Tag Archives: Donald Trump

A Marriage of Inconvenience? Pinning Your Company’s Colours to the Rainbow Mast

24 Thursday Aug 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

marriage-equality-in-australia-w

In Australia we are a few weeks off voting in a postal poll that will ultimately decide whether marriage equality will be voted on in Parliament. For a range of reasons, our self-proclaimed ‘fair-go’ culture hasn’t thus far extended to same sex couples who want to commit to their relationship publicly. I can’t recall in recent memory an issue that has so divided politics and (yet to be fully tested) so not really divided the public. Time will tell if my latter assumption here is correct.

As I have blogged about previously, in many cases the corporate world is stepping in where governments have faltered. The adoption of the Paris Climate Accord in the US by big corporates, when Trump pulled out, being the most salient example. And so it is with the marriage equality debate. A large number of companies have publicly expressed their support for marriage equality and this has been recognised by the large logo wall that appears on the http://www.australianmarriageequality.org   website. There are many big names there aside from the obvious like Qantas and Telstra who have made the media when they came out in support. These companies are making a stand and good on them.

Those regular readers of my blog can easily divine that I am in favour of same sex marriage and, to me, other common sense public policy initiatives like support for the LGBTIQQ community. Making our workplaces more welcoming can never reduce productivity or make it harder to attract and retain ‘talent’. A diverse workplace is one of the key ways I believe to establish a great culture and help raise the understanding of all staff. The fact is that as humans we exhibit so many similarities that bind us and that the differences, though often outrageously amplified, are small and at the end of the day quite trivial.

GayMarriageOpponent-570x320

So it might be surprising to some that apart from my own publicly professed support of marriage equality I haven’t rushed to sign-up to show my support for same sex marriage wearing my corporate hat. It’s not that I have made up my mind to deliberately keep a low profile, it’s more I am still reflecting on the what role or right I have, as leader, to endeavour to promote a long-held ambition through wearing my corporate hat. I’m not there yet. Who knows perhaps in wiring this blog I will reach some conclusion?

In my head the argument goes something like this. A top manager of a company, being the CEO, might take a socially-ethical decision (to them) and decide to promote marriage equality. S/he may do it to reflect the diversity that exists within their workplace. In reality, such a decision is likely to be more of a ‘captain’s call’. What if some of the workforce is against marriage equality? If the naysayers are right there are many in the workplace who believe the sanctity of marriage should be reserved for the union of man and a woman; a number of whom who keep this view to themselves for not wanting to be out-of-step.

Where the CEO raises the flag for the ‘yes’ campaign, that CEO has made a judgment call and must be prepared to stand by it. The argument could also be made that CEO’s need to be principled and authentic and stand by these principles. Lord knows the corporate world has seen precious little truly principled management over the years, especially in the lead up to the GFC. Some might add that the apparent ‘blind-eye’ shown by the CBA over suspicious money transactions is a case in point that principles are held in check in favour of greed even today. So on balance as a CEO, ‘go with the Captain’s call’ my head says on this one.

quote-the-best-leaders-are-clear-they-continually-light-the-way-and-in-the-process-let-each-robert-k-greenleaf-64-82-49

But what of the CEO as a leader? If we take a leaf out of the Handbook for Servant Leader written by Robert Greenleaf (wordplay intended). His credo is:

“Caring for persons, the more able and the less able serving each other, is the rock upon which a good society is built. Whereas, until recently, caring was largely person to person, now most of it is mediated through institutions – often large, complex, powerful, impersonal; not always competent; sometimes corrupt. If a better society is to be built, one that is more just and more loving, one that provides greater creative opportunity for its people, then the most open course is to raise both the capacity to serve and the very performance as servant of existing major institutions by new regenerative forces operating within them.”

It might well be argued that a servant leader, caring for people, might take soundings of those s/he leads and reflect the organizational viewpoint as a democratic output. It might be possible that in full humility a pro-YES CEO leader might reflect a pro-NO viewpoint to the world. On the face of it this may not be a huge thing but it does go to what is the nature of organisations and into organisational theory. Is the corporation merely a legal entity defined by contracts? Is it the sum of its parts including the hopes and aspirations of its individual workers, or does it exist as a fluid culture that shifts each time a new person joins its ranks? In some ways organisations are trinities incorporating all three. As leader we need to acknowledge how organic the organisation is and given this, how much more complex it is. It’s too simplistic for the figurehead just to be able to stand up and speak on its behalf without consideration of these other layers.

1a1fd594d1e54d0e524c542808a48e36

So where has this reflection got me? I think I’m happy to be pro marriage equality without having to use the vehicle of my company to make the point. I don’t judge those who do. For the likes of Alan Joyce of Qantas his leadership is around a form of activism and I respect him totally for that. But for me it is almost too easy to stand bestride my company’s brand to make the argument. It would be unfeeling. Hopefully my brand that stands alongside, but separate to, my company’s is enough to show my authenticity on this topic.

Where leaders do need to be mindful after Nov 7 – the day of the vote – is that a degree of healing, empathy and consideration will be needed. Some will feel hurt and some elated. Finding a way to focus team members on positives and what we all have in common, aside from individual and organisational goals, will call upon the special skills of managers and leaders. It’s about re-building coalitions in the workplace – a marriage of minds as it were! We can all say yes to that.

 

Cities Are Our Democratic Future

16 Friday Jun 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

sadiqkhan

You can’t help but feel for London. With the spate of terrorist attacks and now the dreadful fire there must be a palpable sense of disbelief, grief and anguish hanging over what is one of the world’s great cities. Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, seems to be everywhere whereas British Prime Minister Theresa May not so much. Her expression of grief and upset, while no doubt genuine, seems to feel a little more forced than Khan who, after all, connects directly with his own city.

This appears to be an emerging trend where large cities because of their size, strategic importance and cluster of financial power seem to be wielding a lot more influence. Influence beyond our comprehension a decade ago. Cities, for many of us, are where we live, work and die. The Population Reference Bureau (PRB) calculates that by 2050 70% of the world’s population will reside in cities. Cities are in many ways easier to make a connection to. It’s hard not to fall in love with Madrid or Barcelona, New York or Amsterdam. It is a lot harder to fall for the USA or Netherlands to the same extent. Where passion for an entire country comes into play it can be hard to distil patriotism from nationalism. At the city level I don’t think you can be nationalistic. I’ve not heard of a concept called ‘cityalism’. I’ve heard of city pride though.

