FREE RANGE: ROVING THOUGHTS AND WACKY PLOTS

WHAT Y'ALL THINK?


PUBLIC SPHERE


~ Should the Governor-General have a greater role in the Commonwealth? If neither party can promote a legitimate candidate for leadership, should the G-G be able to step in to remove both candidates in line with electoral preferences (eg, Turnbull, Rudd) and call an early election?

~ KPIs for the Executive: should the government fail to meet basic infrastructure and productivity targets as well as net innovation and equity objectives, the government can be taken to an election for poor performance..

~ Longer electoral cycles in accord with the Electoral Act to five years subject to above..

~ Legislative limits on the power to call repeated inquiries or Commissions into the same subject matter (eg, indigenous welfare)


PRIVATE SPHERE

~ High potential conduits in large organisations: taking hipos outside the standing command-and-control, so that line managers and even business unit heads are directly answerable and responsible to the C-Suite team and even the CEO for hipo growth and development. Matrix-wise, the line manager does not have immediate organisational power over identified candidates. If hipos are seen to be treated differently, that is because they ARE..

~ Much as there is an equity investment premium, placing an underlined premium on growing high-potential strategists. Partnering with senior managers and in programmes, candidates are heavily invested in acquiring and developing strategic thought and a strategic outlook and marketing orientation for use of company resources. Big picture thinking is thereby prioritised. 

DON'T TAKE MUCH TO MAKE ME/YOU HAPPY

http://blogs.hbr.org/anthony/2013/05/should_you_take_that_innovatio.html


WHY COMPLICATE THINGS?

New rejections for 'jobs': uggh, what a cold word that is: 'job'. But funny, how people seem to make the same mistake with me..

It doesn't take much to make me happy. Give me some space, a smile, some paper, some hay (only kidding!) and let the Universe do the rest..

No phones and no jerks, that's about it. And I'll pump your business full of value you've never seen before with everyone involved.

IS RECRUITING A CHINESE WALL? DISRUPT, LEST YE BE DISRUPTED..

'The problem with insecure people is they hire dopes'

'I want a moat, preferably with a drawbridge and shark-infested waters'.

~~

'Applying' for jobs can be tedious. The adverb itself is tedious: Connoting diligent yet ineffectual dedication to a tiresome task.

And task-based recruiting, I suggest, is the next vista for Barbarians at the Gate.

*If organisations, generally, cannot hire smart, they will look increasingly dumb.

*If regulations and onboarding take weeks and even months, talent will walk, and test the ramparts for structural flaws.

* If creativity is discouraged from the outset, competition will get creative both in supply and in attitude. Demand, like a spring rising to its source, will find its own rivulets..

*If creative people cannot design for intraprenuerial roles, they will design blueprints for external change.

Beware the Fate of the Celestial Kingdom and disrupt, lest ye be disrupted..

(This 'applies', of course, to nobody in particular).

CANDOR AND THE CAR-INDUSTRY: I OFFER MY CONDOLENCES AND SOME THOUGHTS TO FORD'S WORKERS

Having mentioned the Australian car industry in my last post - yesterday - I was shocked to hear about Ford closing operations in Victoria. But was I surprised?? That's a critical issue, and not so much a question. Without intending to offend anyone, does Victorian manufacturing risk succumbing to Detroitus, which was left behind in that once great city? It doesn't have to happen that way (ditto for Detroit), and here's why:

SOME KEY TAKE-AWAYS: REIGNITE YOUR SPARK

# Ford motor: surprise or unsurprising? Moral: change is necessary, but management’s obligation is to avoid landing workers with unpleasant surprises so far as lies in their power. Management's power is intellectual, financial and ethical. And they should utilise all sources: in fact they have an ethical obligation to do so, even if their legal duty is toward the company’s shareholders. (Cf German ‘Rhenish’ capitalism, Japan’s keiretsu and the Toyota Way).

# Globalisation is real. Those who remain in a single occupation for thirty years, as some component manufacturers did at Ford, risk obsolescence. In a global economy, risk and reward follow competitive advantage. Shareholders can emplace and remove capital at will so diversification and reinvention are crucial for workers’ job security and for industry success.

