It is not about money . . . and charity

It is about a common purpose, a community sense. “Quote of the Day: ‘When you’re surrounded by people who share a passionate commitment around a common purpose, anything is possible,’ Howard Schultz,” Forbes.com. 23rd Mar 2016 . . . And to Starbucks fanatics Schultz is no stranger.

If it isn’t obvious yet, the blog consistently builds on the theme “developing a sense of purpose and community.” And Starbucks can be a best-practice model. If we Pinoys are to overcome our inward-looking bias and develop an honest-to-goodness community sense, we would want to raise our global consciousness. We’re in the 21st century. Otherwise we will always retreat into our shell, into the familiar: parochialism, hierarchy, paternalism, political patronage and dynasties, crony capitalism and oligarchy.

And we know what doing the same thing over and over again comes down to? Yet the inertia of “insanity” is not easy to overcome. We may want to prescribe solutions around techniques (but as every hacker who calls himself a golfer knows, techniques and hi-tech clubs don’t make a golfer.) It is a mind game. It holds for governance and development. And why ours is a culture of impunity and not the rule of law?

The writer learned about it the hard way. Why would a Fortune 500 company trip itself despite all the techniques and resources and talents in the world at their disposal? Even a Nokia or a BlackBerry or an IBM can be undone.

In other words, while we mean well to address poverty and prescribe solutions, we must recognize that if we are restricted by old paradigms like destiny, we can’t move the needle. We haven’t made a dent on poverty, and PH remains the regional laggard – i.e., destiny is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

PH underdevelopment and poverty is not about money . . . and charity. It is about a common purpose and a community sense – or the lack of it – that is, if we are to move from a Third-World to a First-World nation. [It comes from visionary leadership; not hierarchy, not laws, not regulations, not structure.]

“Early on, Schultz set about making his mark on the company while making Starbucks' mission his own. In 1983, while traveling in Milan, Italy, he was struck by the number of coffee bars he encountered. An idea then occurred to him: Starbucks should sell not just coffeebeans but coffee drinks. ‘I saw something. Not only the romance of coffee, but ... a sense of community. And the connection that people had to coffee—the place and one another,’ Schultz recalled. ‘And after a week in Italy, I was so convinced with such unbridled enthusiasm that I couldn't wait to get back to Seattle to talk about the fact that I had seen the future.’

“Schultz's enthusiasm for opening coffee bars in Starbucks stores, however, wasn't shared by the company's creators. ‘We said, 'Oh no, that's not for us,' Siegl remembered. ‘Throughout the '70s, we served coffee in our store. We even, at one point, had a nice, big espresso machine behind the counter. But we were in the bean business.’ Nevertheless, Schultz was persistent until, finally, the owners let him establish a coffee bar in a new store that was opening in Seattle. It was an instant success, bringing in hundreds of people per day and introducing a whole new language—the language of the coffeehouse—to Seattle in 1984.

“But the success of the coffee bar demonstrated to the original founders that they didn't want to go in the direction Schultz wanted to take them. They didn't want to get big. Disappointed, Schultz left Starbucks in 1985 to open a coffee bar chain of his own, Il Giornale, which quickly garnered success.

“Two years later, with the help of investors, Schultz purchased Starbucks, merging Il Giornale with the Seattle company. Subsequently, he became CEO and chairman of Starbucks (known thereafter as the Starbucks Coffee Company).”

Memo: 29 years later, Starbucks’ market cap stands at $86.26-B with revenues close to $20-B.

“After graduating from the university with a Bachelor of Science degree in communication in 1975, Schultz found work as an appliance salesman for Hammarplast, a company that sold European coffee makers in the United States. Rising through the ranks to become director of sales, in the early 1980s, Schultz noticed that he was selling more coffee makers to a small operation in Seattle, Washington, known then as the Starbucks Coffee Tea and Spice Company, than to Macy's. ‘Every month, every quarter, these numbers were going up, even though Starbucks just had a few stores,’ Schultz later remembered. ‘And I said, 'I gotta go up to Seattle.’

“Howard Schultz still distinctly remembers the first time he walked into the original Starbucks in 1981. At that time, Starbucks had only been around for 10 years and didn't exist outside Seattle. The company's original owners, old college buddies Jerry Baldwin and Gordon Bowker and their neighbor, Zev Siegl, had founded Starbucks in 1971. The three friends also came up with the coffee company's ubiquitous mermaid logo.