In some ways countries are letting us down. The UK just recently seems a good example. For those of us who wanted to remain in Europe the country votes for Brexit. The USA, once leader of the free world, now seems to want to focus internally and gives its mantle to China. China which has worked hard through soft diplomacy to re-enter the world post Mao, now builds faux islands in the South China Sea for aggressive strategic advantage. Japan, in recent years a beacon of what you can do if you don’t devote your intellectual elite to the pursuit of armaments design and manufacture, is now militarising. We waited with baited breath recently for what Trump would do on the Paris Climate Agreement and he didn’t disappoint. They’re out!

With all the flux in the world politics and the rise of populism it feels like democracy itself is under threat. Trump isn’t doing much to help by muddying the waters around the Fifth Estate with his constant labelling of any negative press as ‘fake news’. Putin seems ensconced as the leader of Russia (duly elected) and the maturing democracy of Turkey has taken a huge leap backwards as President Erdogan curtails opposition, the press and free speech in an endeavour to cement his long-term plutocratic ambitions. Voters everywhere (except maybe France and Germany) are fed up. Politics and politicians are turning us off and away from a real interest in politics. It used to be a topic of conversation at the pub, or in the coffeehouses. Nowadays our views are so polarised you would think twice about revealing your political allegiance for fear of being disowned by your friends of the opposite political colour. Tolerance for another’s political perspective is genuinely lacking in today’s society.

Barcelona-Shopping

It’s easy to feel gloomy with this pot pouri of negativity permeating our world. But there is a shining light on our horizons. As it becomes too difficult, or problematic, to contemplate issues at an international or national level, people are starting to think and act locally. Community is the salve for the schisms in society. Cities are on the rise. Cities are making the pledges to reduce greenhouse gases a reality when their nations refuse to play ball. Cities are engaging their citizens in a way that is forging a new and dynamic form of democracy that might leave our traditional democratic structures behind. It just might be that cities save the very essence of democracy. So it’s Sadiq Khan who seems to cut through for me lately. Cities are vibrant and they engage. Spain has grappled with the vexed and complex issue of bull-fighting for years. Barcelona just banned it outright. When it felt like New Yorkers were losing their city to the developers and wealthy, they morphed the Highline out of an ugly industrial relic.

image

It’s easy to be pessimistic with the world today and this constant barrage of negativity. But some things endure. The human spirit is one and the other is the inexorable rise of the city and its ability to heal communities and create engaging places to live, play and do business. Where governments can’t or won’t step in cities now will. That is why Sadiq Khan looked so …err.. Presidential this last couple of weeks and why May and Trump looked forlorn.

The Stark State of Our Corporations

02 Friday Jun 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Iron-Man-Robert-Downey-Jr-Interview-1200x600

It’s the stuff of movies, particularly sci-fi, where the corporation, generally with some arch technology, ends up thwarting and subordinating the State. People become slaves to some corporate juggernaut able to monitor and control our every move. Think Omni Consumer Products (Robocop), The ICS Network (The Running Man), RDA Corporation (Avatar), Multi-National United (District 9) and my personal favourite, Energy Corporation (Rollerball). Just occasionally you see a mega corporation doing good, a la Stark Industries in Iron Man. But it’s the exception rather than the rule.

This week we have been ‘rocked’ by one of the most predictable events in recent political history; the departure of the US from the Paris Climate Accord. No right-minded person could think that climate change is some sort of fake news or hoax. Even Margaret Thatcher, way back when, commenting on climate change said even if you weren’t convinced wouldn’t you err on the side of caution? It can’t do any harm surely? Well Donald Trump thinks it can – to his blue collar coal-mining constituency who voted him in at the very least. The dystopian world that many feared would eventuate with the election of Donald Trump seems to be unfolding before our very eyes. You can almost admire Trump. He thinks something – without any basis in fact – and then follows through on his irrational assumptions. His thoughts on the matter are writ large in the media, especially Twitter.

PicMonkey-Collage-680x454

So too recently has our very own champion of women’s tennis Margaret Court used the media to espouse her distorted beliefs. Just lately she has felt compelled to make some pretty ‘out there’ comments about gay people and transgendered children. Her linkages of LGBTIQ people to Nazis, communists and the devil is the stuff of pure befuddled fantasy. She has so much of an issue with gay people (especially lesbians in the game that gave her so much of her wealth and fame) that she has refused to fly on our Australian carrier Qantas because its CEO is an openly gay man and a supporter of marriage equality.

The withdrawal of the US from the climate accord has left a leadership vacuum in climate change. In fact it would appear that the inward focus of Trump is leaving a leadership vacuum across a range of fronts. Take for example the breath-taking proposition of Communist China assuming the leadership mantle of free trade. Where climate change in the US is concerned it would appear that corporations will fill the void. Big names like GE, Du Pont, Exon Mobil, Tesla have indicated that they will step into the breach. It’s easy to see why. Those who embrace new technology get the jump on it. If you are a market follower it can be nearly impossible to play catch up. US corporations do not want to see energy innovation become the domain of other countries.

15-115

It’s just not in public/climate policy where corporations are stepping up taking on quasi State-like roles. In social policy there are a number of CEOs of corporations who are embracing societal issues. Partly this is driven by responding to consumer pressure, partly due to internal pressure as millennials increasingly take up key roles in organisations. Woe betide any company that under pressure from its media savvy millennial workforce thinks that incremental evolution not revolution is the best way forward on social issues. This is a demographic who demand to see results now.

Alan Joyce, the CEO of Qantas, as an openly gay man has pinned his rainbow colours to the marriage equality mast. Good on him for that. More and more we are likely to see Corporations acting in the stead of the State. While governments play politics, Corporations have an enviable potential to actually deliver if they choose so to do. It will attract the ire of those who disagree with the moral/philosophical issue being championed. Margaret Court’s recent tirade is testament to that. With a clear road ahead it is hard not to imagine corporations pushing the boundaries across a range of issues previously regarded as the preserve of the State.  Space flight is one very clear example.

