The elite class never had it so good . . .

And at whose expense? “The World Bank said the number of unemployed and underemployed Filipinos may jump to 12.4 million by 2016 even if the economy would be able to sustain its current growth pace. Last year, the country’s unemployed and underemployed stood at 10 million, with the latter accounting for 7 million . . . 14.6 million jobs in the formal and informal sectors . . . need to be created, sustained or improved in the next four years.” [Philippine Daily Inquirer, 13th Sept 2013]

 

But of course, “More Filipinos are able to buy brand-new cars these days . . . indicative of the country’s improving economic condition . . . The number of cars sold by dealers across the country totaled 180,000, up by 40,000 units from the yearly average of 140,000 from 2006 to 2011. The growth of the auto industry was due to the improving economy, wherein more people are now able to buy cars” . . . BPI Savings Bank was optimistic that more cars would be bought this year as the economy continues to be rosy.” [Inquirer Mindanao, 13th Sept 2013]

 

That is why it’s called the “Dutch disease” – it gives us “a high” that shuts out and undermines community sense? It means being blind to the reality and fundamentals of the economy? Is it reflective of our “gated-community mentality” and why we can’t connect the pockets of development to the broader economy? They won't connect because there is no infrastructure – both hard and soft – to begin with . . . And we haven’t established a vibrant industrial base . . . I am writing this in Ukraine, in a Cossack-inspired smallish hotel, perhaps once a mansion. And the bust of Lenin is all around, including in my room – where the pencil holder has the picture and signature of Lenin stenciled too. And the irony is the Ukrainians have been learning – and not without the pains – the ropes of free enterprise. We just completed a business review and our local folks signed up to the marching order to multiply the size of their business; and to present it in the budget review in a couple of weeks. Translation: they have seen blood from their competition – two Western MNCs – and must move in for the kill; and that calls for stepped-up investment.

 

Ukraine’s population is half PHL’s and the GDP per person is $7,500, versus our $4,500. And just like PHL, it is a high-consumption economy at 70% of GDP – great for my friends’ consumer-products business. But it is still a poor country (a second-rate nation like Poland is more progressive) and so people think that their economy stinks and aren't reveling – like we (the elite class) are in the Philippines? The wealthiest Ukrainian is in the energy business [sounds familiar?] and is into retail as well, with malls and supermarkets in several Eastern European countries.

 

In this city they have heavy pollution because of the metal industry – which they are proud about being a full-circle business: from mining to metal products, and all the way up to space technology. It is a government-owned enterprise that sells services to countries that need, say, weather satellites up in space. Unfortunately, the industry plus the big wheat and sunflower-export businesses won’t suffice to cover their prohibitive (signed by the ex-Prime Minister who is now in jail) imports of gas from Russia; the latter has been playing games with them, selling gas cheaper to the Germans. Russia wants to keep them under their thumb, a great way to win friends and influence people.

 

Over cocktails they asked what I thought about their economy: “If your oligarchy will move from controlling the local economy to learning to be competitive, you would be wealthier – i.e., extract blood from global competition, not from their own people. For example, your industry model could be Honda. Honda is beyond a car business and is in the engine and motor enterprise. Given that you can power planes and rockets, you can power the smallest grass-cutter to the largest Boeing or Airbus jets – and over time move beyond the engine business.”

 

We were outdoors in a restaurant by the Dnieper River, but it was a touch cold. Fall is coming, but not to worry, precisely why vodka is their staple. The waiter, noting that I was sipping my drink (not the way it’s done by the locals!), offered to wrap me with a blanket. I was just reviewing my notes: their poverty rate has gone down to 24% from the previous 35%. And the elite class never had it so good . . . from the anecdotes the regional manager shared about oligarchy, including in neighboring countries. Just like PHL, it must be fun visiting those countries – which I promised.