‘When I walked in this store for the first time—I know this sounds really hokey—I knew I was home,’ Schultz later remembered. ‘I can't explain it. But I knew I was in a special place, and the product kind of spoke to me.’ At that time, he added, ‘I had never had a good cup of coffee. I met the founders of the company, and really heard for the first time the story of great coffee ... I just said, 'God, this is something I've been looking for my whole professional life.’

“Birth of the Modern Starbucks. A year after meeting with Starbucks' founders, in 1982, Howard Schultz was hired as director of retail operations and marketing for the growing coffee company, which, at the time, only sold coffee beans, not coffee drinks.” [biography.com]

A couple of learnings that must not be lost to us Filipinos: (a) look ahead and into the future and (b) move up the value chain – e.g., in the case of Starbucks, from coffee beans to coffee drinks. Coffee lovers know that coffee offers an array of choices or coffee-drink experiences that would represent the value chain.

The value chain – and the higher the better – is where an enterprise must demonstrate its competitiveness and sustainability. It is where healthy margins are attained – and wealth generated.

This is the mindset that we sorely lack in Philippine industry and why we're not competitive – and continue to be confounded by unemployment and poverty. [But then again, that comes from visionary leadership.]

“Gaya-gaya puto maya.” Imitation may be the highest form of flattery – but it doesn’t hone creativity and innovation. Hierarchy doesn’t either. Oil and water don’t mix – and why the blog in earlier postings discussed “design thinking.” The evidence? (1) PH – we’re not synonymous to creativity and innovation and competitiveness; and (2) “Samsung to reform authoritarian culture to act like startup,” Manila Bulletin, AP, 24th Mar 2016.

“There is a great scope for raising the role of small enterprise in the Philippine economy. I have constantly argued that this is the key to making the country’s economic growth benefit the wider masses of Filipinos more directly, rather than rely on growth driven by large firms to ‘trickle down’ to the bottom. Indeed, why should anyone settle for a mere trickle? What we have always needed, but which has remained elusive, is growth that has much broader direct participation in both the sectoral and geographic sense.

“Small businesses are typically starved of financing, and this has been more particularly so in the Philippines, where the big banks have traditionally preferred to deal with a few large clients than a large number of small ones . . . Small firms are also ill-equipped to keep up with improving technology, as in-house research and development, which large firms routinely provide resources for, is out of reach for a small business.” [Small firms and manifold challenges, Cielito F. Habito, No Free Lunch, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 22nd Mar 2016]

How do we overcome the hurdles confronting small firms?

As some would know, the writer’s Bulgarian friends were the inspiration for this blog. 13 years ago, when he first arrived in Eastern Europe, he found a “cottage industry” operating in an old ex-communist facility. They hadn’t made a profit in 7 years. The one time they did was year-one when they started the business to supply bottle-cleaning detergents to the local brewery – through a friend they had inside the company. The following year, the brewery decided they could buy a better product elsewhere, and they were left with no business to speak of. How many MSMEs have had such a disaster experience?

To stay in business, they had to learn to produce other soap and detergent products while borrowing money collateralized by the owners’ (two brothers) very limited assets. “We have to move up to the next level,” was how they explained the dire situation to the writer. What to do? 

“We shall put together and embrace a vision that will be the company’s reason for being. A sense of purpose. We must become the best in the business and the first major milestone is to be a $100-million company. That is [then] the median size of a Western MNC subsidiary. That is what we must be if we are to compete and win against them. We shall present the game plan to several banks. In the meantime, we shall fine-tune the product portfolio that will deliver the future, including how we will do it year in, year out.” 

And the rest as they say is history. Five years ago they were recognized among the best and the fastest growing companies in the EU. Not surprisingly, Western MNCs have come wooing: “what would it take to partner with you?”

It’s not about money. It is about a sense of purpose. [But then again, it comes from visionary leadership.]