# Take your destiny into your own hands, or someone else will fulfil your destiny for you. In a global marketplace, corporate headquarters could be any place in the world. Face reality as it is when you sign onto new terms and conditions with any business. Instead of waiting on the Fates, all employees and stakeholders – executives, line managers, employees and government officials – should enable transitions with minimal disruption. In a disruptive economy (characterised by restless product and process-innovation) retraining is thus paramount and should be unending. Give people the tools to manage their own futures.

# Employers should be responsible. Treat your employees with respect at all times. If you don’t, your business assumes the reputation risk of a more ethical, creative alternative. (I am not making any observation about particular manufacturers or entities here). 

POSTCRIPT

More than any other stage, perhaps, in history, workers require introduction to the fundamentals of economic thought and history. As industries move in phases and the globe collectively considers the contours of a more human capitalism, Australians need to understand the elements of modern capitalist thinking. And the nucleus for successful transition and flourishing is embedded in the supporting family. 

In particular, I hope to review Jerry Muller's recent contribution to Foreign Affairs, "Capitalism and Inequality: What the Right and the Left Get Wrong".

Here is my list of the economists and thinkers to which Muller charitably refers (p.s. quite an extraordinary list!):

Alfred Rappaport

Hyman Minsky

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels

Jan de Vries

Tyler Cowen

Joseph Scumpeter

Daniel Bell

Brink Lindsey

Michael Spence

Max Weber

Edward Banfield

Pedro Caneiro and James Heckman

Friedrich von Hayek

Alexander Hamilton

In the search for daily bread, always make room for food for thought... 

~~~ 

Condolences and Best Wishes to Ford workers and their families. 

URGENT DELIVERY: DELIVERING THE GOODS REQUIRES DELIVERING MORE AND MORE

http://www.afr.com/p/national/professional_services/accounting_graduates_face_job_market_ml4M9I3CEBdkesW84JzqoJ; Jennifer Eyers. "Paradigm Shift for Local Law Firms"; http://www.lawcareers.net/Information/Features/25022013-Adapt-or-die



I've made the point so many times: And I believe these articles merely emphasise it. The professional and commercial world is changing. So GET AHEAD OF THE CHANGE.. I will not repeat the statistics already tabulated in these Financial Review columns: (Paul Keating's favourite paper, and I appreciate why). The figures largely speak for themselves.

'WHAT COUNTS IS WHAT YOU DELIVER'

We are definitely upon the threshold of a global meritocracy. As the emerging middle class emerges in the BRIC countries and eventually, even, Africa, the power of place will matter less than the power of proximity to growing markets. Like him or loathe him, Rupert Murdoch made this point in his Boyer Lectures. Incidentally, it was Murdoch and Packer, the inconoclasts, who outflanked the establishment in the pursuit of profit.

Thus a venture partner from Sichuan Province raised in the turbulence of the Cultural Revolution likely does not care if you went to Monash, Melbourne or even Oxford. What counts is what value you add to his business or his brand. Of course, he may care: But China has minted countless rural billionaires who happened upon cost-effective and scalable business models emerging from the depths of poverty.

WITH GLOBALISATION'S BENEFITS, YOU TAKE THE COSTS

If Western society wishes to enlarge the global project - the converse could very well be a dangerous mistake - then the Euro-American and Australiasian economies will have to adapt to the 'externalities' of a global marketplace for talent, goods and increasingly ideas. If you are a one-trick financial modelling expert, and your job can be outsourced, most companies will trade players simply to compete. Be more than a utility player: Be a Global Star. If you can cut across disciplines and geographies, and exhibit presence of mind and cultural nous, you may go further than the most decorated, credentialled rival. At least I hope so..

Protectionism will not work. The Australian car industry, for instance, struggles with this conundrum. The industry's product is too expensive to serve the cost-value market (cf Kia) and too inexpensive to serve the luxury segment (think Mercedes or Lamborghini). Australia does not have any obvious competitive advantage in this field of endeavour. And to protect underperforming sectors will distort the economy and reduce our attractiveness to Asian investors.

A PROBLEM I NOTICED AT UNI