Padre Damaso personified

Francis finds the time to personally read the letters he receives, and one reads: “I am Padre Damaso; I fathered a daughter out-of-wedlock and her name is Maria Clara. I wish her to be baptized.” And then Francis calls Padre Damaso: "Maria Clara is God's gift; you should be able to find a pastor to celebrate the Sacrament of Baptism and if not, you know, there is always me." Obviously I made that up. The real story went something like, and I am paraphrasing from memory: “I am a divorcee; I am bearing a child out-of-wedlock from my fiancé who I then learned was married and with children. And I wish her to be baptized.” How did Francis respond? He called the woman on her cellphone: "Your child is God's gift; you should be able to find a pastor to celebrate the Sacrament of Baptism and if not, you know, there is always me." [Francis wasn’t there when we Pinoys defined morality – i.e., divorcees are out, oligopoly is in?]

 

Padre Damaso did not receive such love and compassion from Rizal: "The Filipino culture was backward, anti-progress, anti-intellectual, and not conducive to the ideals of the Age of Enlightenment." And to drive home his points, Rizal created the character of Padre Damaso (in Noli Me Tangere.) After 126 years or so, has Juan de la Cruz proven Rizal wrong? Or was Rizal prescient to foresee our collective failure as a nation – i.e., from the family to the community to the school to the church to the public and private sectors . . . and beyond? “If corruption exists in homes up to the higher level of government, it must be cultural. So how can we provide a cultural response?” said Cardinal Tagle, who earlier denounced the massive corruption of the pork barrel system by lawmakers.” [Philippine Daily Inquirer, 9th Sept 2013] Such a response won’t happen so long as we in the elite class are having a ball – we even hold the keys to heaven?

 

For example, we have embraced oligopoly reflective of our inward-looking, parochial, insular and hierarchical culture? Translation: "backward, anti-progress, anti-intellectual, and not conducive to the ideals of the Age of Enlightenment”? Do they represent our value that is grounded on a cacique system and structure, which we justify because they generate investments that fuel our economy? And yet we remain economic laggards precisely because this source of national pride is feeble when arrayed against the rest of the world – and says the World Bank, we can’t even create jobs? Who is in bed with oligarchy? Our families (like mine for 8 years; my father, all his working life), the community, the school, the church, and the public and private sectors? Not surprisingly, we're in the "kangkungan" – the pits? But Lee Kwan Yew is autocratic; Thailand and Malaysia and Indonesia are corrupt. Yet we are worse off than all of them? Are we Padre Damaso personified – holier-than-thou – and that is a big part of our collective failure as a nation?

 

Who is in bed with oligarchy? Our community – because of crab mentality we created the perfect ecosystem for tyranny and subservience, e.g., from a bloated government bureaucracy to the pork scam . . . and beyond? Have we heard about Greece where a bloated government bureaucracy took its toll on the economy? Even friends from ex-socialist Bulgaria couldn’t figure out why a country with such a long history of democracy could be the poster boy of political patronage – and what about us in PHL? And so in their case they have already gone 3 months in their daily protest!

 

We may tap technocrats for public service yet for the longest time our bloated government bureaucracy has undermined transparency in public service – and nurtured corruption? Because of crab mentality we expect politicians to intercede in the hiring of our own friends and relatives? Who cares if we can’t prioritize and erect the foundation of an economy – as in adequate power and competitive electricity rates, basic infrastructure and a strategic and vibrant industrial base? Have we heard of India? “[India’s] economic decline has laid bare chronic problems, little remarked upon during the recent boom. An antiquated infrastructure, a sclerotic job market, exorbitant real estate costs and bloated state-owned enterprises never allowed manufacturing, especially manufacturing for export, to grow strong . . . The root of the problem is India’s failure to create a vibrant industrial base with the strength to export.”

 

Who is in bed with oligarchy? It is our school – and the church and the public and private sectors . . . and beyond? The bottom line: Because of our backwardness, our economy is in the pits and thus our school is as well . . . and everything else besides? It should not only be the church that must be offended when it is made the personification of Padre Damaso – we all must – but what are we doing about it? There are the courts where we could seek redress – in PHL where there is no rule of law . . . as in justice delayed is justice denied?

