“Beyond the Bulacan airport.”

The topic is an excellent starting point to expound on the distinctions between (a) logical yet linear and incremental thinking and (b) forward, lateral, and creative thinking.

But just so we don’t feel defensive, neuroscience says that the latter is not as developed as the former – because life, despite its unpredictability, can be navigated with logical yet linear and incremental thinking. Why? Because there are leaders in our midst that do the forward-thinking.

Yet, “leadership” is not generic if we push the envelope. There are despots and honest-to-goodness leadership that can leverage the best in people. We know that from People Power.

Unfortunately, from a third-world country, we Filipinos have a narrower perspective on leadership.

I spent the first twenty years of my career in the Philippines, and my leadership perspective focused on “managerial competence.” Unsuspectingly, my mindset was that of the “command and control” model.

The world knew that as the “ideal” leadership model. And it was a carry-over from the successes of the Western military following two World Wars. And unsurprisingly, General Motors, then the most prominent US corporation, was structured consistent with the “command and control” model.

And I can relate to that because my interest in pursuing a corporate career sprouted from a paper I had to work on – where I found myself digging into as much material as possible about General Motors.

It piggybacked on that flash of lightning that hit me when I was less than ten. “That’s the boss,” my father said when I asked who the man was inside a glass-walled office. My father was a mere clerk.

Long story short, look at what happened to General Motors.

Leadership. Leadership. Leadership.

That was pumped into my head when I moved to a regional role at my old MNC company. The bosses sent me to a leadership program and strategy school. It felt like a crash course in global management. And the distinction between managerial competence and leadership hit me even before the program started. The prework required participants to solicit 360-degree feedback from those around them. Surprise, surprise, it included my wife.

“Whether that is how you see yourself or not, that is how the people around you see you.” My subordinates did it, not only my bosses and peers. And I had to face their collective feedback with the aid of a psychologist.

Will a despot even consider getting that kind of feedback?

In the strategy school, we were all practitioners. Surprise, surprise, strategic planning was not in the program. We met and dialogued with senior executives from different companies that did not even carry the title of strategist. It was all real-world stuff. And for the ambiance, we spent many hours around the fireplace chatting. And whenever it extended to cocktail time, we would order drinks.

Let’s get back to the Bulacan airport.

Because NAIA embarrasses us, we are giddy about the Bulacan airport.

Didn’t we see rural poverty as our biggest problem, so we celebrated the comprehensive agrarian reform?

We saw jobs as the answer to poverty, so we celebrated the OFW phenomenon and call centers.

Can we pause and ponder?

Please think of Lee Kuan Yew. We like to talk about him and visit Singapore. Still, our parochialism and insularity stand out.

Consider: Especially us in the Philippine elite and chattering classes. Rank has its privileges. We don’t need some foreigner to tell us what to do. “Beg for Western money and technology,” said Lee and Mahathir to Deng. And Mahathir repeated it for our benefit.

Have we learned from our “reality” yet? Reality is beyond any human system or experience. Recall the late George Gorospe, SJ.

But we are the elite class. Can we not declare that we are the fastest growing economy and have the manufacturing uptick to confirm it? Whatever happened to the 6%-7% GDP growth that we celebrated over ten years? Why did Vietnam overtake us? 

Benchmark. Benchmark. Benchmark.

Beyond the Bulacan airport, it is imperative to create an “ecosystem.” It must translate to the take-off of Philippine industrialization.

And that means beyond Ciel, Boo, and Tony, we need to rally the nation, laser-focused, on pursuing industrialization. That includes our economic managers, think tanks, legislators, us in the Philippine elite, and chattering classes.

Industrialize. Industrialize. Industrialize.

Should we pause right there?

To industrialize isn’t a concrete concept and challenge to Juan de la Cruz. The evidence? We are not weeping despite dropping the ball of Arangkada. And why we can’t execute the scores of industry road maps, we proudly create.

Or, for that matter, why can’t we connect the dots from the comprehensive agrarian reform to globally competitive agribusiness? Because we are stuck with logical yet linear and incremental thinking.

And here is where our head is: Jobs are the answer to poverty, and thus we not only accepted our normal but celebrated the OFW phenomenon and call centers. Throw in the 4Ps, and we are even proud of our efforts.

Consider: Thailand and Malaysia don’t have poverty alleviation front and center because the average Thai or Malaysian produces or earns more than twice and over three times that of Juan de la Cruz.

Should we pause and ponder?

For the umpteenth time: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy; ours is a culture of impunity. Are we simply compassionate, or is our caste system on full display?

What to do?

“Beyond the Bulacan airport.” Creating an “ecosystem” that will translate to PH industrialization or its take-off is imperative.

Industrialize. Industrialize. Industrialize. 

That is what Lee and Mahathir meant.

And there is a world-class model we can replicate, the Pearl River Delta Economic Zone.

Benchmark. Benchmark. Benchmark.

But that is not up our alley. We like to “reinvent the wheel” — because we’re wise as anyone else. See below; Toyota took pains in benchmarking against German cars, which paved the way for the Lexus brand to become the yardstick of sturdiness.

I relayed the story to my Eastern European friends when they first asked me if they could even compete against the global leader in the category they chose to enter.

Long story short, they “killed” the mainstream brand of the industry leader because they benchmarked against their premium brand. And today, they are relentless in pursuing dynamic innovation because industry giants dominate the competitive arena.

Benchmarking paves the way to “forward-thinking.” Moreover, it facilitates prioritizing the “vital few” over the “trivial many.” But until then, Pareto can only be abstract.

In other words, given our lack of experience in development, we can’t help but be academic.

When I related that I mentored a Ph.D. candidate in developing her dissertation, it wasn’t to brag – but to demonstrate real-world stuff.

Consider that the anecdotes the blog shares have a common thread. They are real-world stuff: from my old MNC’s most significant brand to becoming a dominant global brand to my Eastern European friends “killing” a brand of the industry’s most influential player and, as necessary, moving up from an MSME that was a losing proposition for eight years, to my Ph.D. friend becoming the global marketing director of a world-famous brand, to Toyota successfully creating the Lexus brand, today’s sturdiest car in the market with the highest resale value.

The bottom line: Lateral thinking explains why benchmarking is universal. Conversely, absent forward, lateral, and creative thinking, the above examples won’t lend themselves to an “aha moment.” 

See above; why is the blog challenging the nation to rally behind industrialization, including economic managers, think tanks, and legislators? Recall how the blog parallels nation-building and brand management. It translates freedom, democracy, and the free market to real-world terms.

For example, a brand manager must take personal responsibility for the success of her brands, including winning in the marketplace, as though she’s the general manager with no formal authority. In modern management lingo, it’s called horizontal leadership.

In other words, the imperative of personal responsibility to pursue the common good is universal. While leadership is a vital element in the success of human undertakings, personal responsibility translates to “horizontal leadership” in the case of brand management, for example.

And in the case of nation-building, personal responsibility is demanded of Juan de Cruz, including economic managers, think tanks, legislators, us in the Philippine elite, and chattering classes.

“Beyond the Bulacan airport.”

The topic is an excellent starting point to expound on the distinctions between (a) logical yet linear and incremental thinking and (b) forward, lateral, and creative thinking.

But just so we don’t feel defensive, neuroscience says that the latter is not as developed as the former – because life, despite its unpredictability, can be navigated with logical yet linear and incremental thinking.

Still, we have not found a Lee, Mahathir, or Deng to lead the Philippines from a third-world to a first-world economy and nation.

Gising bayan!