Corporations now appear willing to step up when voids are created. Climate change is an existential threat so the role played by Corporations as good global citizens will be crucial if we are to survive the climate change threat. The more governments shy away from taking big bold decisions in the face of huge challenges, the more the public will come to rely on Corporations to save us from our elected politicians. This is a genie that cannot be put back in the bottle. We know who we elect warts and all. The intense scrutiny of the media in the 24 hour news cycle has seen to that. Social media has heightened our gaze. If Corporations become de facto leaders through absentee government then we have to ask just how much do we know about these unelected power brokers? Perhaps as Shareholders now we need to know where Directors stand on a range of issues from climate change, gender equity, marriage equality, LGBTIQQ rights, migrants and refugees etc. rather than just what business qualifications they have and what other Boards they sit on?

65-12-012

Victor Hugo described history as ‘an echo of the past in the future; a reflex from the future on the past’. History has taught us that when Corporations have unfettered freedom, think the East India Company, things don’t always go as we would like. Science fiction writers and directors most often cast the Corporation as evil in their imagined future and we all know how accurate they are in predicting the future look of things (hover boards aside).

1321_cc-vs-gw-vs-wx-768px

So next time you applaud your government for standing aside and letting ‘us’ get on with it, or celebrate the fact that our jobs will be safer and our electricity bills lower without action on climate change, reflect on this. It may not just be coastal erosion and devastating climactic conditions your grandchildren are fighting, but also some nebulous all-encompassing Corporation that cannot be elected out of office. Remember for every Jeff Immelt there is a Lehman brother or a Jeffrey Skilling. And remember we can’t rely on Iron Man. Our choice will be more stark than that!

 

 

Conversing @ Colvinius

12 Friday May 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

IMG_3238

I got a tweet yesterday from someone who had just died. It simply said ‘It’s all been bloody marvellous.’ It was none other than Mark Colvin, the longstanding journalist from the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation). The death of Mark is a blow to quality journalism and his passing is made even more salient by the fact that quality journalism is under attack like never before. There are three threats to the fourth estate. Traditional media is under pressure from falling advertising revenue, social media is skewing newsfeeds, citizen journalism is in many cases reducing the quality of the message and furthermore Trump, ostensibly the leader of the free world, has been doing his damnedest to undermine the role that the media plays in filtering out fact from fiction.

8511486-3x2-700x467

I was no early listener to Mark Colvin whose career spanned some 40 years with the ABC. I was in the UK enjoying arguably the best quality radio, television and print media journalism in the world. The BBC remains, I think, the best news organisation across radio, television and digital platforms. So on my migration to Australia I was bracing myself for a bit of a culture shock from ‘nation speaking peace unto nation’ to laid-back news ditties interspersed by surfing forecasts. Imagine my surprise when I tuned into the ABC and listened to the likes of Fran Kelly, Waleed Ali, PK, Phillip Adams, Virginia Trioli, Leigh Sales, Maxine McKew, Tony Jones and of course Mark Colvin. I realised pretty quickly that my highbrow bias was totally off beam. Mark though, stood out for me partly I think because of his radio voice which appeared to have a tinge of British accent. He had a very direct approach, not quite Jeremy Paxman, but one that had an edge suggesting he had little tolerance for BS. He never got upset or talked over his interviewee and what was abundantly clear was that he didn’t work from scripts. His second question always seemed to be seamlessly linked to the previous answer; a clear mark of an accomplished journalist and interviewer.

Why is the passing of Mark Colvin, aka known by twitter handle ‘Colvinius’, so important? Possibly like no other time in modern history has the freedom of the press been so much at risk. There is the Trump effect. He believes that if you say it is so then it is so. This is mainly true if you run a Corporation. This is patently true if you host The Apprentice. This is clearly not the case if you are in public office and especially if you are running a country. It’s people like Mark Colvin who have kept and keep on holding such individuals to account.

file-20170510-7921-10ru7fw

Secondly there is the worrying aspect of falling advertising revenues to the traditional media platforms of radio, TV and print. We have a very recent example of this in Australia on, of all days, World Press Freedom Day, with the notification of over 100 redundancies of journalists from the Fairfax Group. This means quality journalists committed to keeping our politicians, those in public service and corporations honest. Democracy is kept alive through the constant application of scrutiny. Those who do so are increasingly targeted as ‘un-American’ or ‘un-Australian’ etc. when nothing could be further from the truth. Those who place the spotlight on our freedoms are surely the great defenders of it which comes out of patriotism and not hatred. As Burt Cohen would attest, to lose quality journalists means our ability to actually undertake some of the long-form journalism or investigative journalism is seriously compromised. Denying media freedom is something we would not tolerate in the free world, but allowing it to be starved through lack of quality personnel seems to be something we sit idly by and allow.

There is the argument of course that alternative platforms, including digital, are taking the place of traditional forms of media and we should just suck it up and get on with it. Besides the young people are accessing their media that way aren’t they? All well and good but the questions you have to ask yourself are whether Facebook, Google, Skimm or Buzzfeed etc. would have had the tenacity and prowess to uncover the Watergate scandal if they had been around then? I strongly suspect not.

facebook-new-news-feed1_2040_0

Digital platforms, especially social media, have underlying algorithms allowing social media sites to garner an incredible amount of information about individual eyeball owners. Behaviours and patterns are the primary focus here because advertising revenue is what underpins these companies. This isn’t the world of the first wave of internet companies which were based on ‘fluff’ with no underpinning business model. The business model for the likes of Facebook, Linkedin etc. is well established and it is advertising. We know from FeedVis, developed by the Northeastern University and the University of Michigan, that social media news is actually curated for us. This has caused the New Scientist to claim that ‘in the history of mass media people were in control of what you saw. That’s not true anymore.’ We have every right to be alarmed by this. Our news is likely reflecting our current biases both conscious and unconscious. We know from neuroscience that our ego-brain is constantly seeking confirmation of our particular view of the world. Such self-affirming ‘proof’ delivered to our news feed daily, if not hourly, cannot be healthy from a knowledge, growth or democratic perspective.

shutterstock_212116750-e1479401971146

That said, not all digital news delivery is bad. I love keeping abreast of breaking news via Twitter. So did Mark Colvin by the way. What’s remarkable about Mark is that while he embraced the technology, he also embraced the polar opposite of Twitter and its 140 character limit with a breadth across an amazing range of issues that often had his colleagues breathless in admiration.