Preparing for 2015 – APEC integration

First of all, like a lazy student (that I once was) we are – if it isn’t obvious yet – cramming for the exams? We must not then expect manna from heaven? We ought to appreciate, understand and accept that Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand dominate inter-ASEAN trade to the extent of 70 percent. That is what we’re up against. In other words, they have the requisite ecosystem that makes them dominant, and 2015 will mean gravy given what they’ve established over the years. They will reap what they’ve sown and lower/no tariffs will ensure that.

 

But tariffs (or even currency) are not the first imperative in trade especially in the 21st century. It is the products and services that we are peddling. And why this blog (while about the economy) talks – beyond the imperatives of a transparent culture and prioritizing infrastructure – about marketing or its fundamentals: product, pricing, placement (e.g., distribution and presentation) and promotion; and also the imperatives of global competition: investment, technology and innovation as well as talent development, and product and market development. For example, our biggest exports are electronics but we are into chips, not finished consumer products. [And Warren Buffett comes to mind; beyond being a value investor, he recognizes the value of strong brands and would invest in the latter as opposed to technology which he admits he doesn’t understand. But in PHL, we’re in electronic chips but don’t truly understand technology – or why Ayala is limited to chips?] We are at the mercy of countless variables, and thus our fatalism would continue to be preeminent in our psyche?

 

If we want to leverage “bukayo”, for instance, the question [and we must do a similar exercise for other products that would differentiate us and, as importantly, have value-added] to ask is: how do we introduce value-addition to what, first and foremost, we must consider a basic product – “bukayo.” For example, what flavors are universal that would find a market beyond our shores? What different packaging variants would make it appealing and stand out when put on the shelf side-by-side with competing sweet products? [Imagine Ferrero Rocher chocolates which chances are we would have seen traveling in the region. Note chocolates and potato chips are the largest selling snack foods.] Then we have to test whether our hypothesis will hold true in the global marketplace. That is what we ought to be talking about? And to get to our desired outcomes (i.e., increasing revenues with healthy margins to ensure a sustainable economic activity) we then must test the product ideas against the imperatives of pricing, placement and promotion. Which means we have to do an honest-to-goodness assessment of where we are from (a) an investment standpoint and, as importantly, innovation as well as (b) in talent development, and product and market development?

 

Every industry wants a road map where government would offer incentives tax-wise? Clearly, government must prioritize infrastructure if we are to even have a prayer in global competitiveness. Yet industry (as in oligopoly?) has undermined the very foundation of our economy, i.e., lopsided and skewed for the benefit of the 50 wealthiest Filipinos – while leaving us uncompetitive regionally or globally? In short, we are worse than a lazy student. Are we a disaster waiting to happen?

 

Our neighbors are doing better than us – they must be doing something right? But because of our “bida” culture we see their faults instead? For example, there is a new incentives bill the administration is pushing. How much benchmarking did we do to arrive at the administration’s proposal? Are we focusing on and prioritizing the 7 industry winners from the JFC? Or do we believe we have a universal template that will benefit over 50 industries? We’ve been playing the holistic, inclusive and comprehensive mantra for decades, yet we are the economic laggards? Prioritize. Prioritize. Prioritize.
 

A recent news about the Harvard Business School [Harvard Business School Case Study: Gender Equity, The New York Times, 7th Sept 2013] highlighted the seeming imbalance in its faculty make-up favoring male professors; while women professors are finding reasons to leave Harvard. And one explanation is students would give stellar marks to male finance professors, for instance, that come from the real world – and could discuss the realities of the marketplace like the back of their hand. While the women professors would talk about their research; and when students that also have real world experience ask questions, the women professors would seem intimidated.

 

That is not meant to devalue the academe, the key in crafting programs and plans like an incentives bill is to benchmark against countries that are doing well – they have the real world experience.

Why people (not just Pinoys) find it hard to change

But then again, there are 10 million Pinoys overseas that are able to adapt to the world?Unfortunately, Ryan Jacobs wrote in The Atlantic, 9th Aug 2013, that "the Philippines provides more seafarers than any other country . . . but their awareness of ready replacements has made [them] insecure and hesitant . . . a signal that they are good disciplined "followers" . . . but not natural leaders . . . [and] had stunted their upward mobility . . . In 2005, 73 percent were serving in lower-level roles . . . Filipino captains are still uncommon.