“Why independence, if the slaves of today will be the tyrants of tomorrow? And that they will be such is not to be doubted, for he who submits to tyranny loves it.” [We are ruled by Rizal’s ‘tyrants of tomorrow,’ Editorial, The Manila Times, 29th Dec 2015]

“As a major component for the education and reorientation of our people, mainstream media – their reporters, writers, photographers, columnists and editors – have an obligation to this country . . .” [Era of documented irrelevance: Mainstream media, critics and protesters, Homobono A. Adaza, The Manila Times, 25th Nov 2015]

“Development [is informed by a people’s] worldview, cognitive capacity, values, moral development, self-identity, spirituality, and leadership . . .” [Frederic Laloux, Reinventing organizations, Nelson Parker, 2014]

The good, the bad . . . and the caveat

Development is a continuum . . . Juan de la Cruz is neither living in a tree nor in the 21st century world. Yet he’s part of the latter – an OFW (working in faraway places separated from family) or manning the phones of a BPO. Indeed he brings home the bacon – aka as our major income streams.

And with our 100-million strong consumers, we enjoy a consumption economy that: (a) delivered enviable growth over the recent past; (b) created 11 billionaires that made it to the Forbes’ list; and (c) generated public coffers that, sadly, sustained a culture of impunity. What is our reality? The good, the bad . . . and the caveat.

The caveat? Would sitting in Metro Manila’s traffic be a “teachable moment” for us? What would explain our inability to deliver something as basic as vital infrastructure? Try (a) crab mentality and/or (b) the tyranny that comes with hierarchy and paternalism. And did we create a monster by our parochial bias – protecting and preserving (a) political patronage and dynasties and (b) crony capitalism and oligarchy? And everything goes downhill from there? 

And so when we talk of competitiveness demanded by the 21st century world like trade, we talk defense not offense, i.e., protectionism? Indeed we’re not ready for TPP – we don’t have the competitive products like our neighbors do? Conversely, we know why we don’t attract FDIs. Benchmarking is (a) outward-looking and (b) focused on the best practices of others – not their weaknesses. Try growing up. 

Indeed man wants the familiar, and the stability, that comes from a routine and a habit. Even excellence is derived from a habit. But what’s the difference? The mindset. A fixed mindset nurtures a routine that perpetuates the status quo. A growth mindset attains stability via a platform – e.g., a sense of purpose and values – that can be built upon . . . geared to stand up and face a changing world with confidence.

But if globalization is what a changing world is about then it's a failure? Because we want to take the good – e.g., OFW remittances and the BPO industry – but not the bad?

And why Trump is winning the hearts and minds of America with his isolationist (aka parochial and insular) rhetoric – albeit less than the majority of the party’s delegates and caucus-goers? They forget that to whom much is given much is expected – like to be the hegemon amid the world’s despots?

There’s a piece of America that is not well-informed! Try selling “Coca-Cola” (i.e., major US brands) only in the US and see: (a) how the multiplier effect will work in reverse; (b) how much unemployment they will suffer; and (c) how the US will retreat in the development continuum. It’s about scale (think Zara and Uniqlo) and the economies and benefits that come with it. [To think big, we Pinoys must first develop a community sense – beyond family and beyond local?]

Advanced economies indeed have challenges that come with full-development – where productivity and growth have reached diminishing returns and thus much slower. Still, they must keep looking ahead and up the value chain. Man has much, much more to learn – he claims to know the Big Bang theory but not its construct, for example – and so he keeps messing things up. Unsurprisingly, the US failed to punish the culprits of the Great Recession. Similar to the Great Depression it has unleashed man’s bad side. When man is hungry how different is he from a raging bull if not the rest of the animal kingdom?

Still, the Tea Party’s it’s my way or the highway (aka paralysis) is not the answer. Try restitution [from greedy bankers that matches the crime] instead of crab mentality.

“It’s the Global Economy, Stupid,” Jeffrey E. Garten, Time, 25th Feb 2016. “Most of [the candidates for US president] give the impression of wanting to turn the clock back to an older, simpler world of many generations ago when the US could go it alone or else call all the shots.

“It cannot be done. Globalization began some 60,000 years ago, when a number of families walked out of Africa to find food and security. There have been pauses in the trend, such as during the middle ages, and even some interruptions, such as the period between the two world wars in the 20th century. Globalization has been beset by wars, depressions and horrendous natural disasters. But whatever the swerves and setbacks, the inexorable direction and momentum has been towards a smaller and more interconnected world.”

Development is a continuum. It is “biology” – the survival of the fittest. It’s the ability to transform, e.g., from a caterpillar to a butterfly or a tadpole to a frog. The writer’s laptop runs on Windows 7 Professional. If Windows has had several versions, what more of globalization?