So I’ve received his last ever tweet. Those who listened to Mark on PM on a regular basis will know what I mean when I say that when I got his last tweet I held on for a further one, after a suitable, almost awkward pause, that simply said….’goodnight.’

Getting DT to Get Some DQ

10 Friday Feb 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

trump-turnbull

My regular readers may have been wondering whether I have got a case of bloggers cramp seeing I haven’t blogged for a few weeks. ‘Au contraire’ as Marine Le Pen might say. Rather I felt it was inappropriate to comment of the Trump Presidency without giving him a chance to settle in. After all there is no real antecedent job that would totally prepare you for such a role. You have to ease into it. I recall attending a seminar conducted by Harvard Professor F Warren McFarlan who is Albert H Gordon Professor of Business Administration and Baker Foundation Professor [full disclosure – paid for by JBWere]. McFarlan, as you would expect from a Harvard Professor is an engaging and extremely insightful individual. The premise of his approach is that time should always be taken to get a feel for culture and the local politics to prevent going off half-cocked.

p53_a34x1347_732w

F Warren McFarlan

It would appear that the new President hasn’t taken this approach. To the delight of some and the chagrin of many Donald Trump has blasted out of the blocks all guns blazing. When I say gun it might be helpful to specify what model. It’s no sniper rifle – perhaps more akin to a blunderbuss. Whereas Washington insiders would have a head start having worked in the system – a fact that didn’t appeal to the electorate – Trump has little or no knowledge of the workings of Government, the rules that sit behind this and skill sets required to be an effective leader on the world stage. Putting my business hat on (after all Trump is the head of a family empire) I would expect if you are thrust into a new company (in this case USA Pty Ltd) you would want to get the lay of the land. Half-baked notions of what might be wrong with something may not be the true reflection when you get inside and to the nub of the problem. We have all been there as managers when we found the true cause wasn’t what many people thought it was.

The hardy Washington player or Canberra, London, Wellington for that matter understands that a critical role played by any leadership is diplomacy. So far that skill set has been, one senses, totally devoid in the interplay between the Trump administration and their dealings with the judiciary, the press and some, not all, foreign leaders. It’s almost as if diplomacy is regarded as part of the Washington swamp brigade that needs to be totally dismantled. That’s regarded perhaps as the business of politics and this is a fresh and businesslike approach to running a country. In other words no politics to see here – move on. Part of the public, including a sizeable portion in Australia I would posit, like this ostensibly ‘hard man’ approach. It’s the ‘you’re fired’ approach to management. As any manager who has had to terminate staff and I’ve done probably many more in my time than most, it’s a decision taken with a heavy heart and a lasting impact on your spirit. No one’s flame burns brighter by blowing out someone else’s candle. Trump it would appear delights in the rough and tumble talk where fellow leaders or others in the community get a tongue lashing. To the uninitiated they must think this is how business runs. In some cases it regrettably is.

Diplomacy might, on the face of it, not be an important skill set for business. Clearly ‘The Donald’ has done well without it! You could argue that it’s the preserve of politicians and diplomats. I would argue from a business perspective that it is a core skill. I would go so far as to say it is an essential tool in the manager’s toolkit. We all know about IQ and increasingly managers understand the importance of EQ, but DQ (Diplomacy quotient) is important too.

When Trump thought it advantageous to let on that he had given our Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull (aka Trumble) a ‘serve’ in ‘his worst phone call of the day’ on a day he spoke to Putin, it broke the rules of diplomacy. Tweeting about it didn’t so much break rules as create a brand new precedent. You don’t see business leaders tweeting or leaking sensitive phone conversations about what, in the business world, is potential business partnerships. In business cordial relationships are key to good business outcomes. We know from research that hostile takeovers are far less successful than those conducted in a civil and businesslike way.

2017tra_marciniak_20170109

Beth Brooke-Marciniak

Perhaps the best example I have seen lately on the value of diplomacy in the business world is Beth Brooke-Marciniak in her commencement speech to the Class of 2016 at Babson College. Brooke-Marciniak is the Global vice Chair of Public Policy at EY. Someone whose views you would respect in this field. She argues that CEOs are diplomats in their own right. The juggling of short-term and long-term demands from stakeholders in itself requires diplomacy. Diplomacy is required to build teams to get things done. Change cannot be effected without diplomacy. In fact she goes on to argue that there is no power, even as President, without the skilful and patient application of diplomacy.

We live in a VUCA world (volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous). To survive and thrive in this environment Brooke-Marciniak argues that we need to slow things down and introduce the dying art of diplomacy. This brings fresh perspective, insight and reflection. As she points out in the race to disruption, people are also getting disrupted. The diplomat understands and empathises with the knock-on effects. Who is thinking about the fall-out from the swathe of Executive Orders emanating from the White House?

Diplomacy provides a perfect platform for negotiation which is critical to business success, both externally and often -less acknowledged -internally. It is, Brooke-Marciniak confesses, brutally time consuming. Perhaps for Trump, desperate to get runs on the board in the first 100 days and prove his mettle to the American people, he has overlooked the fact that ‘light’ not ‘heat’ is what we expect from his approach. I suspect anyone wailing around in the Trump Corporation making lots of waves but no real outcomes would have a pretty limited lifespan. ‘You’re fired!’

It’s worthwhile heeding Brooke-Marciniak’s recipe for diplomacy.

  1. It takes courage. This is the courage to be who you are; to be authentic. That goes to trust and trust is the core to diplomacy.
  2. Listen more than you talk. You don’t know everything so be prepared to learn.
  3. Be prepared to compromise. Diplomats see compromise as a strength not as a weakness

Trump would do well to internalise these three rules especially learning the art of compromise.

When business talks about win-win that is seldom the case. Even when two companies merge there is always a winner and loser. Diplomacy is getting people who are marginally unhappy with the situation to go along with it for the greater good. The world of international affairs is no different. Where the developed world might have to take more of the strain with respect to climate change, for example, to help the whole world, surely this is a good thing. Trump says America has been taken advantage of for too long. Trump denies climate science and puts a known anti-EPA protagonist in charge of US environmental policy. This smacks of many things but not diplomacy. I wonder if someone could put this point to him patiently, calmly and diplomatically!

