadership and practice. I can't imagine a better innovation than bringing a person with Bonnie's experiences to the table to help mediate and develop policy for vendor relations which address both social and environmental issues globally. Her work style and dedication have led to her trusted relationships with NGOs, vendors, customers and other stakeholders who could have blocked HP's leadership in environmental and social justice. Early on she understood that an adversarial approach to problem solving just simply did not work. Bonnie's work has directly led to a standard code of conduct and implementation measures--developed during her time at HP--for the entire electronics industry. Companies, such as Apple, IBM, Dell, Xerox, Sony and Phillips now all use this set of guiding principals and assurance system. She understands that her role is bigger than just HP or even her industry. Her dedication is helping to change the way business is conducted on our planet and will have a long-lasting effect on global impact.
Bonnie also understands that if she ran her division with a shareholder-centric model alone, the company would not have made many of the decisions which ultimately led to its current leadership style. It was only through her understanding of all stakeholders in the vendor and supply chain relationships that HP was able to advance better conditions for both the environment and the individuals making the majority of electronic products we Americans use in our homes and businesses.
So what was the HP GHG emission reduction? Over 40 percent. For this reason, it is no surprise to learn that HP leads the Green Corporate List in 2009 and will most likely maintain that position when benchmarked against other Fortune 500 companies. With all that has occurred in our country over the last 12 months, it is easy for many to find fault with big businesses role in economic, social and environmental issues. For that reason, it is always reassuring to find a company like HP who has made conscious capitalism a part of their mission and found a leader like Bonnie Nixon to drive change.
"Want to know if the stimulus act will work or whether ethanol is the right choice for U.S. energy independence? Need advice on how to beat Wall Street?" So asked the Society of Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM) at the annual Moody's Mega Math Challenge. For the past three years, Moody's has awarded college scholarships and summer internships to the high school students with the best answers to these questions. In 2010, Moody's is increasing to $100,000 of scholarships.
What drives a Wall Street firm to such generosity, especially now when every dollar they spend is accounted for to shareholders and the board? I have been working with corporate leaders for the past several years to help them shift their philanthropy and their service programs in order to advance the companies' own purposes while also benefiting the community. This is the only way that corporate social responsibility will actually be effective and sustainable.
And as I reported from the Clinton Global Initiative in 2008 and 2009 here in my posts, the tide has turned. "There is a business reason for every decision we make," explains Frances G. Laserson, President, The Moody's Foundation.
"Moody's wants to encourage students to study economics and finance and see the relevance of proficiency. To think about financial services as a career," elaborates Laserson. "This is a way to reach talented national students in junior and senior years. We bring the top teams to NYC to Moody's and they do presentations and Q & A in front of math Ph.D.s. Moody's sees these students directly." As with Moody's Kiva partnership, this SIAM relationship also provides service opportunities for Moody's people when the M3 student finalists come to Wall Street for the final round and later for internships.
Starting in the early 90's, I have encouraged and assisted companies in assessing the impact of their social investments. In today's environment, companies are much more inclined to do that. "We measure everything," says Laserson.
When people think about joining nonprofit boards, they often think in general terms: arts, education, healthcare, etc. In fact, the nonprofit sector has such a multitude of widely diverse and differentiated organizations. The key is finding the board that will meet your unique set of interests, so that you will be passionate and do a terrific job.
When Bonnie Weill was thinking about joining a board in New York City, she couldn't imagine that she'd find a nonprofit that specifically combined her interests and work and volunteer experiences in both the arts and environmental awareness and action.
In fact, there was an organization that was a perfect match. A nonprofit that supplies hundreds of public schools, senior centers, and arts organizations with discarded, but brand new, supplies donated by businesses. A nonprofit that puts hundreds of tons of would-be-waste into the hands of eager artists and educators.
The nonprofit that gathers, warehouses, and distributes these supplies is Materials for the Arts (MFTA). Not only does MFTA broker the supplies but they also provide art classes to show educators how to do creative projects. MFTA, headed by executive director Harriet Taub, is funded by the City of New York.
The organization also relies on significant, additional funding from the Friends of Materials for the Arts (FOMA). In 2006, Weill was invited and joined the board of FOMA. In 2008, Weill was asked to chair FOMA. Under Weill's leadership, FOMA's fundraising has been robust, enabling MFTA to expand and renovate its warehouse and classrooms.
Demonstrating the centrality of MFTA to New York's cultural community, last month, the New York Innovative Theater Awards awarded MFTA with the Stewardship Award for providing "free costumes, set pieces and other tidbits to needy companies for three decades" and "to recognize significant contributions to the Off-Off-Broadway community." According to the NYT, "the Stewardship announcement seemed to garner the loudest and longest applause of the night."
Weill found the perfect match. That's the key to your success on a board and the organization's success.