“Our genes influence our intelligence and talents, but these qualities are not fixed at birth. If you mistakenly believe that your capabilities derive from DNA and destiny, rather than practice and perseverance, then you operate with . . . a “fixed mindset” rather than a “growth mindset.” [What you believe affects what you achieve, Bill Gates, gatesnotes.com, 7th Dec 2015]

Note the point Gates makes about practice and perseverance. Perseverance is resoluteness, a strong belief or faith like conviction. And so we can’t turn against crab mentality and the culture of impunity? It takes a growth mindset to develop perseverance. Did our sheltered upbringing inform a fixed mindset?

Consider: the Vatican stubbornly stood by “the world is flat” for the longest time. Fast forward to the 21st century: Finally . . . after a century . . . the world was able to prove that Einstein was right.

And do they explain why despite the lapse of several decades, we Pinoys have no track record in industrialization – and how to move up from Third-World to First-World? And Binay can fix this in 6 years? Or Poe or Duterte or Roxas? Or Santiago? What about Bongbong? See above: We created a monster . . . that even martial law and EDSA 1&2 failed to slay!

Yet we Filipinos don't like unsolicited advice the latest examples being (a) the JFC's 7 industry winners and (b) the RCBC money-laundering case? Are they reflective of the tyranny of parochialism and hierarchy that have isolated us from progress and development? Why is Francis battling the Curia? Blind obedience to hierarchy immortalizes tyranny and subservience isn’t what our faith is about? The evidence? Both PH and the Curia are transparency-challenged?

And what do we see around us? For example, why is the Korean community in the Philippines growing? The writer asked a Korean family and the response is: South Korea’s costs structure is that of a developed nation; and it is easier for a mom & pop’s enterprise like ours to thrive in the Philippines. 

Clearly this Korean family is entrepreneurial. And while the US is entrepreneurial as a nation, there are those that are away – in their mind or heart or spirit if not physically – from the economic hubs of the East and West coasts that are not. Which all the more makes globalization bad.

Enter: Lee, Mahathir and Deng – who would see through that! And why Singapore, Malaysia and China can compete and win? Water seeks its own level! Translation: (a) an SME can be an MNC; and (b) to be a small entrepreneur or a small farmer is not destiny. It’s all about the mindset! It is mind over matter!

Why are we Pinoys the regional laggard? “Who . . . [is] responsible . . .? Short answer: our political leaders . . . whose decisions, supposedly taken for the public good, are in truth motivated by a desire for private gain and result in policies and projects that impoverish rather than enrich our country . . . [they] find ‘public service’ so lucrative that they decide to make a family enterprise out of it, creating dynasties . . . Graft and corruption permeate all levels of public life . . .

“Perhaps in no other country in South Asia is political dishonesty so widely recognized, accepted and talked about as a part of the political game . . . [W]e are unique – in corruption . . . [T]he presence of these dynasties is correlated with higher poverty, lower per capita income, lower primary education completion rates . . . [T]hey account for 70 percent of regular legislators in the Congress [in 2012].” [“The Philippines’ ‘buwaya problem,’ Solita Collas-Monsod, Get Real, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 5th Mar 2016]

Why are we “blind” to political dynasties? Is it all about family – or our mistaken notion of family values? Or is it the outcome of the viciousness of our “ecosystem”. It cannot create and sustain a competitive economy – a characteristic shared by wealthy nations. Instead it goes from poverty – and circles back – to poverty!

Is Prince Charles not decent enough? Why do they need Prime Minister David Cameron? And why do we need Marcos and Imelda and Imee and Bongbong? Does the Marcos dynasty compare with the British Royalty – i.e., did the Swiss offer to reveal their Swiss account and return them to the British people and set an example for other tyrants? But we love tyrants – and are the breeding ground for generations more to come, so says Rizal?

In a recent posting the blog talked about Kurt Lewin’s Forced Field Theory. There are always positive and negative forces that drive and restrict our ability to move forward.

The key is to exploit the positives and overcome the negatives – via a growth mindset. Sadly, we’ve embraced destiny – a fixed mindset – and gave it a positive spin, charity? To develop a growth mindset we must learn to look ahead, internalize Pareto's 80-20 rule and learn to wait for our turn – to wait in line. And it applies even when driving in our archaic Metro Manila streets. 