 

Wikipedia: “The comfort zone is a behavioral state within which a person operates in an anxiety-neutral condition . . . A comfort zone is a type of mental conditioning that causes a person to create and operate mental boundaries . . . Like inertia, a person who has established a comfort zone in a particular axis of his or her life, will tend to stay within that zone without stepping outside of it . . . To step out of the comfort zone raises the anxiety level engendering a stress response, the result of which is an enhanced level of concentration and focus. White (2009) refers to this as the Optimal Performance Zone – a zone in which the performance of a person can be enhanced and in which their skills can be optimized. However, White (2009) also observes . . . the work of Robert Yerkes (1907) . . . in which he reported ‘Anxiety improves performance until a certain optimum level of arousal has been reached. Beyond that point, performance deteriorates as higher levels of anxiety are attained', if a person steps beyond the optimum performance zone they enter a "danger zone" in which performance will decline rapidly as higher levels of anxiety or discomfort occur.”

 

Indeed change is hard, and here is how a Christian blogger puts it: “Change is hard—so hard, in fact, that most of us avoid it at all costs. But by avoiding change, we create even bigger problems, such as lost opportunities . . . or sometimes a wasted life . . . One of the reasons so many celebrities keep going in and out of rehab is that they leave out the critical element to lasting change: God. Change is too hard when you try to do it without him. God supplies everything you need for successful change, and when you make changes with his help, you stay changed.” [Jack Zavada, a career writer and contributor for About.com, is host to a Christian website.]

 

Which reminds me of the lecture of the Yale professor while flashing two photos and saying: Look at Einstein and look at Beethoven, didn’t Einstein want to look like Beethoven? But he was making a much bigger point: While scores of great men demonstrated personal strength in changing the course of history, there were those who were God-inspired – like Gregory and Thomas Aquinas – or were divine-inspired – like Leonard and Michelangelo.

 

Meanwhile in America, being "plastic" is taken for granted and so while the economy is doing better than that of Europe, for example, the financial services sector has yet to fully fix the flaws of the system, which at its core stem from greed. And not surprisingly, the supposed hero during the bail-out of Wall Street is proving that he is the poster boy of what is objectionable about Wall Street. And there are two other elements of the US economy that would continue to undermine its competitiveness: (a) the healthcare system, and (b) good-old customer service. Everyone wants to gloat about the advances and innovations in healthcare yet everyone in the marketplace has their hands in the cookie jar. Mandating limits of covered benefits, for example, is very easy to circumvent by overstating charged fees for services rendered; and so limits keep rising “in keeping with the market.” It is a blatant out-and-out fraud.

 

And I am reminded of the American general manager in Thailand (of my old MNC company) who joined me for breakfast in my hotel, wondering if there was a way for a US [or Western?] company to approximate the "Thai [or Asian?] customer service" – and that was 24 years ago. More recently, I finally gave up on Heathrow on my way to Eastern Europe; and tried Warsaw. And it was like night and day; you step out of the plane and walk right into the departure area – some smart thinking to cancel out security checks and other border formalities. It’s a tiny but a world-class airport. (And their national airline flies Boeing’s Dreamliner to boot. It is a gorgeous aircraft with the bells and whistles to delight passengers despite the early bad news re battery/electrical system – a case of taking the eye off the ball, i.e., the core of the broader system as in an enterprise . . . or even an economy . . . that got the project manager fired. It's called the rule of law, as opposed to tyranny?)

 

Poland’s population is just a little over a third of PHL’s and their GDP per person is about 5 times ours thus our poverty sticks out like a sore thumb. They are a second-rate European nation though [which makes us worse than second fiddle as in Third-World], but clearly moving up. They still have infrastructure challenges like roads and rails and, of course, politics. And they still need to move up manufacturing- and technology-wise – i.e., they need to go beyond BPOs (although my old MNC company has its European shared-services center in Poland). But at least in customer service, they are already beating the West – from the perspective of business travelers like me.

