Dynamism not “perfection”

Can Juan de la Cruz embrace dynamism?

Juan de la Cruz is an adult and takes life experience as a foundation – if he is to learn “new tricks.”

Enter: “Andragogy, i.e., the learner depends on self. It requires self-evaluation, direction, and self takes responsibility for the process.”

Consider: “Among our comparable ASEAN neighbors, we export the most negligible relative to the size of our economy, and it’s glaring. In 2021, Singapore’s exports amounted to 127 percent of its gross domestic product. The corresponding figure for Vietnam was 104, Malaysia 63, Thailand 54, and Indonesia 20 percent. Ours was a mere 14 percent.

“In times of global recession, such as is widely feared to be imminent now, this might be seen as a blessing in disguise, as we would have much less to lose when export markets shrink in the face of declining incomes. But this doesn’t mean we should not be trying to sell overseas much more than we’ve managed to.” [“Exporting more to more,” Cielito F. Habito, NO FREE LUNCH, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 25th Oct 2022]

Dynamism, not perfection, must be the mantra.

Economists tell us that economics is a cycle and global recessions demonstrate that it is so.

Recall that the blog defines the 21st century as one characterized by innovation and global competitiveness. And while that comes from my background and experience, it confirms the character of the universe, our world. For example, the galaxies are in constant motion and expansion.

And that brings to mind the 24/7 phenomenon that we call photosynthesis.

Let’s hold it right there.

Then consider our instincts, reflected in the Philippine caste system: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy; ours is a culture of impunity.

Put another way, and we cannot intellectualize the challenge of change. The evidence?

“When the 1987 Constitution was under development, some Commission members included bans on foreign ownership of advertising agencies and media. Those stupid provisions of the 1987 Constitution must go.

“Why are we so insecure about our culture and ability to compete that we need total protection from foreign competitors? The problem, even in 1987, was that mass media was so international that a ban looked silly. What it did was benefit a few privileged folks.” [“Don’t ban. Compete!,” Boo Chanco, DEMAND AND SUPPLY, The Philippine Star, 24th Oct 2022]

Dynamism does not equate to perfection; thus, the adage, “perfect is the enemy of the good.” It is an aphorism that means insistence on perfection often prevents the implementation of good improvements. The Pareto principle, or 80–20 rule, explains this numerically. Aristotle and other classical philosophers propounded the “principle” of the golden mean, which counsels against extremism in general.” [Wikipedia]

In other words, given our values of hierarchy and paternalism, deference to authority explains why we can’t embrace dynamism. And why the blog never fails to recall Rizal’s admonition: We submit to tyranny because we love it.

Absent dynamism in our DNA, we are left but rationalize our inability to change. And we express it in various ways. For example, we keep debating democracy as though there is a perfect system.

And that also explains why innovation and global competitiveness are foreign to us.

Recall that the blog raises the continuum of democracy and autocracy. Because it is a continuum, it is not binary or dualistic thinking.

In other words, even the Western model of democracy is not absolute. But then again, dynamism, not perfection, must be the mantra.

What about innovation? The hierarchy of human needs is the bedrock of innovation. Innovation is not for innovation’s sake. It must address a human need. In the meantime, human needs are a continuum – physiological to self-actualization.

Consider the absolutism of despots or autocrats. But then again, why do empires come and go?

The universe we live in presupposes dynamism, not absolutism.

That also explains why Juan de la Cruz cannot fathom the Pareto principle. See above; perfect is the enemy of the good. Given our instincts and caste system, we can’t undo the crab mentality.

Why does the blog often distinguish the “real world” from the academic world? The former assumes a constant notion when the real world is 24/7.

Why can’t we execute AmBisyon or Arangkada or the scores of industry road maps we all celebrated? As the blog asserts, they are like dissertations, not real-world stuff.

Can Juan de la Cruz embrace dynamism?

Juan de la Cruz is an adult and takes life experience as a foundation – if he is to learn “new tricks.”

Enter: “Andragogy, i.e., the learner depends on self. It requires self-evaluation, direction, and self takes responsibility for the process.”

Then consider our instincts, reflected in the Philippine caste system: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy; ours is a culture of impunity.

Put another way, and we cannot intellectualize the challenge of change.

Dynamism, not perfection, must be the mantra.

Gising bayan!

How many times should we fall into the “insanity” trap?

“Insanity is doing the same thing “over and over again” and expecting different results,” said Einstein. And we quote him all the time.