It is the time of year when many Pinoys are in town as balikbayans – including those attending their alma mater’s homecoming. And the stories they hear would make one laugh if not cry. But it’s home – we take the good with the bad? The caveat: We must pursue transformation – not extinction?

“Why independence, if the slaves of today will be the tyrants of tomorrow? And that they will be such is not to be doubted, for he who submits to tyranny loves it.” [We are ruled by Rizal’s ‘tyrants of tomorrow,’ Editorial, The Manila Times, 29th Dec 2015]

“As a major component for the education and reorientation of our people, mainstream media – their reporters, writers, photographers, columnists and editors – have an obligation to this country . . .” [Era of documented irrelevance: Mainstream media, critics and protesters, Homobono A. Adaza, The Manila Times, 25th Nov 2015]

“Development [is informed by a people’s] worldview, cognitive capacity, values, moral development, self-identity, spirituality, and leadership . . .” [Frederic Laloux, Reinventing organizations, Nelson Parker, 2014]

Where is our head?

Consider: “Graft and corruption permeate all levels of public life . . . Perhaps in no other country in South Asia is political dishonesty so widely recognized, accepted and talked about as a part of the political game . . .” [“‘The Philippines’ ‘buwaya problem,’“ Solita Collas-Monsod, Get Real, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 5th Mar 2016]

If we are to have a chance – a prayer – to overcome a culture of impunity, must we first recognize that there is no free lunch? We must want to be upright. It is “mind over matter.”

Would the following initiative be the answer – assuming it is applied across the board in the public sector – to the graft and corruption that permeate all levels of public life? “Government corporations undergo 1st governance evaluation,” The Philippine Star, 4th Mar 2016.

“State corporations will undergo their first governance evaluation . . . under new rules aimed at strengthening their administration and adherence to transparency.

“The (scorecard) is a quantitatively-driven evaluation tool extracted from existing and globally accepted standards and practices . . . GOCCs will be assessed on three criteria namely stakeholder relationships, disclosure and transparency and responsibilities of the board members.”

And what about this? “Failed experiment at DA,” Marichu A. Villanueva, COMMONSENSE, The Philippine Star, 4th Mar 2016. “Ironically, the contribution to the country’s annual economic growth from the agriculture sector, however, has been declining even while budgetary support grew by unprecedented proportions.

“President Aquino . . . transferred to the Office of the President the following DA agencies to his newly created Cabinet post called Presidential Assistant for Food Security and Agricultural Modernization (PAFSAM): the National Food Authority (NFA); the National Irrigation Administration (NIA); the Philippine Coconut Authority (PCA), and the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA).

“The creation of PAFSAM was supposed to help beef up the DA . . . Secretary Alcala had also been under fire from various stakeholders’ groups denouncing alleged shenanigans in rice importation, problems of delayed irrigation projects, the coco-lisap infestation, among other issues.

“Unfortunately, this political accommodation did not produce miraculous gains for the country’s agriculture sector.”

The writer asked friends in the Philippines why “daang matuwid” appears not to boost the candidacy of Roxas, for example. And they’re one in saying: “It raised expectations but didn’t deliver on the promise.”

We’re probably not lacking in good intentions.

“Our parents and teachers exert a big influence on which mindset we adopt—and that mindset, in turn, has a profound impact on how we learn and which paths we take in life.”  [What you believe affects what you achieve, Bill Gates, gatesnotes.com, 7th Dec 2015]

It is mind over matter. “‘Alone in Antarctica.’ At the end of November 2011, Felicity set off from the coast of Antarctica on the Rose Ice Shelf to cross the entire continent on skis by herself. Ahead of her was a 1744 km journey through the Transantarctic Mountains, across the Polar Plateau to the South Pole then on to the far coast of Antarctica. The physical challenges of the 59-day journey are astonishing but it is the mental hardships that Felicity describes that are the most memorable.” [Felicity Aston, lecture, aboard the Queen Elizabeth, 11th Mar 2016.]

“It is mind over matter,” is how Aston would sum up the experience. And she had already developed what she called “the bug” – and two years later would organize a team of three women to race in the Arctic against all-men teams (including from the military, trained and fit for combat) and finished 6th out of 16. But they had to work that butt off – like cutting on sleep. After the first checkpoint they were dead last. And at the second checkpoint they had moved up to 9th. And so they kept pushing.