Consumer technology vendors notoriously use the “booth babe” to grab the attention of nerdy passers-by at conferences. After all, nothing says “Check out my new widget” like a hot, clueless chick dressed as a pirate. (Sarcasm, naturally.) I was saddened to see in a post this week from NYT’s Green Inc. that the same kind of thing is happening in the solar industry. According to the post, 22-year-old Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition supermodel Melissa Baker has been hired to conduct interviews of solar executives at an industry tradeshow for the launch of a new website, www.solarvisionaries.org.
I’m not a raging feminist or anything, but the idea of using a supermodel to conduct these interviews left me puzzled for a number of reasons:
1) What are the merits of using sex to sell something, when you risk ticking off half of your audience? I suppose I should deal with the fact that sex does sell, but the target demographic for solar panels is not teenage boys, beer-guzzling tailgaters, or even gamers. Solar panels are not on the same level as clothing, cologne, alcoholic beverages or other consumer items where the use of a supermodel might make more sense. I don’t see the connection.
2) How does the use of a supermodel to conduct interviews help the new website/organization gain credibility? I understand that many a male brain will respond positively when a beautiful woman approaches him for an interview. But a supermodel-as-concerned-citizen seems like such a copout to get the needed interviews for the site launch. I don’t mean to imply that Melissa isn’t intelligent, but there are plenty of women working within the alternative energy sector that would have been much more qualified for this position.
3) When will we get out of the dark ages and simply think about how to connect with the audiences we’re trying to reach? Let’s take Solarvisionaries’ argument that solar panels still carry with them a nerdy stigma. By their logic, using a supermodel as a spokesperson will make solar sexy. For what it’s worth, even if solar panels were “cool” and “got you the ladies,” there are still the very real barriers to adoption including a) cost and b) ease of installation. A focus on these issues would be more effective in reaching the masses.
The new book SuperFreakonomics by Drubner and Levitt has become more than a mere book – it is a news event itself because of the chapter about climate change.The blogosphere and mainstream media are crackling with controversy over this section, practically guaranteeing huge book sales.This is no accident I imagine.
The book takes on climate change like other topics the authors address – they are intentionally provocative and good at it.They question the basic science behind climate science, question the value of addressing it, and question the value of carbon dioxide emissions.They question whether cap and trade will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and tout the advantages of pumping particles into the atmosphere to simulate the cooling impact of a volcano.Given the prominence of the authors, the heated nature of the climate discussion, and its profound global importance, it’s no surprise that this chapter has earned such a dramatic response.
They are authors, and best-selling authors at that; they know what they are doing when it comes to selling books.The authors know that getting people excited or angry gets attention, interviews, airplay, and book sales.I liked Freakonomics, which used the same strategy, describing Levitt as a “rogue economist”.Last time it was abortion, and this time it’s climate change.Same strategy though.
It’s like a lot of our public discourse.The discussion gravitates toward the extremes because the extremes get attention.The extremes sell books, draw web clicks, and draw TV viewers.
I haven’t read the whole book, just the part about climate change, but if the rest is anything like Freakonomics it’s probably a good read. You really can't go wrong with monkeys learning how to use money and using it to buy sex. Ka-ching. One thing the book shouldn’t do though is to drive climate policy.As talented as Drubner and Levitt are as writers, they aren’t climate scientists.Not many of us are, so a lot of what we hear about climate is from second, third, and fourth-hand interpretations of the science, or completely disregards it.Climate change is a complicated story and an extremely important one.We need to listen much more carefully to scientists, and craft policy based on the consensus scientific opinion.
Dubner claims to only want to stimulate discussion, and its hard to argue against discussion without sounding like one of the climate change acolytes they describe, but the danger is that they will drive the climate conversation off course at a critical juncture.
A recent poll found that only 57% of Americans believe that climate change is happening.That’s a big drop from other polls, and may reflect the complexity of climate change, and reluctance to deal with it now, when people are still worried about their jobs and mortgages.That’s where the middle is, and that’s where the discussion needs to be, talking about what climate change really means for them.We need to have discussions based on solid science and looking for cost effective solutions that work for everyone.We need to make sure the incentives are right to drive the right economics that ensure both a strong economy and a healthy environment.There are immense opportunities ahead for businesses inventing cleaner and more efficient ways of doing things, opportunities driven by putting the right economic incentives in place.That’s something that would have been interesting to read about.
There are solutions that can get us away from extreme polarization and back toward making real progress.In a recent New York Times Op-Ed Senators John Kerry (D - Massachusetts) and Lindsey Graham (R – South Carolina) proposed how to do this, saying we should grow renewable energy and take care of energy efficiency, but also consider nuclear, clean coal, and offshore drilling.I don’t love all of this, but if a compromise like this can get action on climate change moving forward, we should consider it.
Maybe the authors themselves hold the key to understanding the current controversy.Levitt and Drubner write in their books about the ways that incentives and punishments drive the choices we make.Sumo wrestlers cheat and monkeys learn how to use money because of the incentives they are faced with.The key to understanding SuperFreakonomics is to apply the authors’ own principles.
What are the economics of SuperFreakonomics? Look at the incentives and punishments that might influence authors of best-selling non-fiction, and then trace them to their impact on behavior.Stimulate controversy and you nab big book sales.Fail to stimulate controversy and you might be on your way out faster than you can say “yesterday’s news”.Viewed in this light, the whole thing makes perfect sense, just like the cheating sumo wrestlers.