India hugs front pages for wrong reasons

Does it matter to us in the Philippines? Disclosure: We look at the profile of over 40 countries on an ongoing basis for the benefit of my Eastern European friends (with my old MNC company we looked at over a hundred) as well as the transcripts of “earnings call” of leading global companies in the same industry to benchmark our performance – while constantly focusing on the “vital few” consistent with Pareto’s 80-20 rule – the key being to test one set of data points against the other. Which is not inherent to us Pinoys because we like to look at the glass as half-full – mistaking fatalism for faith?

 

“THE PHILIPPINES has risen further in an annual competitiveness list, benefiting from continued reforms that have allowed it to record four consecutive years of ranking gains. The WEF, however, noted that the improvements were “coming from such a low base that the country cannot afford to be complacent . . . While transport infrastructure has improved, it “remains in a dire state (84th), especially with respect to airport (113th) and seaport facilities (116th)”

 

“Similarly, the labor market has become more flexible and efficient over the years, but the Philippines still ranks a low 100th . . . Guillermo M. Luz, National Competitiveness Council (NCC) co-chairman, welcomed the ranking improvement but agreed that more needed to be done. “As our economy becomes more knowledge-based, all parts of the economy such as agriculture will soon become knowledge-based. If we don’t invest now, we will be left behind,” he said. “Inadequate supply of infrastructure, corruption, and inefficient government bureaucracy were listed as the top three most problematic factors for doing business.”  [Competitiveness up for a fourth year, Business World, 4th Sept 2013]

 

Reports The New York Times, 4th Sept 2013, Falling Economic Tide in India Is Exposing Its Chronic Troubles, by Keith Bradsher: “India had seemed tantalizingly close to embarking on the same dash for economic growth that has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in China and across East Asia. Its economy now stands in disarray, with the prospect of worse to come in the next few months . . . The economic decline has laid bare chronic problems, little remarked upon during the recent boom. An antiquated infrastructure, a sclerotic job market, exorbitant real estate costs and bloated state-owned enterprises never allowed manufacturing, especially manufacturing for export, to grow strong . . . The root of the problem is India’s failure to create a vibrant industrial base with the strength to export. As Western buyers scour Asia for alternatives to increasingly expensive Chinese factories, India and its enfeebled manufacturing sector are mostly ignored.”

 

Unfortunately in PHL, there is no clarity on the imperatives of free enterprise, and what competition is. And that translates to our continued inability to create a vibrant industrial base – from our inability to recognize what's implicit in oligopoly and influence peddling to how it undermines transparency and nurtures corruption to why we rank among the most corrupt to how the dots connect to social injustice and immorality as in the wealthiest 50 Filipinos owning over 25% of GDP? In short, a cacique system and structure similar to what the then cardinal, now pope, Francis saw in Latin America and why he entertained Liberation Theology, minus the Marxist bent? Or what Rizal saw, and that is, the “Filipino culture was backward, anti-progressive, anti-intellectual, and not conducive to the “Age of Enlightenment” – which he then refined in Padre Damaso [Wikipedia]? And today they are reinforced by the restrictive economic provisions of the Constitution?

 

And it explains why a local enterprise with the benefit of oligopoly could get into the infrastructure business or any business for that matter, absent the core competency. Translation: they can't become a competitive player in the region, much less globally, because they bring no competitive advantage – and not surprisingly, Myanmar rejected PLDT at the get-go. And it is the absence of competitive enterprises [e.g., don't we complain about poor Internet service and dropped calls?] that characterizes underdeveloped nations, and where endemic poverty comes from. [And which was why the European Business Awards honored my Eastern European friends, neophytes in free enterprise yet beating their Western competition – and were models at home, because they weren't weaklings.]