It was actually the third time Aston did the impossible. The first time, in 2006, she organized a team of four women to cross the southern part of Greenland both ways, 16 days going west and 14 days coming back east. The first women to do so and bettered the record of 30 days in either direction – the best men could do.

On the return they had in fact decided to give up – and so Aston called the rescue team. They’ve had a slew of obstacles including one when a member fell into a patch of thin ice down to her neck – a miracle in itself because she could have vanished. But they chose to carry on. While on the phone with the rescue team, Aston heard what she thought were the magic words: “keep the faith.” And as the head of the expedition, Aston learned a great lesson in leadership.

Her three lessons: (a) it is mind over matter; (b) keep the faith and (c) it is about leadership.

What about reflecting on the following and asking ourselves: Where is our head on each of them? (a) Graft and corruption permeate all levels of public life; (b) State corporations will undergo their first governance evaluation this month under new rules aimed at strengthening their administration and adherence to transparency; and (c) President Aquino . . . transferred to the Office of the President [4 DA] agencies to his newly created Cabinet post called Presidential Assistant for Food Security and Agricultural Modernization (PAFSAM). Unfortunately, this . . . did not produce miraculous gains for the country’s agriculture sector.

And would these three elements represent our collective mind as Filipinos? (a) Leadership; (b) Juan de la Cruz; and (c) Institutions.

We know, for example, that President Aquino like everyone else has his strengths and weaknesses. What about Poe, Binay, Roxas, Duterte and Santiago. Can these candidates be any different? And should Juan de la Cruz likewise ask himself where his mind is? And what about our institutions?

The writer remembers 13 years ago when he first arrived in Eastern Europe. Consider: (a) he had retired from an MNC where every year he executed a sworn statement (required by the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act) that he did not engage in any corrupt practices wherever he did business; and (b) he was representing USAID in Bulgaria.

“If you want me to come again (he had spent a month with them), you must commit that ‘transparency’ will be our guiding principle. There will be no ifs and buts.

“Bulgaria is infamous for corruption. That is why you no longer embrace the ex-king that returned from exile only to mess things up. You have had three oligarchic families that took advantage of the transition from communist-rule to free enterprise.

“And you say that if only Bulgarians would use their astute minds for the collective good not evil, you will have your rightful place in the community of nations. We cannot control the rest of the country. But we can be an exception and be the model for industry.

“Because that is what it would take for you to compete and win against the best companies from the West. The West may be assisting you in your accession efforts into the EU. But they are the friendly competition. You will be competing for the same consumers. You cannot think small, you must think big.”

As a nation we have our job cut out for us. We have a far, far greater challenge that one singular private entity. [Bulgaria despite its infamy ranks ahead of us in the various global rankings. Yet these people see themselves as awful.]

We have model entities – no doubt – yet despite 11 billionaires in the Forbes’ list we are not as competitive as our neighbors!

We have to search our hearts and our minds why this is so.

Ours is an oligarchic economy! In today’s highly competitive and globalized world, we are deluding ourselves if we believe we can cling to the past – and losers do. And it’s no secret that the world goes with the winners. 

We are not a true free enterprise – where (a) the leadership; (b) Juan de la Cruz; and (c) our institutions have a track record in progress and development. And are we juvenile, unprepared to exercise democracy and are yet to appreciate progress and development – that the world in fact has evolved and moved beyond aristocracy into democracy? And yet we still value oligarchies and political dynasties?

In an earlier posting the blog discussed the primacy of leadership over structure. And contemporary knowledge and techniques per se can’t undo the mind. Character- and institution-building is mind over matter. Consider: The way to heaven is straight and narrow. It’s the spirit behind “daang matuwid.” And if we believe it has done us some good, we better demand it of our leadership – today and tomorrow!

On the other hand, knowledge and modern techniques can represent false insurance – when there is no ultimate accountability. At the end of the day, Juan de la Cruz must be answerable; and as much if not more so is the leadership. And without that level of accountability we cannot build our institutions. And why “Graft and corruption permeate all levels of public life . . .”

