The writer remembers –
from a few years back – his Eastern European friends wondering why
he didn’t appear overly excited about the teambuilding workshop
they wanted to conduct. And the Business World article would capture
what similarly was going in the writer’s mind: “In quite a
number of cases in the past years, it is apparent to many who have
been part of, or observed, PCAARRD activities that different R&D
activities conducted by members of the consortia more often than not
do not take conscious account of the market implications and links of
the studies they conduct. If and when they do, the bases they have
for asserting "marketability" and/or "profitability"
are questionable.” (Similarly, a teambuilding workshop, as an
activity, must be reinforced in the work setting by the requisite
work processes so that the outcome is greater than the parts –
i.e., synergy. For example, the organization must be able to
succinctly define its “nirvana” – i.e., “starts with the end
in view” – to which individuals are committed and are thus
single-minded, not at cross-purposes.)
And the writer’s
friends have since understood what being “activity-driven” means.
And it is the consequence of linear thinking – or building from the
ground up instead of “starting with the end in view.” And hence
the title of this blog: Translating a road map into a sustainable
undertaking. The Department of Agriculture has developed a road
map that would make us a major international player in aquaculture,
for example, and the challenge is to translate that road map into a
sustainable economic undertaking. It is not about embarking on an
undertaking . . . but rather sustaining the undertaking.
And this latest
initiative by PCAARRD to overcome the hurdles of marketability and
profitability is a step in the right direction. An undertaking is
sustainable when the output is marketable and profitable – which
means that the cycle of production and marketing is uninterrupted –
recognizing that in today’s world the marketplace is global and so
is the competition. And as the article stressed: “To be sure,
many have a thorough understanding of the more limited sector or
sub-sector understanding of the specific businesses they are in, but
these are precisely what they are -- sector-limited, parochial views
of the nature of their direct businesses . . . Even our government
officials are often no better in their "world views” . . .
[M]any other shortcomings have hampered the ability of our country to
become competitive in these sectors, thus subjecting us to the
onslaught of much cheaper commodities we could easily have produced
and exported ourselves.”
Good enough is never
good enough. We have to keep raising the bar: “the end
point” has to be that our output is unmistakably competitive
that we are able to capture overseas markets. We can’t be
shortsighted – isolating ourselves from the rest of the world –
and claim patriotism. Winning in the global market arena – and
generating greater economic output – is what patriotism ought to
be. We may not be globally competitive today – and we will never be
if we keep the market to ourselves and set such a low bar. Because
competitiveness is a skill-set that is developed as our neighbors
have demonstrated. Taking for granted that we are incapable of
developing – like we’re merely the “little brown brothers” –
is reflective of our stratified mindset where people are pigeon-holed
akin to a caste system. And which, unwittingly, is why we remain
wedded to our cacique system and structure. We can only create what
we think and until we get the mindset right we can only expect more
of the same! [The writer’s Eastern European friends could
still lapse into missing the power of the mindset. And as one
explained: “There was a time when “the idea of a bright future”
was totally alien; and “a sense of resignation” reigned.”]
No comments:
Post a Comment