I feel like a big of a rogue economist myself now.I’d write a book about the surprising impact of incentives in media, except that they’re not really that surprising at all.Maybe I’m just a little superfreaking jealous.I’ve written a couple of books myself - I’ll have to take a lesson from these guys for my next book.I’m going to call it “In Your Face Stuff Guaranteed to Get Your Goat, and Your Money.”Look for it soon at bookstores near you.
Glenn Croston is the founder of StartingUpGreen.com and the Green Biz Blast, and the author of "75 Green Businesses" and "Starting Green", helping people to start and grow successful green businesses.
Dell had its much-ridiculed Della site – a masterpiece of misunderstanding of a large and lucrative customer segment called women.Is British Airways far behind?I wish you could see the image currently on BA’s frequent flyer site, and see how well you think the image captured the interests and lifestyle of at least 50% of the business flying public (in other words, women).
In this image, a little stick man at the center is labeled "You." He looks like the guy on the outside of many public bathrooms for men. He is surrounded by a bevy of other figures, some in little stick trousers, some with little broomstick skirts. The copy reads: "With a complimentary companion ticket on your next trip, who will you take? Where will you go?" The choices are clearly labeled your wife, your daughter, your son, your brother, your boss, your dad, your mom, your best friend (in trousers). (Believe me, it is more compelling in a visual. If you can, go to the website, and check on promotion.)
The three questions that popped to my mind when I unsuspectingly clicked on this promotion on October 13 and smacked into this graphic were: What’s going on here? And, how could this have happened at my beloved BA?I have always really enjoyed flying with them.Finally, don’t they like me? Surely I am not the only potential British Airways business passenger who is not a married man.
The first explanation at which I grasped was corporate sabotage by a disgruntled internal marketing department determined to destroy BA’s brand with half its audience – more than that if you consider that 63% of new business travelers are women.Or perhaps it was an external assault, a thoughtless bit of artwork by poorly chaperoned external designers with no sense of the BA brand.Although I immediately wrote to BA Customer Service to find out, I have yet to get a response so can only speculate.
With or without their input, I can say this: in this instance, BA did a pretty poor job of translating the external market into internal decision making and action taking, a set of activities that is at the very essence of leadership.As the airline’s strategy was executed through its marketing decision-making, it completely missed women, unmarried people, and married gays and lesbians.(It also missed people who might want to travel with their sisters but that is perhaps a little easier to understand).
Think about this miss in terms of the five core elements of leadership:
Strategy: The target market for this offer was either mis-defined or not defined at all (either way, a strategic error)
Execution: Whatever team worked on this project, and whatever decisions were made never caught the error.Was no one thinking about BA’s market positioning or customer during the execution phase of this promotion?
Talent: Who worked on this project?Only married men (without sisters)?Or were there other sorts of people who either didn’t speak up when surely they must have noticed the problems, or, if they did speak up, were neither heard nor heeded.
Human Capital Development: Who will be working on such projects in the future?Are the people and culture being developed for the future – or for the 1950’s? Who exactly is being engaged, rewarded, promoted? Outcomes such as this are directly linked to culture, and culture is the result of who is in and who is out, who is rewarded and promoted, and for what.
Personal Proficiency:Do the people who worked on this have the awareness to realize that this is a problem, and then to act on it?Consider that I wrote to BA two weeks ago alerting them to this issue and have not heard anything back. Another friend and colleague, Jean Williams, wrote to them at the same time and heard last week that this webpage was being examined “at the highest levels.”So far, nothing has changed.Either our little 50% of the market is not viewed as having an important voice, or decisions and actions in BA take an inordinately long time.Either way, there may be a significant issue here that springs from some individual deficiencies.
Am I just being a PC American? I enlisted Jean to do a little surveying because we could hear the backlash winding up across the Atlantic already. Here are some reactions we have sought from what we have gamely tried to make a variety of sources:
“It probably is sexist...?” (female HR executive)
“Stupid rather than sexist, I guess. And crudely drawn at that.” (female board member)
“Piss poor and awfully sexist.” (female executive in financial services)
“This excludes me and my partner.” (senior level consumer products executive, a gay male)
“How lame.” (senior level female scientist)
“I’m most mad that it doesn’t allow me to take my sister.” (female board member)
“Why is the daughter so big and the wife so petite? Why is the mom bigger than the wife?Why is the son so small?Why does the dad have that strange blinder across his face?”(undergraduate psychology major)
“I know someone who will sue them.”(a prominent lawyer)
[blank stare](good male friend, a successful senior executive in manufacturing, early 50’s)
What any of us see is indeed a Rorschach of our own worldview and preconceptions – another reason to be very careful when drawing pictures, writing commentary, selecting and guiding a marketing team, or attempting to be that most difficult thing: a leader.
Would love to hear your reactions.In the meantime, I will hope to hear from BA. I hope they still like me.