Then consider: Where are we with AmBisyon? Or with Arangkada? What happened to the manufacturing uptick we bragged about in 2014?

Or the scores of industry road maps that we celebrated?

Let’s stop and ask ourselves how different we are approaching our “kuro-kuro” – our efforts to right the Philippine ship.

When friends and relatives asked me what I thought – being an expatriate for decades – about our floundering ship, I started engaging the media. And it didn’t require much digging. Come early next year, and the blog will be 14 years old.

Vietnam had already overtaken us in FDIs even if their GDP was still a fraction of PH. In other words, given our dependence on OFW remittances, it was clear then that we were a disaster waiting to happen. What do we keep missing? See below; context is one of the three elements of cognitive development beyond dualism or binary thinking and multiplicity.

Unsurprisingly, we can’t distinguish between “analysis” and “analytics.” The former is logical yet linear and incremental, while the latter zooms out – is forward, lateral and creative thinking. It does not accept that “the surgery was successful, but the patient died.”

Relate that to how proudly we embraced our GDP growth rate of 6%-7% over a decade, yet Juan de la Cruz continues to suffer from abject poverty – and even learning poverty.

How could we be under the illusion that everything was fine and dandy? We had GMA as president and took comfort that she was an economist. Another economist followed her in PNoy.

Don’t we recognize that we can’t run this country? In the private sector, no ifs and buts — heads roll when they must.

Consider: The “context” is that Juan de la Cruz is an object of charity – not that we in the Philippine elite and chattering classes are prosperous.

And that is after AmBisyon, Arangkada, and the scores of industry road maps. And even after the much-celebrated “manufacturing uptick.”

Then add the pandemic and the turmoil – from the global economic slowdown to the Russian invasion of Ukraine to the 6th Jan Commission on the attack on the Capitol to the threat of nuclear war to the potential China invasion of Taiwan – the world faces.

In other words, what kind of a disaster are we waiting for before we lift a finger?

The bottom line: We are [cognitively] challenged because we lack the development experience of our neighbors. Sadly, we can’t wrap our heads around our shortcomings because of inexperience.

Here’s a quote from an earlier posting: You cannot solve a problem you do not comprehend.

That’s from Richard Rumelt, the Harry and Elsa Kunin Professor of Business and Society at the UCLA Anderson School of Management; adapted from his books (a) Good Strategy/Bad Strategy: The Difference and Why It Matters and (b) “The Crux: How Leaders Become Strategists.”

As the blog submits, we are floundering because (a) we are a rudderless ship and (b) we suffer from our version of the “Dutch disease.”

The excellent news is that we are not alone in our inability to comprehend. Look at the UK.

We keep debating democracy and education – e.g., even America faces an education crisis – but they are not drivers of rapid economic expansion as we saw in our neighbors. They are enablers but not drivers. But because of inexperience, we can’t distinguish the two.

And given our crab mentality – apart from our ivory tower influence – we can’t get a handle on Pareto – the “vital few versus the trivial many.” It is to prioritize, not to forego critical initiatives. Sadly, inexperience can’t overcome the said barriers.

If we understood strategy, as we like to believe we do, we would not fall flat on our faces with AmBisyon or Arangkada or the scores of industry road maps. They are like dissertations, not real-world stuff.

Context. Context. Context.

“All solutions to problems must have reasons and be viewed within a specific context. The basis for this stage [relativism] is to challenge every issue because everything is contextual.”

Again, let’s borrow from an earlier posting: “Unsurprisingly, on the one hand, we’re stuck with our version of the Dutch disease courtesy of the over $50 billion generated by the OFW remittances and call centers. And on the other, we have no investment-industrial base to be competitive export-wise.

“Preeminent economist Ciel Habito captured why Juan de la Cruz suffers abject poverty and learning poverty. And why the Ramon Ang Bulacan initiative must be our rallying cry to generate $200 billion in exports.”

In the meantime, we spend an inordinate amount of time on our “kuro-kuro” addressing symptoms – not the crux of why Juan de la Cruz suffers from abject poverty and learning poverty.

Recall that we championed CARL (comprehensive agrarian reform), the OFW phenomenon, call centers, and 4Ps because we see poverty and jobs as the two sides of the same coin.

Now we want to add other industries to champion.

