“Don’t expect logic from us . . .

. . . We’re Italians!”

Italians thrive in pulling the wool over another’s eyes: “Why did you block my car?” “Of course, I’m Italian!” The next line is left unsaid: “Don’t expect logic from me!” – and the world simply loves them!

Why did the Nobel Prize Committee give Obama the Nobel Peace Prize? “Of course, we’re Europeans!” And unsaid is: “We’re kinder and gentler!” – a not so subtle rebuke to the predecessor?

What do the following have in common: (a) “The pursuit of life, liberty and happiness”, (b) “It’s the economy, stupid” and (c) “Just do it”? Europeans find Americans too forthright and candid – because their mindset tends to be confident, focused and precise? On the other hand, the Brits struggle to define themselves vis-a-vis the EU, for instance?

When the writer first came to Eastern Europe he immediately sensed their tentativeness. Instead of saying “yes” they say “maybe”. They are not very different from Filipinos. And when asked “how they are”, the typical response is “so-so”.

Americans instinctively express clarity of purpose while Easterners and even Europeans formulate more dimensions? And in the case of the Filipinos, is it because compassion and inclusion are imbedded in our subconscious?

We imported the latest Western “widgets” and so managers from neighboring countries trained in our institutions to learn problem-solving and decision-making. We know that fundamental to problem-solving is problem-definition. But is it instinctive to us? For example: What do we need to be a developed country? Infrastructure: capital, market, technology, talent – to make strategic industries competitive globally? Why are we exporting talents then? (None of the presidential wannabes has a compelling vision but more of the same? We have ourselves to blame because we don’t go to the gut of our problem and quiz them?)

Is it because our mindset is so inclusive that we end up with no clear problem-definition and thus fail to attain clarity of purpose? That we are so scared to omit anyone from our “guest list”?

With the Eastern Europeans the writer incessantly talked principles (e.g., 80-20 was JC’s before Pareto’s) and related them to the real world; but still it took them time to internalize what clarity of purpose meant.

The first exercise (competitive advantage) the writer did was to have them define who they were: What business they’re in and conversely what business they ought not to be in. (Filipinos argue against this given monopolist tendencies and parochial blinders – that limit market to the Philippines and cement our uncompetitiveness?) He had to walk them through the dynamic of pricing and value thus margins. With their communist past and poverty, their instinct was a hostage – to cheap pricing. And so because of inertia (or sentimentalism?) they did not have the heart to kill a business until they realized the red ink could drown them.

They had “to be schooled” to unlearn their practice re product development – that competitiveness demands more than artful and cheap products. That it’s about clarity of purpose: that every product must have a compelling concept – a message to stand on to travel beyond local boundaries, which was their wish. Now they’re well on their way and confident!

We have so much to unlearn if we’re going to break loose from our parochial shackles . . . and solve our problems? But we’re too proud or sentimental? Quezon should’ve been careful what he’d wished for?