“Why independence, if the slaves of today will be the tyrants of tomorrow? And that they will be such is not to be doubted, for he who submits to tyranny loves it.” [We are ruled by Rizal’s ‘tyrants of tomorrow,’ Editorial, The Manila Times, 29th Dec 2015]

“As a major component for the education and reorientation of our people, mainstream media – their reporters, writers, photographers, columnists and editors – have an obligation to this country . . .” [Era of documented irrelevance: Mainstream media, critics and protesters, Homobono A. Adaza, The Manila Times, 25th Nov 2015]

“Development [is informed by a people’s] worldview, cognitive capacity, values, moral development, self-identity, spirituality, and leadership . . .” [Frederic Laloux, Reinventing organizations, Nelson Parker, 2014]

Learning Nation Building from “Kids Astronomy”

“It is true that there are only eight planets. However, the Solar System is made up of over 100 worlds that are every bit as fascinating. Some of these minor planets, and moons are actually larger than the planet Mercury.” [kidsastronomy.com]

That is a better way to say what this blog has said a few times: Keep it simple, stupid! If kids can learn the solar system using such simple terms, what about a simpler way to pursue nation-building?

“BOI sets review of MVDP,” Bernie Magkilat, 6th Mar 2016. Hopefully the BOI knows about KISS? The blog has talked about global companies. It is not uncommon for MNCs to cover over 200 markets or countries and have 100 subsidiaries and over 200 brands. Yet it is acknowledged that they are more efficient and effective and productive than, say, the public sector and why they are used as benchmarks.

It is thus encouraging to read news reports that go like this: “DTI readies perks for key sectors,” Amy R. Remo, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 7th Mar 2016. “THE DEPARTMENT of Trade and Industry is preparing incentive packages aimed at accelerating the growth of high-impact industries like shipbuilding and aerospace.”

Instead of talking about 40 or 32 roadmaps it appears we are now talking of key sectors. In the old days or before we had computers or laptops, in inventory management, they had the ABC classification – fast-moving, slow-moving and the in-betweens. Putting industries into similar buckets would allow the DTI to focus their efforts accordingly. For example, the CARS program’s “contribution to gross domestic product was estimated at about 1.7 percent.”

“Such packages [for key industry sectors] will likely be similar to the Comprehensive Automotive Resurgence Strategy (CARS) program, under which P27 billion in incentives were made available to qualified assemblers to boost the automotive and parts manufacturing industries, explained Trade Secretary Adrian S. Cristobal Jr.

“Under Executive Order 182, the CARS program will provide fiscal and non-fiscal incentives for assemblers that can produce 200,000 units of a single model over a six-year period.

“If successful, the CARS program is expected to attract more than P27 billion in new parts manufacturing investments; produce at least 600,000 vehicles; generate some 200,000 new jobs; and generate a total economic activity estimated to be worth P300 billion. The resulting contribution to gross domestic product was estimated at about 1.7 percent.

“In an interview with the Inquirer, Cristobal said the DTI was looking at other sectors that may warrant a similar incentive program, including shipbuilding and aerospace.”

The solar system is an ecosystem – and people are awed by the wonders of nature despite devastating storms. And in the Philippines we even monetized it with “It’s more fun in the Philippines” – despite the inadequacies in our infrastructure. 

In pursuing nation-building, we likewise must create an ecosystem. Or what is called the “big picture.” To this day we have been conditioned to focus on monetary and fiscal policies and their impact on GDP growth. As this blog has pointed out, in an underdeveloped economy like PH, we need to look beyond this narrow set of metrics. And indeed reality has set in. The international institutions have recently confirmed that growth alone will not solve poverty in the Philippines.

Simply put, like the solar system, nation building may have over 100 worlds but its emphasis must be on its “eight planets.” 

Crab mentality has brought this country to a halt for the longest time. And to add insult to injury, pseudo-Christian dogmas have been taken as gospel truth – when what it was simply is to hide a culture of impunity behind the skirts of the church? That was the genius of Rizal. He saw through the fraud.

Consider: Political dynasties hid behind family values. Paternalism behind charity. Parochialism behind love of country. Crony capitalism and oligarchy behind investment. 

What is the common denominator? “I, me and myself” – the sense of community and the common good be damned!

“Graft and corruption permeate all levels of public life . . . Perhaps in no other country in South Asia is political dishonesty so widely recognized, accepted and talked about as a part of the political game . . .” [“The Philippines’ ‘buwaya problem,’ Solita Collas-Monsod, Get Real, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 5th Mar 2016]

In a recent posting, the blog discussed an ecosystem: “Sadly, because of pervasive poverty, we like to believe that fighting poverty is our nirvana. Until we realized that poverty comes from the absence of jobs! But where do jobs come from? They come from a sustainable and competitive economy – which would characterize a developed and wealthy economy.