On the other hand, what will an incremental $200 billion in exports do? Don’t we know how Vietnam overtook us with two export drivers, i.e., Samsung and Apple, despite our over 300 export processing zones — an outcome of our traditional fiscal initiatives?

That will add tons to our tax revenues much faster than the 6%-7% GDP growth we like to celebrate – and fund our pet projects like education and whatever.

Sadly, our ivory tower influence can’t figure that out.

Surprise, surprise; why can’t we figure out how the Asian Tigers, then China, and more recently Vietnam left us in the dust?

In other words, we can’t figure out Pareto – the “vital few versus the trivial many.”

How many times should we fall into the “insanity” trap?

“Insanity is doing the same thing “over and over again” and expecting different results,” said Einstein. And we quote him all the time.

Then consider: Where are we with AmBisyon? Or with Arangkada? What happened to the manufacturing uptick we bragged about in 2014?

Or the scores of industry road maps that we celebrated?

Let’s stop and ask ourselves how different we are approaching our “kuro-kuro” – our efforts to right the Philippine ship.

But will our instincts keep standing in the way? 

We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy; ours is a culture of impunity.

Gising bayan!

“You cannot solve a problem that you do not comprehend.”

That’s from Richard Rumelt, the Harry and Elsa Kunin Professor of Business and Society at the UCLA Anderson School of Management; adapted from his books (a) Good Strategy/Bad Strategy: The Difference and Why It Matters and (b) “The Crux: How Leaders Become Strategists.”

As the blog submits, we are floundering because (a) we are a rudderless ship and (b) we suffer from our version of the “Dutch disease.”

The excellent news is that we are not alone in our inability to comprehend. Look at the UK.

What can’t we comprehend?

Consider our instincts, an expression of our caste system: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy; ours is a culture of impunity.

As Rizal pointed out, the impunity we submit comes from our love of tyranny – given our indolence.

The problem is that we keep pointing at Juan de la Cruz in the Philippine elite and chattering classes because of our standing in the hierarchy. And in one fell swoop, we confirm our values of “hierarchy and paternalism.”

They explain our parochialism and insularity. And that is what we can’t comprehend.

Why did humankind resort to conquest in ancient times? Or why did the first humans migrate from Africa? People – economies and nations – have needs to satisfy, and they must look beyond their shores to get the best of all worlds. Why is that difficult to comprehend?

If our forebears knew that they had to trade by bartering with other countries, how could we even imagine that we could be an island unto ourselves?

“Britain’s imploding government,” headlines The Economist, 14th Oct 2022. “The prime minister has not done enough to restore confidence in Britain’s finances or her premiership.”

But nothing happens overnight. Consider: “It was the autumn of 2016, and Brexiteers were still high on the fumes of the EU referendum earlier that year. Seventy-five Tory MPs called for a new royal yacht to mark Britain’s rebirth. Everything, they agreed, was going to be terrific. As for the fiddly detail of Britain’s new relationship with the EU, Boris Johnson, then the foreign secretary, had it covered. “Our policy is having our cake and eating it. We are Pro-secco but by no means antipasto.”

“Donald Tusk, the Polish president of the European Council, saw Britain’s predicament rather more clearly. Its wish to avoid the EU’s legal jurisdiction and to end the free movement of people left only the choice of a hard Brexit or no Brexit at all. The cozy deal many Britons imagined was an illusion. “There will be no cakes on the table for anyone. There will be only salt and vinegar,” he warned.

“The economic damage is plainer by the day. Britain’s GDP was 5.2% lower by the end of last year than it would have been if Brexit hadn’t occurred, calculates John Springford of the Centre for European Reform, a think-tank. Brexit has caused a sharp decline in Britain’s trade openness that will drag on productivity and wages in the years to come, according to a new Resolution Foundation paper. The Centre for Economic Policy Research reckons Brexit added 6% to food prices in two years. A promised burst of deregulation has not materialized. Salt and vinegar are plentiful; of cake, barely a crumb.” [The Economist, 23rd Jun 2022]

How many of us Filipinos saw Brexit as positive? Or why do we have a soft spot in our hearts for the monarchy? See above; Rizal and why we submit to tyranny.

What about our indolence?

Here’s a quote from an earlier posting: “Unsurprisingly, on the one hand, we’re stuck with our version of the Dutch disease courtesy of the over $50 billion generated by the OFW remittances and call centers. And on the other, we have no investment-industrial base to be competitive export-wise.