 

Why haven't we addressed something as basic as power? First we need the technology and the financial muscle to carry that out. Yet we've embraced the "quilt-making" business, meaning the Big Boys, and their foreign partners limited by law in their participation, are behind our energy program which by definition could only be Third-World? We're still blind to the Asian tigers that opened their economies to become simply that, tigers – because in the 21st century we still proudly wear our parochial blinders? There is the India model that sooner than later we would be replicating, if we haven’t yet?

Innovation, innovation, innovation

"Microsoft continues to market excellent office productivity software . . . Yet these are successes engineered by a company that is, essentially, a very profitable utility, not a company that is a groundbreaking innovator . . . Steve Ballmer certainly was not the only reason for [Microsoft's] failures, but it ultimately was his responsibility, as Chief Executive to fix them. His departure is long overdue, and his successor has a lot of work to do." [Six opportunities Steve Ballmer missed at Microsoft, Bloomberg, 23rd Aug 2013]

 

There are two things to note in the above: (a) it is a straightforward and dispassionate assessment; and (b) the imperative of innovation in the 21st century.

 

It was many years ago and the Sales VP of the US operations of my old MNC company (his retirement was due in a matter of weeks) was reminiscing the times he travelled to the Philippines to introduce sales training to the sales force. And he was talking animatedly about the then more recent "fact-based selling" as opposed to "relationship-selling." But he was making a bigger point: he thought that the moving of a growing number of non-Americans to New York was bringing a battlefield/global perspective into updating our training curriculum, among other things. Yet in contemporary times even a corporate jargon could be evolving faster; and in this particular case, from "fact-based selling" to "sales management is information management."

 

And years later, my Eastern European friends would more than surprise me because they've gone well beyond the jargon: twice a day managers, with no human intervention, would see in their mailboxes an updated "information dashboard" to focus them on the state of the critical business drivers. And, as importantly, it sets them up to: (a) make a dispassionate assessment; and (b) take the necessary managerial action. And the better trained they were and the more markets they've been exposed to, the more innovation they were able to bring to bear. It must be human nature at work: they would want to demonstrate mastery subsequent to the couple of years when I ran the sales force – and proudly show how far they've brought the spirit of the jargon.

 

But then for the ones we assigned to Asia, the first cultural lesson they had to learn was about relationship – i.e., that relationship comes first. They've heard about the 8 months I spent traveling to China before the joint venture (with my old MNC company) came to fruition. And very recently while still on my summer break, I would smile upon reading an email that said we were delivering a-celebratory champagne to a company friend in Hong Kong (who belonged to the network of supporters that we had cultivated) to mark the day when our first TV ad aired in Hong Kong. (And it's not just a fancy slogan; it's driven by a high value-added product with healthy margins thus a high-cost environment like Hong Kong is desirable, not a barrier.)

 

Of course, we Pinoys are masters in cultivating relationships. But do we then struggle to figure out when relationship ends and the objective and fair begins? And so our “pakiramdam” would rule our problem-definition and problem-solving – as in land reform, as in party-list, or as in EPIRA? And what about innovation? If a Microsoft could be labeled a utility as opposed to a groundbreaking innovator, aren't our major enterprises in fact franchises and concessionaires, or utilities? But they are high up in our hierarchy and so we defer to them? Conversely, we see global competition through the prism of exchange rates and tariffs instead of innovative products; and because we're small, we are likely to be bullied?

 

And how come Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand could dominate inter-ASEAN trade to the extent of 70 percent? First we complained against the West; will our neighbors be next? And because we can't win in our region we think we can win in Europe? Are there still door-to-door salesmen? Selling and marketing has become targeted, no longer shotgun; meaning, we must understand the consumer and the product that will meet her needs. [Those who've seen Jobs, the movie, would feel for Steve Wozniak who felt Jobs was an egomaniac for being so obsessed about every product they were developing?] It must be said again, because it is crucial to our economy, that industry must be driven by a sustainable economic activity (i.e., margins) and a sustainable market (i.e., innovation.) Sadly, we've chosen oligopoly as religion, and influence peddling as its rewards – reflective of our hierarchical culture? And we wonder why we are economic laggards – while putting on our best face as in fatalism?

