We are in deep doo-doo.

We can go on denial mode, but that can only mean we shall keep missing the turn at every fork.

In other words, a vicious circle does not happen by accident. It is the convergence of several miscarries. 

We’ve been kicking up a perfect storm.

That’s why the postings would often reference the genesis of the blog.

We were supposed to be the most sophisticated nation in the region. And I owe it to that impression – by the outside world, especially the Americans – that we would be the next big thing. My old MNC-company chose me to be the regional manager over colleagues, including Australians and Canadians.

But what happened?

Let’s hold it right there.

I will again risk being immodest to illustrate the imperative of benchmarking against best practice models – i.e., for us to look outward, forward, and across disciplines and specialties consistent with the 4 C’s to 21st-century skills.

How did we become the regional laggard when we were supposed to be the next big thing?

We can only point to our instincts: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy that ours is a culture of impunity.

That is one heck of a barrier: We ceded the region to our neighbors and then to the world and became the supplier of low-skilled labor. The biggest insult I hear from my introduction, especially in Europe, is that I am a New Yorker, not a Filipino.

On the other hand, we celebrated the OFW phenomenon.

And recall that several years ago, at the Ateneo and UP economic briefings, I questioned the manufacturing uptick our economists and “economic managers” were celebrating. We are a consumption-service economy. That is our reality, irrespective of what the manufacturing numbers were saying. It’s called context. And no financial mumbo jumbo would suffice.

And our instincts, again, get in the way. “Context” deserts us because of our crab mentality. In other words, we can’t distinguish between the “vital few” and the “trivial many.” It comes from Pareto, whose principle influenced economics.

Then consider: If we can’t even admit to ourselves that we blew it, where would we get the courage to change, to reinvent Juan de la Cruz?

My first real introduction to the American culture came from my first boss in New York: “I blew it.” And my response: I’ll fix it.

In other words, we don’t fix our piles of problems because we can’t admit to our faults. That reminds me of Padre Damaso and why it is a regular postings feature. 

That inability to own up to our mistakes is an ingredient to a perfect storm.

But let’s get back to the genesis of the blog: How come no one raised the red flag that Vietnam’s FDI was almost twice as ours back in 2009?

Bring that to today: How come no one raised the red flag that our investment policy-making and tax reform initiatives don’t measure up to 21st-century demands?

Recall the Eastern European Ph.D. I mentored and questioned the outline of the dissertation approved by the professor-adviser. 

I had read through a handful of dissertations and understood the outline she would use. “I will only assist you if you commit to using the final product to a real-world challenge.” The scores of dissertations I scanned were too academic; they won’t fly in the real world.

It did not surprise me. As those familiar with the blog may recall, the US has its shortcomings in higher education that “Fortunate 500 companies” had to grab the bull by the horns — and created in-house education and training initiatives.

Academics have their world. That’s why we call academe “Ivory tower.” 

That is how we have crafted our investment policies and tax reform initiatives.

In other words, such pursuits must pass the acid tests; and in this particular case, the blog asked: “Devolving to LGUs is not the answer in a banana republic. If LGUs are not the answer, is it CREATE and SIPP or the scores of industry road maps? What about this news? “Congress ratifies bicameral report on amendments to Foreign Investments Act.”

“Translation: Our investment policy-making and tax reform initiatives don’t measure up to the demands of the 21st century. 

“The evidence? Will any of our efforts match the coup Vietnam pulled with Samsung Vietnam?”

Let’s have another example familiar to those that read the blog.

But before that, let’s recall the “4 C’s to 21st Century Skills.”

Take two of them: "Critical thinking • Students need to be able to look at problems in new ways and link learning across subject areas. 

“Creativity • Students need to be willing to try new approaches to get things done. That leads to innovation and invention.” 

And the other example: We had over 1,000-strong scientists at my old MNC-company, and I empowered the CEO of the pharma unit to buy an outside technology to put us ahead of the state-of-the-art. And it catapulted our biggest brand ahead of the competition in the US market and dominated the global market.

In other words, if inhouse R&D isn’t the be-all and end-all, economics isn’t the be-all and end-all in nation-building. Look at how Vietnam pulled that coup with Samsung Vietnam. They don’t teach that in economics school?

Look at the Ph.D. referenced above. Today, she is the global marketing director of one of the world’s most famous brands. 

If we care for another example: Why did we not develop the instincts of innovation? And why is “franchising” prominent in the Philippines instead?

We rely on political patronage and oligarchy to drive business and industry.

And it is not surprising. When we value hierarchy and paternalism, we don’t value humankind. Instead, we love tyranny. Why did freedom-loving nations award the Nobel Peace Prize to Maria Ressa and deny Harry Roque the ILC seat?

Why did we buy into the mantra of “serving the bottom of the pyramid”? That is how victimhood and entitlement come about. In other words, we see paternalism as a virtue when we are invoking rank and privilege as in our caste system – aka destiny. To respect humankind, we must be committed to raising one’s well-being. Even informal settlers deserve to have a TV set, for example. 

Even beyond that, recall “personal responsibility” is inherent in a democracy: It is an exercise in self-government to attain the “common good.” It is not the place for Bondying or Juan Tamad. In other words, who wants to be an object of charity? Charity-giving is the exception, not the rule in a functioning society.

Recall that my Eastern European friends were surprised that while they were excited about “branding” and “innovation” being new to the free market – born and raised as socialists under Soviet rule – I started the first marketing workshop with Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs. They thought technology and design were lesson number one.

Still, the first brand we focused on became their springboard to become a model enterprise among big and small companies across the EU. 

