Start with the end in view . . .

. . . It’s another way of dissecting our economic woes

When responding to a challenge, people and nations tend to figure out what the first step ought to be – because logical thinking can easily migrate to sequential or linear thinking and thus a ground up process. But that can also yield sub-optimized or half-measures because it is activity- as opposed to results-driven.

Farmers know this from experience – without silos to preserve their produce, the harsh cold months would ruin them; and so they work back to establish the absolute start date to commence the farming year. The writer heard this from a priest who grew up visiting his grandparents’ farm: “Do you know how farmers are able to drive their tractors on an absolute straight line – or why vineyards and orchards are so lined up? My grandfather showed me how to drive a tractor after I messed up my first attempt. As I sat next to him on the tractor he said: pick a spot at the farthest end – that will be your goal. And keep your eyes focused on that spot and your brain will guide your hands to your goal.”

Educated as we are especially in business, we likewise learned planning and budgeting, yet universally people from whatever country (we’re not alone) find themselves thinking from the ground up. Kennedy demonstrated how it should be done instead when he set a goal for man to get to the moon within a decade. It does not have to be as complex as getting to the moon – it can be as simple as getting to our next appointment or even to work on time.

If we benchmark our economy against our neighbors, we see that we have a $100 B shortfall in revenues or GDP – how much do we have to scale-up marginal enterprises to come close to that number, i.e., they most likely will yield sub-optimized or half-measures? $100 B should be our farthest spot, our goal – and we need to keep our eyes focused on that goal.

And then we can work back – which lends itself to lateral or creative thinking: where will these revenues come from? This is not the time to eliminate options, instead we should put every option on the table – whether electronics, agribusiness or BPOs or whatever. The key is to develop and then pick and choose higher value-added products and/or services that will generate healthy market shares and margins, and achieve sustainability. A product does not always have to be an outcome of creative destruction – it can be an update recognizing that Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is the core of consumer needs. Products can be retro (fitted) or recycled or upcycled to respond to ever changing consumer needs – or why Steve Jobs is able to build on supposedly standard if not sunset products. Products can be rural-based or urban-based so long as they are not sub-optimized. They can be capitalized locally and as importantly, by foreigners – who have access to a larger capital- or resource-base. But foreigners will not just come to us. We have to demonstrate that we have the wherewithal to become globally competitive: that we are casting our nets wider beyond our shores, seeking resources – from capital to technology to talent to market access – in order to optimize the options the global community has to offer. They want the best yield – or the most efficient use of resources!

Unfortunately, our mindset is stuck – to the status quo. And when foreign investors see this, they tend to invest elsewhere. Have we paid attention to the suggestions from the foreign chambers, for instance? They may have their own interest at heart but our posture ought to be to seek the right combination of resource options, and so we should more than humor them?

There is a reason why there is a global ranking on competitiveness – because emerging countries as well as long-developing ones like ours cannot rely on foreign aid alone. We have to become active participants in the global economy – so that later on we would have the ability to “raise all boats”.