We do not, in the West as a whole, allow critical thinking to flourish. China, I understand, is mandating training in emotional intelligence or EI, a point Daniel Goleman makes in HBR. No longer tethered to Maoist orthodoxy or rote learning, Prof Niall Ferguson has suggested that Asian students outperform American and European classmates even in the humanities. They master both STEM and social science. We have to improve literacy and numeracy by broader, collaborative learning and cultural sensitivity. One-lecturer marking and examination templates have to go. They're nonsense.

For example, in Law School I would challenge the lecturer about his interpretation of a hypothetical problem or the application of complex legal principle to a case. 'No, that's wrong. The answer is X'. 'Oh, is that so", I would query, "then why did this commercial entity pay a team of QC's thousands per hour to argue the matter'? No response.. THIS IS PLAIN DUMB: AND THE EMERGING MARKETS WILL CALL US ON 'DUMB'. 

So whether you're a Harvard PhD or a mathematical genius from a remote Indian village, what counts is WHAT YOU DELIVER.. 

GOOD LUCK! 

I LOVE THE COMMON LAW! WHAT THE EAST CAN LEARN FROM US

In his Reith Lectures, Prof Niall Ferguson decried our growing litigious culture. Prof Ferguson referred, in particular, to Lord Goff's reasoning in Kleinwort Benson with respect to common law development through the 'interstices' of past decisions. According to Prof Ferguson, legal firms are rather incentivised to prosecute and prolong legal disputes.

In respect to legal reasoning, I agree largely with Ferguson and Lord Goff having long upheld the precept of Dixonian 'strict and complete legalism'. To be fair to the legal profession regarding interlocutory delay and expense, however, practitioners increasingly resort to international and commercial arbitration and the diverse forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution to allay and terminate legal conflict. Which is as it should be. Litigation is expensive and often onerous: cf Queensland v JL Holdings. In the UK, Lord Woolf's report on case management enunciated the Royal Courts of Justice's committment to the 'overriding objective' of dealing with cases justly. As the Courts should do. In all cases. 

At the same time, I would exalt the common law and the wonderful legacy it has bequeathed to the Anglo-American world. As the classic case of Donoghue v Stevenson demonstrated, common law courts are, overall, responsive to the claims and demands of struggling litigants. Indeed, Judge Christopher Weeramantry of Sri Lanka objected in his Law in Crisis to the unreasonable and objectionable overload in legislation and regulation thereunder. Since State of Victoria v Meakes & Dignan, at least, in Australia citizens and business have been deluged by a torrent of subordinate legislation and administrative procedure. (The Corporations Act is unecessarily complex, and recondite regulation should be culled). Balancing the scales, nevertheless, amendments to the Legal Profession Act in Australia and adjustments to the Practice Rules and Directions of our Supreme and Federal Courts have certainly redirected legal practioniers to their clients and their obligation to observe the due administration of justice.

And, in fact, the furiously growing members of APAC and China herself could well learn from the English tradition of justice. For all our economic and social travails, the Anglo-American world in its very 'pith and substance' inherits the Rule of Law. India, for all her problems, practices the common law tradition as the world's largest democracy. (A point Sir Michael Kirby has made repeatedly). As we learn from the East in Michael Dobbs-Higginson's 'Age of Disorder, therefore, China and her nanyang diaspora can equally learn from the principled application of practical justice which our courts of common law and equity truly afford.

FILLING THE VACUUM: "STAND UP, MADAMS/SIRS" NOT DOWN

Paul Keating said, "John Howard is the Policeman at the scene of every crime". Whatever your politics, Australia does not need more policemen.

Actual policemen are critical to our democracy; the national traffic cop is not.

For years, I have worked in entry-level roles - now I see why. From a relatively privileged background, I suspected I had not seen the whole story. And I needed to know why?

Indeed I hadn't. So flunking law school meant cutting out of the privileged loop to understand our country's real malaise: a leadership vacuum..

Throughout our businesses, people struggle to manage increasing demands - from consumers, from stakeholders, from government, from their peers - without the tools to do so.

I have seen every species of dreadful management - people who can't or don't understand how to lead..

And I have seen enormous generosity and enthusiasm; and, yes, creativity.

I am not perfect: I am so terribly imperfect. But I want to learn from others. Not get angry with them. I want to watch fellow Australians succeed.

I may be green, but I want to learn to lead. Maybe, psychically, I've graduated from the entry-level stage?