There is always a market . . .

. . . for ideas that travel

Unfortunately, we have been occupied nursing our little pot of soil in our desire to protect it that we may have missed: (a) that “we can’t have our cake and eat it too” and (b) there are larger pots to tap that we have unwittingly ceded to others? Fortunately, there is no such thing as being too late – as the good thief experienced during the Crucifixion. Nor is the global economic crisis a barrier to all as reported by Jollibee Foods Corporation: “Jollibee aims overseas branches to equal local stores”. (See: Jollibee)

There is always a market for ideas that travel – products & services, the components of GDP, are driven by ideas. (See: Ideas/Houston, we have a problem). While the West wants Asian tigers to follow their lead and step up local stimulus efforts given the contraction of the world economy, it does not mean that Germany and Japan will cease exports – the largest exporters and truly export-driven economies. And given: (a) our miniscule GDP per person, (b) our OFW/consumer-driven economy, (c) deficits and (d) poverty rate, we are NOT in the same boat as the Asian tigers. That means it is foolhardy if we don’t step up our competitiveness, and seek markets wherever they are.

But to change course is never easy especially with the success of our largest enterprises, bred by our inward-looking culture. And we don’t have the experience to rapidly exploit the global market. But we can take the first steps: (a) sharply define the products/services with the biggest bang and (b) identify and mobilize requisite private and public sector support, for example – which we are doing but we need to do more: clarity, passion and efficiency.

The need to problem-solve and execute is something we know in private business but still that has been limited to the local market. And this ability is not as developed in the public sector especially as it relates to our economic development.

To be sure, it is extremely difficult to problem-solve and execute in a democratic system. But Bill Clinton and Barack Obama have demonstrated it in different yet still similar ways. Clinton sharpened his focus even more (“It’s the economy, stupid) after he realized that his other programs like health care would undermine his ability to deliver on the economy. So he demonstrated focus and leadership in a very narrow area and succeeded in balancing the budget (that included welfare reform to manage costs though politically unpopular) and generating surplus that unfortunately the successor blew away. And Obama is likewise demonstrating leadership: he is on TV practically everyday driving his programs and explaining how he is doing it while allowing himself to be grilled by the press.

Focus does not mean ignoring details necessary for execution; it is to sharpen clarity of purpose. And this may be our biggest dilemma given we’re not Anglo-Saxons or why Clinton succeeded, i.e., with our own instincts of inclusion and compassion – yet we have not stemmed poverty, for example. We must focus on economic development to bring prosperity to Juan de la Cruz.

If a typical Fortune 500 company is focused on revenues, margins and efficiency, public sector efforts can be focused on revenues, balanced-budget and efficiency – the “marching orders” from Clinton to Greenspan, Rubin and Gore, respectively. (Of course, acknowledging that the Fed is an independent body.)

The bottom line – the challenge to our leadership and to us as a people:

1. We need to as quickly develop the confidence to exploit the global market
2. We need to cut to the chase: focus on the vital few drivers of the economy – we cannot be all things to everyone
3. The narrower the focus, the sharper the clarity of purpose and the greater our ability to execute will be