Hello Donald & So Long Leonard

16 Wednesday Nov 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In the space of roughly a week we saw Donald Trump elected to the most powerful position on earth and the death of poet, writer and musician extraordinaire Leonard Cohen. As difficult a task as I am setting myself here I’m going to try to draw a thread between these two events.

For many of us I think the win of Donald Trump was shocking but not a surprise. After Brexit many realised the unreliability of polling and also after the election of Duterte in the Philippines, the appetite of some to stick it to traditional, legacy or dynasty politicians. This isn’t revolution a la ‘First we take Manhattan then we take Berlin’ this is anarchy. The anarchist movement which featured very powerfully in Portugal and Spain in the late 1920s concentrated on tearing something down without too much regard for what to put in its place, believing that out of the destruction comes possibility. It is the bushfire  approach to forest regeneration. As we know from this there is every chance things may not turn out as you wish for. Fate is a very fickle mistress in which to place all your reliance.  What I fear many voters have done in that moment of sobriety in the booth is think about teaching the establishment a lesson, not realising that collectively everyone voting the same way brings out an unintended consequence – the candidate of your worst nightmares.

I don’t particularly blame American voters though because they had a tough choice. As ‘leader of the free world’ there is not only the prosecution of your agenda but also POTUS provides world leadership, including, I would argue, moral leadership. In the case of Election 2016 US voters were confronted by two candidates neither of whom had any particular moral strength. With regard to Trump he’s most probably a narcissist but definitely sexist and racist. His two clear failings are lack of a sound IQ and temperament. I suspect that he will be the President known for the thinnest skin and the lowest resilience. I hope I am wrong. While Trump’s flaws are there in plain sight (or at least we hope he has no shortcomings we aren’t already aware of) Hillary’s are a bit more opaque. There has always been a taint over the House of Clinton going way back to the 1970s and 80s with Whitewater (a failed real estate investment). Then there was Bill’s indiscretions, the emails and the Clinton Foundation. When we talk about moral authority I don’t think there was much on show with either candidate. Hillary had money and the entitlement and this may have turned many off. Makes you wonder whether the result would have been better with Elizabeth Warren at the top of the Democrat ticket, ‘Pocahontas’ jibes aside?

160817080531-stephen-bannon-780x439

It was clear in the run up to the election that Trump really wasn’t the mouthpiece of anyone. Sure he had Steve Bannon of the alt-right at his side but I doubt they pitched in much cash.  He wasn’t bankrolled by big business; in fact Clinton outspent him by many millions $898m v $430m if Bloomberg has its figures correct. Take a moment to reflect on the amount of money we are talking about here. No wonder blue collar America feels out of the loop. Clinton on the other hand had funds from sources that made America uncomfortable. The feeling that she had been ‘bought and paid for’ by Corporate America, especially by the investment banks like Goldman Sachs, never went away. Nor did she adequately douse those flames. To have – on record – public speeches saying that investment banking practice would be put under the microscope, only to say in a $200k a time paid for address to the very same bankers that she would look after them, smacked of hypocrisy. Which it was. America sensed this and on top of the fact that ‘we ain’t having no woman in the White House pushing us around’ Trump took the prize many said he could not claim.

So now we live with the consequences. One of the key ones is the ‘America first’ aka isolationist policy that was Trumpeted during the campaign. To paraphrase the saying about Wall Street…’when America sneezes the whole world catches a cold’. We have all seen what happens in a vacuum. In Libya with no thought to who would replace Gadhafi we ended up with real chaos and the likely new base for ISIS. When America creates its own vacuum in focussing on domestic ‘America first’ policies its foreign policy void will be filled – make no bones about it. China will become more aggressive in the South China Sea if no Asia-Pacific pivot is there to counterbalance that. Putin is likely to be more aggressive towards ex-Soviet territories who have cosied up to NATO. NATO without the ‘attack one-attack all’ rule will be toothless. The world will become a much more unstable place and that is coming from our current position with a number of serious conflagrations including Syria and Yemen which aren’t that stable.

Employees work in a factory of Babylon Garments in Dhaka

So while the international scene might re-align with a more distracted President (and some would say this is a good thing) we are likely to get a whole host of domestic politics filling our screens streamed live from the US. Journalists around the world will be hanging off every throwaway remark, every tweet to goad or ridicule. The ‘victims’ are likely to be the very blue collar workers that brought Trump to power. With little opportunity to exploit the primary labour market they are unlikely to get enough ‘jam’ to be kept quiet. It’s just not possible to have a T Shirt under $5 and previously outsourced jobs brought back to the US. That genie’s out of the bottle and won’t fit back in.

Then there is the fissure created within American society occasioned by Trump’s divisive campaign that will take years to heal if at all. Black lives matter when you have a black President. Do they still matter when you have a white President who has open support from the KKK? With Bannon as key adviser many rightly wonder just how far  race relations will retreat. Remember they didn’t advance that much under a black President. For many minorities I suspect, under Trump’s Presidency, they will ask whether  ‘Democracy is coming, to the USA.’

Canadian singer and poet Leonard Cohen i

It’s easy to be pessimistic, but remember this –  society is nothing more than the aggregate of people living together in a more or less ordered community. Last week our society was the poorer for the passing of Leonard Cohen. Where Donald Trump is a self-confessed lady’s man pest with a mouth full of tic tacs, Cohen was an acknowledged lover of women in the best possible sense. His final words of farewell to Marianne, a former lover, on hearing of her impending death are testament to a great poet and all round nice person. ‘Come over to the window my little darling’ feels very different if it is Trump or Cohen saying it!

Cohen had a lot to be genuinely bitter about given his retirement was rudely interrupted by the knowledge that his manager and purportedly long-time friend Kelley Lynch had stolen his money and money left in trust funds for charities. Without an ounce of bitterness Cohen took to the road and blew the world away (including me on two occasions) with the most sublime musical and poetic performances, in his late 70s and 80s no less. Now that is true stamina!  Where Cohen shows humility and stature as a true man in these circumstances, Trump would be all over Twitter trying to exact revenge.

I leave the last observations on Cohen to those of his son writing on his father’s official website.