“Aside from structure, what other elements are imperative if we are to erect a wealthy economy – recognizing that we need a leadership that can articulate a sense of purpose and embrace its requisite values – and edify Juan de la Cruz? We all know the importance of investment or FDI. And beyond investment – in order to attain competitive advantage – we need technology and innovation as well as people, product, supply chain and market development. Marketable products are what make an economic undertaking sustainable.

“And these elements don’t pour like manna from heaven. They demand a platform that’s derived from good governance – committed to community and the common good. And the platform is one that provides the basics of an economy – e.g., vital infrastructure and strategic industries. If it sounds like connecting the dots, it is! In one word, an ecosystem.”

Note the element of “strategic industries.” And that is why this posting finds it encouraging that the DTI is preaching key sectors.

But what about industries that don’t fall under them? The blog recently gave an unsolicited advice to the Ilocos region and DTI re their focused industries: cacao, coffee, mango, and processed meat and fish industries. There are ways to address these initiatives in a visionary fashion – the key to the pursuit of a wealthy economy – so that we stop looking at Juan de la Cruz as an object of charity.

“[T]ake cacao. Where do we export this product? What are the different segments representing the levels of value-added? The basic segment being the produce from our farms.

“And so we must ask: How high up the value chain do we go and compete? The higher we go the greater the probability of generating healthier margins – the critical element in the effort to attain a sustainable economic undertaking. For example, do we have premium chocolates like Belgian chocolates that are branded?”

In other words, we must be truly committed to manufacturing. And the mindset must not be simply “to revive” manufacturing – but “to win.” It takes a winner to sustain a competitive economic undertaking – and be on the way to a wealthy economy.

And before we can move up the value chain, we have to recognize that manufacturing demands its own ecosystem subset – or simply, of connected dots. Thankfully the JFC is on our case. But we have to demonstrate more self-help and initiative – we’re not PWDs?

“Foreign chambers cite obstacles to manufacturing growth,” Victor V. Saulon, Business World, 4th Mar 2016. “THE Joint Foreign Chambers of the Philippines (JFC) has listed a number of constraints that are hampering the manufacturing sector from sustaining the steady growth that it has experienced in the last five years.

“While existing data spark optimism, industry players are cognizant that a number of constraints hamper the sector’s upward trend . . .

“The joint chambers . . . said these issues cut across the diverse sub-sectors under manufacturing.

“JFC listed these as high power costs, congested ports, labor costs, bureaucracy, taxes and broken linkages in the supply chain. Manufacturing is also wary of the country’s non-inclusion in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) -- the free-trade agreement whose major proponent is the US . . .”

And as far as vital infrastructure is concerned, we have the PPP – and it is not a bad response. Though PPP despite its many accolades continues to be faced with daunting challenges. And they are not surprising: given crab mentality and culture of impunity, why shouldn’t we expect inefficiency and ineffectiveness and mediocre productivity to be the rule? 

KISS is like an insect repellant. If the public sector learns how to keep it simple, there will be less opportunity for bugs to bite – as in complexity. Complexity is the devil’s workshop; while the road to heaven is straight and narrow . . . There’s no two ways about it . . . If “conviction” is not in our heart, character- and institution-building will indeed defy us? [And is our sheltered upbringing a factor? Recall Carol Dweck’s treatise re mindset, billgatesnotes.com, 7th Dec 2015.]

“Why independence, if the slaves of today will be the tyrants of tomorrow? And that they will be such is not to be doubted, for he who submits to tyranny loves it.” [We are ruled by Rizal’s ‘tyrants of tomorrow,’ Editorial, The Manila Times, 29th Dec 2015]

“As a major component for the education and reorientation of our people, mainstream media – their reporters, writers, photographers, columnists and editors – have an obligation to this country . . .” [Era of documented irrelevance: Mainstream media, critics and protesters, Homobono A. Adaza, The Manila Times, 25th Nov 2015]

“Development [is informed by a people’s] worldview, cognitive capacity, values, moral development, self-identity, spirituality, and leadership . . .” [Frederic Laloux, Reinventing organizations, Nelson Parker, 2014]