Hierarchy, permanence . . . and parochialism

RHIP – Rank Has Its Privileges! Could our mindset be leaning to our instincts of hierarchy and permanence – thus our seeming inability to adapt to the times? And adaptability is one of the elements of developed institutions highlighted by Prof Hutchcroft in dissecting our institutions, speaking at a recent gathering in Bacolod?

Hierarchy and permanence especially in a parochial society won’t be hospitable to transparency – and so some sectors are pushing the FOIA with the Aquino administration? But our challenge goes beyond the ‘freedom of information’? Our comfort zone, unwittingly, is to shut extraneous forces out and perpetuate respect for hierarchy and the acceptance of permanence? Unsurprisingly, the church thrives and oligarchy, too? While the Church wants to address transparency especially as it relates to sexual abuse, its efforts are deemed still opaque in the West? Hierarchy tilts to opaque; on the other hand, transparency brings openness and fairness – and thus competitiveness? And somewhere along the line is our confusion, and why we struggle with competitiveness?

And so while the world economy has gone global we’re still of two minds – or hearts? But because of our compassion we recognize that beyond the church and oligarchy is poor Juan de la Cruz? The latter being the underdog finds a soft spot in our heart – and even gives legitimacy to insurgent elements, claiming to protect the poor? But to rock the boat is pointless and thus the option is to acquiesce – finding consolation that as a society we are in a state ‘equilibrium’? Everyone is in their right place . . . except the country – because what we have in fact attained is the ‘lowest-common denominator’? When the 21^st century demands a ‘culture of excellence and innovation’?

For decades Detroit labored yet failed to satisfy this new culture especially because the US auto industry was founded on the ‘command and control’ model – synonymous to a former GM CEO and management guru? Its attendant environment had set off demands for labor fairness and protection . . . until the industry turned uncompetitive? The Japanese (and soon the South Koreans?), having taken over industry dominance, demonstrated that the better model is that of a ‘high-commitment work system’ – i.e., manufacturing teams are vested with authority and every person is an equal and thus highly committed to the success of the enterprise, which likewise stepped up its investment in technology? Invariably new US car manufacturing operations are adopting the contemporary model in state-of-the-art facilities sprouting in the South, and abandoning Detroit and its old mindset?

The global community in the meantime continues to raise the mantra of innovation. And as innovation spreads it opens new markets and opportunities for investment, e.g., China and India. And in India a Western auto maker has introduced the concept of a ‘modular car’, where damaged external parts could be replaced rapidly and inexpensively, thus eliminating the need for repairs – not uncommon given the density of India’s thoroughfares. And so while India has a long history in car manufacturing one industry titan saw it fit to buy the Jaguar and Land Rover brands – to stay abreast with progress and innovation. [China has its own challenges, global leadership demands a new set of responsibilities – but China’s leadership over the short-term must keep an eye on social stability as opposed to transparency? But as nations and people evolve, and as the Singaporeans displayed in their recent elections, they would want to be treated like adults? Which is likewise manifested by current events in the Arab world?]

It is the 21^st century and we have seen how college kids if not drop outs could change our way of life as we know it? Thus progressive enterprises organize teams instead of relying on the formal, hierarchical structure, especially with innovation and product development initiatives. But nations and cultures are not as flexible? And the challenge, in our case, is to raise our consciousness of the barriers we need to overcome – our comfort zone being largely characterized by hierarchy, permanence and parochialism?

We would not want the Asian tigers to continue to corner investment funds that move around whenever there are perceived growth opportunities? When push comes to shove investors would still bet on markets that are committed to competitiveness – unfortunately despite professed Western values like human rights, for instance?