“Preeminent economist Ciel Habito captured why Juan de la Cruz suffers abject poverty and learning poverty. And why the Ramon Ang Bulacan initiative must be our rallying cry to generate $200 billion in exports.”

In the meantime, we spend an inordinate amount of time on our “kuro-kuro” addressing symptoms – not the crux of why Juan de la Cruz suffers from abject poverty and learning poverty.

Recall that we championed CARL (comprehensive agrarian reform), the OFW phenomenon, call centers, and 4Ps because we see poverty and jobs as the two sides of the same coin.

In the meantime, we can’t help but address the disasters we experience in the tourism sector, sugar supply, and competitiveness – and rice, even onions, agriculture in general, including the lost leadership of our coconut industry, water, and electricity, infrastructure in general, unlivable cities, on and on and on.

Consider: “The first known democracy in the world was in Athens. Athenian democracy developed around the fifth century BCE.”

In other words, the world hasn’t fully developed “democracy” despite the genius of the Greeks of ancient Greece.

What about education?

“Ancient Greece was famous for its educators like Plato, Sophists, and Isocrates, who are known and studied even today.

“Schools were established by the 5th century BC, before which education was supposed to have been given by private educators.”

And what are we debating today? Democracy and education?

And what can’t we comprehend?

We live in a dynamic universe, a dynamic world. And why our caste system and values have rendered us unfit for the 21st century.

Consider: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy; ours is a culture of impunity.

Why are we the regional laggard?

“Beg for Western money and technology,” chimed Lee and Mahathir to Deng. In other words, be like the Asian Tigers.

“A need for a new economic model. Philippine economic performance in recent years revealed that the 6-7% GDP growth range seems to be the maximum growth trajectory. In comparison, East Asian countries expanded 8-10% to achieve developed status within a generation.” [“The Philippines and the middle-income trap,” Cesar Polvorosa Jr., The Philippine Star, 5th Oct 2022]

I was delighted to read the article of Professor Polvorosa until he asserts, “Rebalancing of the economy, food security, and industrial policy/strategy.

“While the economy is gearing toward greater export competitiveness, it would be a prudent strategy to achieve a balanced domestic market and export-driven economy. Future low growth and volatility could adversely affect export-dependent economies.

“The Philippines as a large nation can deviate from the export-dependent strategy of small nations like Singapore and Netherlands.” 

Why do I object to the above assertion?

It is too academic. It does not stress the imperative of choice. Recall that the blog never fails to raise Pareto and the “vital few” versus the “trivial many,” especially given our imperative to overcome abject poverty and “learning poverty” rapidly.

In the real world, we can only focus on one or two imperatives to ensure that we cease being a rudderless ship – and not hedge sucked into the “Dutch disease,” our reliance on the easy way out, i.e., the OFW remittances and call centers.

Focus. Focus. Focus.

“Do you, as a leader, make an explicit choice to grow? Or do you pay lip service to your growth ambitions and let your resolve falter if profit isn’t immediate?” [Rumelt, op. cit.]

“Preeminent economist Ciel Habito captured why Juan de la Cruz suffers abject poverty and learning poverty. And why the Ramon Ang Bulacan initiative must be our rallying cry to generate $200 billion in exports.”

Until we learn the ropes and become globally competitive, we cannot sustain a competitive economy in today’s world. It is not about being export-dependent – being competitive in a dynamic universe is the “context.”

Recall the three elements of cognitive development: (a) dualism or binary thinking, (b) multiplicity, (c) relativism or the imperative of context. 

Again, the excellent news is that we aren’t alone in being cognitively challenged.

But we must learn from our shortcomings, the crux of why Juan de la Cruz suffers from abject poverty and learning poverty.

Why does the blog keep talking about my Eastern European friends? They have become giant killers, demonstrated by the split of their revenues: 70% comes from exports, with the remaining 30% local. And they are into day-to-day products, not even high-tech electronic gadgets. Why? They can do business in over 70 countries because of their global competitiveness.

While still much smaller, they mirror my old Fortune 500 company, also into day-to-day products, doing business in over 200 countries. And their revenues are 70% exports and 30% local.

That’s why experience matters. Theory cannot explain how global competitiveness comes about the way it does in the real world.

You cannot solve a problem that you do not comprehend.

That’s from Richard Rumelt, the Harry and Elsa Kunin Professor of Business and Society at the UCLA Anderson School of Management; adapted from his books (a) Good Strategy/Bad Strategy: The Difference and Why It Matters and (b) “The Crux: How Leaders Become Strategists.”