‘My sister and I just buried my father in Montreal. With only immediate family and a few lifelong friends present, he was lowered into the ground in an unadorned pine box, next to his mother and father. Exactly as he’d asked. As I write this I’m thinking of my father’s unique blend of self-deprecation and dignity, his approachable elegance, his charisma without audacity, his old-world gentlemanliness and the hand-forged tower of his work. There’s so much I wish I could thank him for, just one last time. I’d thank him for the comfort he always provided, for the wisdom he dispensed, for the marathon conversations, for his dazzling wit and humor. I’d thank him for giving me, and teaching me to love Montreal and Greece. And I’d thank him for music; first for his music which seduced me as a boy, then for his encouragement of my own music, and finally for the privilege of being able to make music with him. Thank you for your kind messages, for the outpouring of sympathy and for your love of my father.’

Maybe Donald Trump can rise to the occasion and address his spiritual vacuum in the way that Cohen was able to constantly remain positive through his embrace of spirituality through his music, art and life. If this happens we may for the first time in Trump’s reign be able to say ‘Hallelujah’ to that!

RIP Leonard Cohen 1934-2016, hello Donald Trump 1946 – present.

The Week When the Bell Tolled for Trump

22 Friday Jul 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

360_wbell_0425

I had the rare pleasure last Saturday to be in the presence of Rob Bell for a whole day seminar. Bell was recently announced in Time magazine’s 100 most influential people. Part evangelist, part stand-up comedian this American self-help guru was great fun. There is nothing more inspiring than seeing a master ply their craft and doing it live. It doesn’t matter if it’s Pink Floyd, Kiri Te Kanawa, Ritchie McCaw or Oprah Winfrey, virtuoso performances can be enjoyed for the pleasure of seeing someone at the top of their game. And believe me Rob Bell is at the top of his.

melaniatrump_010616douglasfriedman

This week has also been the week of the Republican’s convention (RNC 2016). Talking of people at the top of their game, Donald Trump is being less feted in Cleveland than any other Presidential candidate in living memory. There’s a slight irony here too because the performances on stage have been routinely poor from the ‘haven’t I heard that before’ speech by Melania Trump, to the Ted Cruz speech where he forgot, or overlooked actually endorsing Trump for President. The irony being that Cleveland is home to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame which celebrates probably the greatest on stage performers the world has ever encountered. Of course the Hall of Fame is a backward looking institution as all halls of fame are, celebrating the best from the past. Seldom do you ever get in when in your prime. Rather it’s a celebration of a lifetime’s contribution. This fixation with looking back on how good things used to be, does resonate through the Cleveland republican Convention in a big way and I believe amongst a group of worried voters the world over.

In the Q and A session last Saturday Rob Bell was asked to explain, if he could, the rise of Donald Trump. His answer was very insightful. He talked about revolutionary change. He referenced the internet and the massive change this is bringing about to how we do things from relationships to business and everything in between. He referred to the previous massive change being the printing press where knowledge, once the preserve of the political elite became, theoretically anyway, available to the masses. Both good and bad came of that but the mass production of knowledge changed the world forever. The internet is the next seismic shift in the way information is changing our lives forever. Then, as now, Bell divides people into two groups when a seismic change is upon us. There are the ‘lean-in’ people who see this marvellous opportunity and embrace it. The app millionaires and social media junkies are shining lights here. But then there are those fearful of change – the resisters. This is the brigade that think surely the internet has wrought bad tidings upon us including networked terrorists, bomb-making classes and school bullying via social media. This group resist and look back to the halcyon days when things were simpler and clearly better. Resistance like this, according to Bell, stems a lot of basic survival instinct and this emanates from the reptilian brain. This is where we know from neuroscience that our fight and flight instinct is based. Here adrenalin and cortisol are produced and these do cause heightened arousal and a tendency towards aggression. This fear of change is tapping into the reptilian brain and manifesting itself as the aggression and violence we are seeing exhibited by Trump campaign supporters.

Not so long ago in Queensland over half a million people voted for Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party. Political commentators, scratching their heads to explain this, have put it down to her tapping into some basic fears. In times of uncertainty fear is given much greater freedom to roam. When uncertainty levels rise we drop down the Maslow hierarchy a notch and find ourselves more concerned with safety and security. It’s easy to tap into generalisations borne more out of ignorance than fact, and there are plenty willing to exploit this; Hanson being one of them. Migrants will take our jobs, their Islamic religion will overwhelm us and they will be bomb-making on the quiet. Jobs and family security will become paramount. While these might be reptilian instincts they are familial and tightly held for good evolutionary reasons.

This week also saw the release of McKinsey’s report ‘Poorer than their parents? A New Perspective on Income Equality.’ by Richard Dobbs et al. Part of the reason why we should not think that a Clinton Presidency is a foregone conclusion rests in some of the statistics contained in the report. Survey results from the US showed that almost two in five respondents felt their economic positions had deteriorated. Broadly the same figures were reported in the UK, where Brexit has recently happened and France where Marine Le Pen’s National Front party are waiting in the wings when, as The Spectator recently observed, ‘the French mood finally snaps.’

To really understand whether the current political turmoil is in fact a zeitgeist we need to understand what is on the radar for those for whom the digital advance has not yielded increased prosperity. I think it is possible here to make some global generalisations. The blue collar workers of say Michigan (automotive), South Australia (automotive) Philadelphia (manufacturing) Wyalla (steel) Wales (mining), Central Queensland (mining), Townsville (refining) all share a common thread. Their jobs are being taken and they are being automated or off-shored out of existence. While generally unskilled, these workers are anything but stupid. They know the truisms that lie behind the advance of technology and globalisation. Firstly a displaced steel worker, or someone from the automotive assembly line does not easily transition to a social media manager, nor will their self-curated life on Instagram generate much income. Secondly they know that once their job has gone their chances of living the lifestyle they were accustomed to are very slim.

This weekend I’m out looking at cars. A quick look at some of the new vehicles on the market suggests driverless cars are not that far away. Many of the advanced features, albeit on makes and models beyond my scope, are already nudging close to the driverless car concept. Only the wealthy at the outset will be able to afford them. Whether the ownership or not of a driverless car becomes a class wedge that illuminates the burgeoning gap between rich and poor is yet to be determined, but you can be sure that blue collar workers whose livelihoods depend on driving for a living will be keeping a watchful eye on the future. It’s perhaps understandable then that this cohort in the US might want to look seriously at Trump. His slogan after all is somewhat backward looking. ‘Let’s make America great again’ could mean pushing forward or for many it resonates with simpler better days gone by. Days by the way we cannot get back. If you are one of the 2.5 million workers who currently drive for a living in the US you might just want to side with Trump.