Curiosity . . . creativity . . . innovation

Why did Beethoven move from Bonn to Vienna? That question from a Yale professor is my take-away from the "one-day university" (ODU) where my wife had recently enrolled us. She enjoyed her first experience in Manhattan that she ensured I joined her this time, at Tanglewood; and the program included the Boston Symphony Orchestra performing Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9. They are rock stars consistently voted tops in their respective universities, my wife assured me. Her take-away: “It takes time to grow,” from the Lincoln lecture, separating fact from fiction. Lincoln was perceived by his own cabinet not to favor abolishing slavery, but in time his thinking evolved – from it being a function of state laws, not federal, to being a doctrine of military necessity; and he had at other times as well demonstrated that capacity to analyze matters and change his mind. [Does President Aquino have to truly analyze the midnight deals of Arroyo to evolve his thinking about those around him; and, as importantly, the agenda of his administration, i.e., what must Juan de la Cruz expect at the end of his term? For example, they must stop promising economic nirvana, it will not happen – not in this generation? Not even in the next if we keep to our mindset and our worldview? The Indios can read the Bible; it does not have to be kept away from them? And so Rizal had to define independence: that the slaves can’t then be the tyrants.]

"Exploring the nature of genius" is the Yale professor's 7-year old course, and having recently watched Jobs, the movie (and earlier read the book), and having preached innovation in Eastern Europe the last 10 years, I would readily relate Beethoven to Jobs. Beethoven wanted to keep company with the best the world had to offer and so he had to be in Vienna. He had a big ego and could have chosen to stay in Bonn, and be the best in his hometown. Steve Wozniak (the techie partner of Steve Jobs when Apple started in the latter's family garage) simply wanted to make cool things while Jobs wanted to impact the world. His ego was big but was outward-directed.

 

I could relate to my wife's take-away ("It takes time to grow") being a once lazy student and thus had a fuzzy sense of the future. And my wife was right; the ODU caters to folks like me: "We don't do the stuff you may have hated about college like homework and exams." That was from the opening remarks of the first speaker.

 

But back to Steve Jobs: Some would say that he was simply building on the ideas of others. For example, the hard drive of the original iPod which is the size of a dollar coin was developed by Toshiba; and the Gorilla Glass that he wanted for the iPhone was developed by Corning. And as the Yale professor explained, the innovation Beethoven brought to music is attributed to his adding additional instruments like the trombone and incorporating big and disruptive sounds – and making the piece longer. And then he spelled out the six characteristics of individuals like Beethoven and Jobs from his work in "exploring the nature of genius": genetic gift, memory and concentration, curiosity, motivation, self-confidence and luck. Even Tiger Woods early on talked about luck; and in the case of Beethoven it was being born in the era of the industrial revolution and with Jobs the advent of computing and communications.

Recalling my initial impressions of my Eastern European friends from ten years ago, my sense was they were very creative from what I saw in their products. Yet they were missing the imperative of a "sustainable economic undertaking" – and had to learn about driving "margins." Also, their creativity was centered on following the features of global brands but pricing their products lower – the classic “me too" approach. They had to learn what a “sustainable market” is about via the fundamentals of product architecture modeling. And at its heart is Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs; and the development of the computer is an example of how human needs had moved up: from the mainframe to personal computers to mobile devices. And clearly Steve Jobs demonstrated how to be forward-thinking in product innovation – or in understanding value-addition. And it goes beyond the next product offering – and would also necessitate investing in R&D. How did Beethoven or Steve Jobs introduce innovation?

 

We Pinoys believe we are creative yet we haven't developed innovation and competitiveness as a culture? Why did Beethoven move from Bonn to Vienna? But parochialism dictates that we be higher up in the local hierarchy than to keep company with the world's best – i.e., in this particular case, it is the simple definition of curiosity and global versus local? And so we celebrate and reward oligarchy and influence peddling – perpetuating persistent underdevelopment and endemic poverty? And social programs are not the simple answer as the India (i.e., corruption and inefficiency) experience has revealed. And also that of East Germany where “social programs devoured billions of euros [and thus a failed] job creation program [had to be] dropped.”