As the blog submits, we are floundering because (a) we are a rudderless ship and (b) we suffer from our version of the “Dutch disease.”

The excellent news is that we are not alone in our inability to comprehend. Look at the UK.

What can’t we comprehend?

Gising bayan!

Can Juan de la Cruz reinvent himself?

Probably not. And that means we’re bound to decline even more especially given the downturn in the global economy.

And Venezuela comes to mind. In other words, do we hue closer to Venezuela than to our neighbors, the Asian Tigers – all major export players?

Consider: On the one hand, we’re stuck with our version of the Dutch disease courtesy of the over $50 billion generated by the OFW remittances and call centers. And on the other, we have no investment-industrial base to be competitive export-wise.

Preeminent economist Ciel Habito captured why Juan de la Cruz suffers abject poverty and learning poverty. And why the Ramon Ang Bulacan initiative must be our rallying cry to generate $200 billion in exports.

The Dutch overcame the “Dutch disease,” while Venezuela couldn’t.

“The Netherlands, the sixth-largest economy in the European Union, plays an important role as a European transportation hub, with a consistently high trade surplus, stable industrial relations, and low unemployment. The industry focuses on food processing, chemicals, refining petroleum, and electrical machinery. A highly mechanized agricultural sector employs only 2% of the labor force but provides large surpluses for food-processing and underpins the country’s status as the world’s second-largest agricultural exporter.” [The Netherlands - The World Factbook (cia.gov)]

“The term Dutch disease was coined by The Economist magazine in 1977 when the publication analyzed a crisis that occurred in The Netherlands after discovering vast natural gas deposits in the North Sea in 1959. The newfound wealth and massive oil exports caused the value of the Dutch guilder to rise sharply, making Dutch exports of all non-oil products less competitive on the world market. Unemployment rose from 1.1% to 5.1%, and capital investment in the country dropped. [Dutch Disease Definition (investopedia.com)]

“Venezuela, which has the world’s largest known crude oil supplies, is left with an economy barreling out of control. On 22nd Jan, Venezuela’s oil price fell to $21.50 a barrel, compared to over $100 in 2014 (Yahoo News, 2015). As prices continue to fall, Venezuela’s surplus of oil stocks grows. Rising oil surplus, however, does not translate into food, medical supplies, and political and domestic stability in Venezuela, as President Maduro is quickly finding out. A country rich in one of the world’s most demanded natural resources, Venezuela is riddled with poverty and instability, having been cursed by the resource upon which it depends so deeply.” [Venezuela’s Case of Dutch Disease: Cursed by Oil | Panoramas (pitt.edu)]

What to do?

“Addressing the Philippine education crisis,” Bernardo M. Villegas, Human Side Of Economics, BusinessWorld, 27th Sep 2022.

“Food security and quality education are the two most significant challenges to attaining sustainable and equitable economic development in the Philippines during the coming decade.

“The DepEd decision to join PISA for the first time in its 2018 round is a step towards globalizing the quality of Philippine basic education. Together with the changing landscape of education, global standards are also changing, and the country needs to have a complete view of the gaps and areas for improvement.”

“The results of international assessments, coupled with our own National Achievement Test, will provide the necessary data that will inform the efforts of DepEd to formulate a plan to improve the quality of Philippine education significantly. This master plan will install aggressive reforms in four key areas: (1) K to 12 curriculum review and updating; (2) Improvement of the learning environment; (3) Teachers’ upskilling and reskilling through a transformed professional development program; and (4) Engagement of stakeholders for support and collaboration.

“How are these reforms directly related to the overall plan of Philippine society to attain First World status of its economy from 2040 to 2050?”

It’s worth repeating: Food security and quality education are the two most significant challenges to attaining sustainable and equitable economic development in the Philippines during the coming decade.

“Land consolidation is the answer,” Calixto V. Chikiamco, Introspective, BusinessWorld, 2nd Oct 2022

“The primary binding constraint in developing Philippine agriculture is land fragmentation. The answer to our agricultural woes is farm consolidation and modernization, nothing else. All other efforts will fail.

“More so if PBBM relies on the government and the Department of Agriculture (DA) to solve problems. Experience and studies have shown that the DA is dysfunctional, inefficient, and corrupt. Therefore, increasing the DA’s budget or announcing new government-directed programs, like reviving the National Food Authority’s trading operations, won’t be the answer. It may be too late if he realizes this after six years because he would have failed by then.