Pauline-Hanson

Between now and November 8 when the Presidential race is decided we need to be less critical of the voters who are drawn to what, on the face of it, is a pretty distasteful, mean and shambolic Trump campaign. We also need to be mindful of the pollster gyroscopes that are out of whack. Reports of a Clinton landslide sound way too optimistic to me. Remember the Brexit pre-polling? In our own nation we need to become comfortable with the paradox of embracing those who voted for One Nation, but rejecting Pauline Hanson and all her party stands for. As Rob Bell much more eloquently puts it. ‘Why blame the dark for being dark? It is far more helpful to ask why the light isn’t as bright as it could be.’

Like a Sturgeon – Trumped for the Very First Time

17 Thursday Mar 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

11951929_10153603954729402_5401036763861155580_n

You guessed it; I was at the Madonna Concert last night that is quickly becoming legend for the late arrival of the pop diva. Notified by the event management we arrived ‘fashionably late’ at 8.45 all geared up for the announced 9pm start. As it was, that meant a 12pm finish and a late (or should I say early) repose. Madonna graced us with her presence at a few minutes before 11.30pm and my head hit the pillow at 2.30am, pretty much blowing my productivity the day after and making me somewhat of a hazard driving home from work on a pretty meagre zzzz diet.

So there were two and three quarter hours we had to while away. Thanks to American Express this wasn’t as onerous as it might have been. Indeed, had it not been for access to the American Express cardholders lounge at the Brisbane Entertainment Centre, we probably would have baled out before the concert started (like some people I know) throwing the $299 per ticket in the trash. So at a time when one person trashed their own brand – Madonna, another organisation – Amex once again stood out as a company that gets what it means to delight their customer.

Madonna on the other hand doesn’t seem to give a damn, or as she might more aptly call it ..a f*@k. It was a concert ridiculously punctuated with expletive ridden monologues which were Madonna’s forlorn endeavour to come across as some sort of freedom fighter, social evangelist and all round rebel with a cause. It didn’t work. The audience were treated to what amounted to no more than a cringe laden, school-girl giggly clichéd series of sexual innuendo (ooohh in your end Oh – you get the picture). The way she treated her two main protagonist dancers, both black, was heavy in racial stereo-typing and the production of a banana from the waist coat of one of them was to me offensive. Still it’s Madonna and she can get away with that, after all she is a freedom fighter right?

That made me ponder. Does anyone in her entourage vet this stuff and call it for what it is, or does she have a sycophantic coterie that tell her exactly what she wants to hear? Madonna, it appears to me, puts herself in the rarefied air of someone so special that she affords herself a license that few others would be given. She is the caviar of the music world – a multi-million selling recording artist who has successfully traversed the vagaries of musical trends across four decades. Amazing given she is actually a child of the 1950s. This seems to afford her certain rights not available to us mere mortals.

While spending time in the Amex lounge I went on Twitter and caught up with the day’s events which was pretty much dominated by the US Primaries. There were numerous news organisations reporting on the recent wins by Trump progressing him further and further towards winning the GOP nomination. What characterises Trump’s campaign is a kind of aggression that appears to appeal to a certain segment of the US population. This in turn is causing riotous behaviour at the various rallies associated with Trump. Trump has quite often suggested that someone should be punched in the face and on more than one occasion his ‘disciples’ have followed through on this. Why wouldn’t they? Here is a leader, possibly soon to be the most powerful person in the world, advocating a behaviour that they are only too willing to carry out if it is given sanction.

Leadership requires many things. We often describe it as the ability to take people with you, as well as persuade many to your particular point of view. Quite often successful leaders don’t make good leaders if success is defined by the size of the following you garner. Hitler after all had much of the German nation in his thrall but that did not make him a good leader. Madonna in her own way is a leader. She has influenced many generations of women, and has advocated a more direct approach on issues of sexuality and equality. That doesn’t make her a good leader. Other attributes are necessary to tick all the boxes in the leadership stakes.

To be honest I have never been a great fan of the leadership as a discipline in its own right brigade. Leadership to me is a subset of effective management. To take it away from management suggests that it is the preserve of a select few, an elite, and this propagates the view that leaders are born and not made. Leadership has a set of skills that can be learned and with practice true leadership results. Some of the hallmarks of good leadership are:

  • Humility – knowing when to take your foot off the pedal of self-promotion and narcissism;
  • Listening – to get advice and to shape this into the way you behave;
  • Followership – if you were never a good follower at some stage what insights do you have over your dominions?
  • Broad Shoulders – if you put yourself in front you need to be prepared to take on board the slings and arrows of criticism and to handle this with grace. People who do not agree with you aren’t necessarily stupid;
  • Being an example – knowing that people are watching means you have to do right and to be seen to do right; a plain fact so many in Office get wrong;
  • Sticking around – people want to see you there through thick and thin. If you bail out and move on then people do not get exposed to the true you;
  • Vulnerability – no-one is full proof and no-one is the complete person so showing the areas where you are not strong but get the necessary assistance to cover for this deficit provides comfort to those who follow you. This is not a prophet we follow after all; it is a human being;
  • Insight – you need to understand the power of your words and actions over those who have vested in you their hopes and aspirations;
  • Authenticity – if you cannot show the true you the audience for your ideas or leadership will spot it pretty easily and your following may well be based on fear and not a genuine desire to be led.

Neither Trump nor Madonna appear to display many of these characteristics. When Trump talks about people who decry his campaign he labels them, especially female reporters, as idiots and advocates they get beaten up. His rival Marco Rubio was ‘Little Marco’ in some strange reference to his genitalia. Last night Madonna made reference to genitalia on a number of occasions and also suggested that the audience should fight for the bouquet she was about to throw into the audience and that the person who got it should be punched in the nose.

Like and respect are the two emotions that followers afford their leaders. Neither I would give to either. Surely they know the impact of what they say? If not it is the responsibility of those around them to provide wise counsel. Blind adoration is not what we do when we anoint a leader. I suspect that Trump and Madonna wouldn’t be happy knowing this. When the Primaries get to the later stages where it really matters I don’t think the chorus in Cleveland are going to be singing to Donald ‘We’re Crazy for You!’ If upbraided for being late at concerts Madonna may well regale us with ‘Papa don’t preach.’ Here’s my response from a one-time admirer. ‘I’ve been losing sleep!”