And how time flies. These friends had asked: Do you think we can even compete against the best brands from the West?

“You must be continually addressing the hierarchy of human needs – not bogged down at the bottom of the pyramid – and that means moving up the value chain.” 

Long story short, they “killed” the Western brand in their home market. And the Western competition saw the handwriting on the wall – as my friends expanded their reach in the region – and sold the European business. I did not acquiesce when the competition offered the brand to them.

I chuckled when I then saw the brand in the Philippines. It must be because the local marketer knew that we Pinoys “serve the bottom of the pyramid.” But this brand died because, in Europe, even poor consumers from Eastern Europe seek better and better products – demonstrating their hierarchy of needs.

Let’s pause right there.

Which Filipino company — big or small, as an MSME — even contemplates overpowering an MNC in the region? 

Why not – because we pigeonholed Juan de la Cruz as a fragile enterprise and can only survive if we value hierarchy and paternalism?

And that reinforces our fixed mindset; worse, it undermines any desire to develop a growth mindset.

Unsurprisingly, we can’t see a rut a mile away because our caste system denied us the instinct to be ahead of the curve. Instead, we developed the knee-jerk as in “Pinoy abilidad.”

Consider: Our economics playbook focuses on monetary and fiscal policies — something we learned from the West. That plus our insularity can explain why we ignored the omens that came with the economic miracles labeled Asian Tigers. See above; our fixed mindset undermines any desire to develop a growth mindset.

In other words, we took the successes of our neighbors for granted; they were not the laissez-faire models. For example, Lee Kuan Yew had run Singapore like a company. 

And so, we took it as a given that the private sector would drive economic growth – as in the “animal spirits” they had in the West. 

Moreover, financial types would see the financials as the be-all and end-all.

Let’s hold it right there.

Recall that the blog has repeatedly spoken to “logical yet linear and incremental thinking.” And conversely, to “forward and lateral thinking.” The latter is counterintuitive and not in our comfort zone — and why it is associated with exceptional minds like Einstein and Jobs and a few others.

The good news is that it is knowable. Thanks to Edward de Bono, who introduced creative and lateral thinking to humankind.

The first time I was a team member (while still in the Philippines) assigned to a restructuring initiative at my old MNC-company, our marching orders were: “Cut overhead by 10%.” How else to describe that but logical yet linear and incremental?

And I felt it was a very narrow perspective – and could miss out on more positive factors to drive the way forward. [That is why later on, I would change the planning and budgeting system of this 200-year-old Fortune 500. And that was after the president recognized how I had upgraded the way we conducted business in the region. Did I embarrass the financial community? We hired from the Ivies and top US audit firms.] I can go on with lots more examples of how number crunching can fall way short of addressing a challenge.

But then again, recall the 4 C’s to 21st-century skills.

See above; Edward de Bono. Readers of the blog may recall that the late Anacleto del Rosario, acknowledged as the first Philippine marketing consultant, introduced me to de Bono when he arranged for the latter to conduct a workshop for the marketing and advertising community. And I was up close and personal, but whatever he said went over my head. I was too young and naïve. 

But there must have been a germ of knowledge that settled in my subconscious mind that as I gained career experience, it nudged my brain. 

For example, when we addressed the shortcomings of US higher education for my old MNC-company and developed an in-house education and training curriculum, we met with top educators and consultants. That was when I learned about “cognitive development.”

The resources we tapped recognized that marrying on-the-job experience to the various disciplines would bring about what they called “teachable moments” and have a knock-on effect on “cognitive development.” Teachable moments are when the abstract comes out with clarity to relate to the real world.

Recall that the blog often discusses the continuum of binary and relative thinking, that cognitive development or moving across the continuum is a function of experience. 

And I go back to my second job (I had six in a 20-year career in the Philippines), with barely ten months experience in another company. 

And in my short stint of fourteen months, I led the development of the planning and budgeting model, including the capital expenditure budget. I also dug deep into the sales function and how we had to drive revenues – and develop a compensation package for the VP of Sales, among others.

The assignments came fast and furious. The General Manager, a young Wharton graduate, the conglomerate patriarch’s son, recognized that I was responsive and proactive, to boot. He would come to me to dump whatever he couldn’t assign to anyone.

But I left not long after; the choice was between this family enterprise and an MNC. I chose the latter but again left after thirteen months. It was an awful company; the number two (a Spanish-Filipino) turned it into a tyrannical place.

I should have welcomed it because it opened promotion opportunities for me. The “number two” asked to see me: “I just fired your boss, move into his office. I admire what you have accomplished in so short a time. Your first assignment is to fire the purchasing manager.” I was in my early 20s; it awed people in the company — they called me the “hatchet man.” I wonder why the American bosses let him. MNC is not a magic word. 

While attending MBA school, I learned by doing and realized the nuances between the real world and academe.

At a very young age, I could be staying in the office up to 10 to figure things out, surviving on 12 cups of coffee and a pack of cigarettes. I paid the price, prescribed thyroid pills for the rest of my life.

The bottom line: Early in my career, I learned that financials could not be the be-all and end-all. And why the blog keeps saying that nation-building is beyond monetary and fiscal policies, for example.

The good news is that the 4 C’s to 21st-century skills are not foreign to us. The challenge is: how do we internalize and operationalize them in our nation-building efforts?

We are in deep doo-doo.

We can go on denial mode, but that can only mean we shall keep missing the turn at every fork.

In other words, a vicious circle does not happen by accident. It is the convergence of several miscarries.

We’ve been kicking up a perfect storm.

Gising bayan!