“The central problem of agriculture is that too many farmers marginally tilling small parcels of land (average of 1 hectare or less.) Many farmers are just producing enough for their consumption. Many farmers, too, are part-time farmers because farming isn’t profitable, and they have to earn non-farm income, such as driving tricycles.

“That too many small farmers working on atomized farmlands cause other problems down the supply chain line. Volumes are just too small to ship economically. Ask domestic shipping companies, and they will tell you that their prices are high because agriculture produce volumes are too low. There are “middlemen” that can aggregate these small volumes, but the transaction costs of dealing with many small farmers are too high.

“Middlemen or traders also have inordinate power over the farmers and are criticized for exploiting them. With so many small farms, the power dynamics skew toward the trader.

“Therefore, the government must promote land and farm consolidation to create giant, better-managed farms—commercial farming or agri-business, in other words. We need more giant farms that can use science, technology, capital, and management to increase agricultural production and produce for profit.

“However, creating more giant and better-managed farms is impossible under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL). Successful farmers are not allowed to expand beyond five hectares. Often, farms get subdivided into ever smaller plots of land with each succeeding generation.

“It’s good that PBBM has included debt condonation of agrarian reform beneficiaries as part of his legislative agenda. Debt condonation won’t affect government finances because it will involve an accounting write-off in the government’s balance sheet. Most agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs) (at least 75%) don’t pay.

“More importantly, farmers will be free to sell or lease their lands because, under the law, they aren’t allowed to do so until they fully repay their loans. The theoretical effect of debt condonation is a more vigorous and unrestrained land rental market that will promote land consolidation through leasing.

“Other reforms can also help reduce transaction costs and create a more efficient and frictionless rural land market.

“However, debt condonation won’t be a cure-all. Only mega-corporations like Dole or Del Monte can pay rent. Small- and medium-sized farmers prefer to share tenancy, which isn’t allowed under the law – but is prevalent. Share tenancy rather than fixed rental makes sense for the small farmer without capital because of the vagaries of farm production, affected by weather, pests, and other unforeseeable factors.

“We must promote land consolidation through ownership. Farmer families would rather own the land rather than rent it so they can pass it to succeeding generations. Increasing the land retention limit to 24 hectares will lead to more family-owned agribusiness ventures.

“Moreover, there’s another compelling reason land consolidation through ownership should be promoted: lessees tend to overfertilize the land because they don’t own it, thereby degrading the quality of the soil, and its productivity, over the long term.

“Why 24 hectares? Because that was the size allowed for homestead and agricultural patents under the 1935 Constitution. In other words, the 1935 Constitution fathers thought that that size would constitute a good-sized, economical family farm. Studies by the University of Asia and the Pacific economists led by Dr. Rolly Dy bear this out. Ideally, there should be no land retention limit because the market should dictate the limit, but this may be politically unfeasible.

“The government can’t shirk promoting land consolidation. There will be some form of creative destruction with more efficient farmers displacing less efficient ones. Farmers who sell or lease their lands can earn higher incomes by becoming farm workers on much bigger but more productive farms or factory workers in secondary cities. In China, their industrialization took off because farmers and rural workers were encouraged to move to the cities to work in labor-intensive factories where their incomes were higher and more stable. Therefore, we must amend labor laws and ease labor rigidities even as we promote land consolidation.”

Question: Hasn’t the Philippines proudly proclaimed our ability to grow the GDP by 6%-7%, consistent with the World Bank-endorsed metric?

What are we missing?

“Horatio Nelson had a problem. The British admiral’s fleet was outnumbered at Trafalgar by an armada of French and Spanish ships that Napoleon had ordered to disrupt Britain’s commerce and prepare for a cross-channel invasion.

“The prevailing tactics in 1805 were for the two opposing fleets to stay in line, firing broadsides at each other. But Nelson had a strategic insight into how to deal with being outnumbered. He broke the British fleet into two columns and drove them at the Franco-Spanish fleet, hitting its line perpendicularly.

“The lead British ships took a significant risk, but Nelson judged that the less-trained Franco-Spanish gunners would not be able to compensate for the heavy swell that day. And that the enemy fleet, with its coherence lost, would be no match for the more experienced British captains and gunners in the ensuing melee.