 

 

No Regrets for the Comeback Kids

17 Wednesday Feb 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

11895427

 

 

 

Those who follow my blogs regularly know, music is very important to me and I am pretty much across most forms of modern music with a pretty eclectic taste – some might even say catholic! My guilty secret is I’m also a huge Sinatra fan. That’s music from a previous generation – my Dad’s to be exact. ‘Old Blue Eyes’ never really made the transition – he didn’t rate ‘pop’ music and why would he? The stripped back sound of the Beatles compared to the arrangements of Billy May or Nelson Riddle must have sounded very hollow at the time.

Frank’s most well -known song to non-aficionados is likely to be ‘My Way’. The famous line from the song sung in Sinatra’s inimitable style is ‘regrets I’ve had a few, but then again too few to mention’. That’s not a bad motto to take through life both work and personal. Speaking of regrets I have one of my own as far as Sinatra is concerned. I had the chance to see him, Sammy Davis Jnr and Liza Minnelli at the Royal Albert Hall in April in 1989. Didn’t get the tickets quick enough though. Act now act decisively -not a bad motto to take through life; both work and personal either. Almost certainly what a President is expected to do.

What characterised the Sinatra story is how he was able to rejuvenate his career when it looked in the early 1950s that it was all but over after being dumped by both Columbia, his record company, and the Hollywood studios. The scale of the comeback is such that it is unrivalled in the halls of music then and since.

bill_clinton_thumbs_up_AP

Of course the phrase ‘comeback kid’ is more recently associated with Bill Clinton’s turnaround of his fortunes in the primaries to be the Presidential candidate for the Democrats in the 1992 Presidential election campaign. He was third in the Iowa caucus and trailed in New Hampshire before pulling up a creditable second after appearing on 60 Minutes to rebuff charges of an affair. The rest they say is history.

Why am I reflecting on American politics? Because America is still the major super power and what happens in America has a direct impact here in Australia. We are in many ways the 51st State of America. It is essential therefore to be across American politics for the geo-political understanding of both the world and our region. The Presidential nomination race is hotting up and there are many layers to it that can be revealing for the world of business and life.

For many Democrats there was really only one candidate on the scene for a long time – Hillary Clinton. She’s a seasoned performer, from a ruling dynasty and a pragmatist. But along comes ‘old’ (74) Bernie Sanders, a maverick and we end up having a good old fashioned, but so far quite polite, ‘ding dong’. What distinguishes Sanders from Clinton is the fact that, believe it or not, he appeals to the younger voters and is seen as from ‘left-field’ (always a favourite of the young). He’s also an unapologetic ‘socialist’ who comes from a position of ideology. Compare and contrast this with our own recent Prime Ministerial change were we have switched from the ideologue Abbott to the pragmatist Turnbull.

how-much-donald-trump-makes-in-speaking-fees-compared-to-everyone-else

The elephant in the room (reference to the Republican emblem) is of course Donald J Trump. After losing in Iowa he has come back to win the New Hampshire Primary. Whether or not his maverick style will sustain itself across the duration of the campaign remains to be seen, but he is clearly appealing to sections of the Republican Party and therefore parts of America. Once again it is this unique or maverick approach that is resonating. The cookie-cutter politician with the best dollars behind them doesn’t appear, thus far anyway, to be what the public want. The dynastic ruling families of Clinton and Bush appear also to be out of favour. People want fresh; people want authenticity. Trump and Sanders don’t appear over rehearsed. The politically over-coiffured look is no longer de rigueur. An appealing narrative and being true to yourself appear to be the two key ingredients. This is scary for the myriad of political advisers to the candidates because prepping for a debate on Fox is within their span of control. Controlling authenticity or generating a ‘back story’ is well-nigh impossible to achieve. The latter may be possible but not if you want to achieve the former. The secrets of how to find favour with the public are known to very few.

The reason Sinatra fell out of favour with the public was because his public persona was damaged by his affair with Ava Gardner. His back story was blemished and the public didn’t take too kindly to that. So he packs his bags and joins another pack of guys hanging out in Las Vegas. The ‘Rat Pack’ is born. He spends time in this artistic purgatory and redeems himself through presenting an image to the public as a serious actor in the role of Private Angelo Maggio who suffers his own redemption and on screen atonement (death). While Burt Lancaster will be forever remembered for the scandalous (at the time) water’s edge embrace with Deborah Kerr in From Here to Eternity, the real success story was Frank as Maggio taking home the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor. His redemption, at a pay packet of only $8,000, was complete. So it’s possible to re-write the backstory, or put a different coat of paint on it. The other ‘comeback kid’, Bill Clinton, can also attest to that. He’s now an elder Statesman and people want him around their campaign in a way they once wanted distance. Hilary is often seen in his company where once that wasn’t the case. Even quoting the incumbent, Obama seems back in favour.

So this set of Primaries feels different. The mood seems to have switched from ‘Yes We Can’ to ‘Can You Really?’ Leaders have an important role in setting the tone for a country and also for an organisation. Behaviours at the top are very quickly mimicked and flow down at herculean speed. A heady mix of geo-political challenges await the new President including, but certainly not limited to, a sabre-rattling North Korea, Chinese militarism in the South China Sea, Syria, Daesh, instability in Libya, the almost forgotten annihilation of Yemen, domestic gun violence, the growing gap between rich and poor, the rise of Islamic militancy in Africa, potential Cold War with Russia and the selection of a new Supreme Court Justice. Whoever gets the job better know how to walk and chew gum at the same time.

Leaders of organisations, too, have a challenging agenda. There is the inexorable rise of digitisation, automation and artificial intelligence, Blockchain, IoT, how to motivate the workforce, gender pay inequality, a volatile stock market, suspiciously insecure banking sector, high debt levels and the need to keep all this together when faced with moments of self-doubt and real concern. Important to all leaders is remembering that mistakes can and do occur. The real measure of leadership is not necessarily always avoiding them but how you bounce back. We each must learn to be a ‘comeback kid’ and I suspect in the new world order more than once. To quote Frank ‘That’s Life!’