“He was proved right: the French and Spanish lost 22 ships, two-thirds of their fleet. The British lost none. Nelson’s victory is a classic example of good strategy, which always looks this simple and obvious in retrospect. It does not pop out of some strategic-management tool, matrix, triangle, or fill-in-the-blanks scheme.

“Instead, a talented leader has identified the one or two critical issues in a situation—the pivot points that can multiply the effectiveness of effort—and then focused and concentrated action and resources on them.

“A good strategy does more than urge us toward a goal or vision; it acknowledges the challenges we face and provides an approach to overcoming them.” [“The perils of bad strategy,” Richard Rumelt, McKinsey Quarterly, 1st Jun 2011]

Consider: On the one hand, we’re stuck with our version of the Dutch disease courtesy of the over $50 billion generated by the OFW remittances and call centers. And on the other, we have no investment-industrial base to be competitive export-wise.

Can Juan de la Cruz reinvent himself? Can he overcome our crab mentality – or our academic approach to problem-solving – and focus on what separates us from our neighbors?

In other words, what will it take to separate the wheat from the chaff, the “vital few” from the “trivial many”?

Focus. Focus. Focus.

“Do you, as a leader, make an explicit choice to grow? Or do you pay lip service to your growth ambitions and let your resolve falter if profit isn’t immediate?

“When sustainable, inclusive, and profitable growth becomes a conscious, resolute choice, it shapes decision making across every business area. “Growth” becomes the oxygen of an organization, feeding the culture, elevating ambitions, and inspiring a sense of purpose. Growth leaders generate 80 percent more shareholder value than their peers over ten years. Beyond creating shareholder value, growth attracts talent, fosters innovation, and creates jobs.

“The leaders who choose growth and outperform their peers think, act, and speak differently; they align around a shared mindset, strategy, and capabilities. They actively track leading and lagging growth indicators to tie their aspirations to clear and measurable key performance indicators (KPIs). They explore and invest in opportunities both within and outside their core business. Their commitment to growth leads them to invest in an appropriate mix of enablers at the right time and scale. They stay resolutely faithful to their growth vision in the face of unexpected challenges in their business and operating context, even turning disruption to their advantage.” [“Choosing to grow: The leader’s blueprint,” McKinsey & Company, 7th Jul 2022]

Recall that the blog often distinguishes between (a) logical yet linear and incremental thinking and (b) forward, lateral, and creative thinking.

Consider: “William Perry’s Theory of Intellectual and Ethical Development discusses three stages: dualism, multiplicity, and relativism.

“He believes college students go through four mental and moral development stages. The four states are dualism, multiplicity, relativism, and commitment. These four stages are then further divided into nine positions.

“Perry’s theory is instrumental because he details specific stages and how people arrive and change to get to each “stage.”

“The first stage (typically discussed for incredibly young people) is dualism. Dualism is the belief that every problem is solvable, that students are to learn the correct answers, and that one must obey authorities. The second stage is known as multiplicity.

“Multiplicity is that there are two types of problems: solvable and issues that the answer is not yet known. In addition, in this stage, students trust their inner voice.

“Relativism is the third stage. The basis for this stage is that every issue needs evaluation because everything is contextual. During this stage, all solutions to problems must have reasons within a specific context.

“Lastly, commitment is the stage where we allow uncertainty as part of life. During this stage, students use the combination of personal experience and evidence learned from outside sources to arrive at conclusions.” [Perry - Student Development Theory (weebly.com)]

Recall that the blog speaks about our lack of experience in development – unlike the Asian Tigers, our neighbors.

What makes us an oddball compared to our neighbors? In the beginning, they also did not have development experience. But they were not like us in parochialism and insularity. They begged for Western money and technology. And they learned from one another, as demonstrated by Deng, who followed the advice of Lee and Mahathir. And more recently, Vietnam followed suit.

Sadly, we can’t seem to recognize that we can’t do it alone, even in how we problem-solve.

Why? Consider our instincts expressed in our caste system: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy; ours is a culture of impunity.

Can Juan de la Cruz reinvent himself?

Probably not. And that means we’re bound to decline even more especially given the downturn in the global economy.

And Venezuela comes to mind. In other words, do we hue closer to Venezuela than to our neighbors, the Asian Tigers – all major export players?

Consider: On the one hand, we’re stuck with our version of the Dutch disease courtesy of the over $50 billion generated by the OFW remittances and call centers. And on the other, we have no investment-industrial base to be competitive export-wise.

Gising bayan!