Creating an open, transparent and diverse society

Two recent articles influenced this blog posting. “A Mckinsey article, ‘Redefining Capitalism’ (Beinhocker and Hanauer, 2014), argues for revisiting the role of capitalism. The authors claim that the essential role of capitalism is creation. The world today is a better place because there are life-saving inventions and many technical and social innovations. Capitalism creates the incentives and reward for solving human problems and makes those solutions available. It is solutions to human problems that define prosperity.” [Rolando T. Dy, The need for creativity and problem solvers, Business World, 9th Dec 2014]

“Problem solvers are scarce commodities in this country. And we need tremendous creativity to find solutions to the society’s problems. Natural resources -- land and sea -- are under-utilized. Surplus workers are mostly under-employed. And markets -- domestic and foreign -- are untapped.”

“As Filipinos, what lessons can we learn from these? Strategic Lesson No. 1: ‘Prosperity is the accumulation of solutions to human problems. Businesses contribute to society by creating and making available products and services that improve people’s lives.’ Strategic Lesson No. 2: ‘Democracy is the best mechanism for navigating the trade-offs and weaknesses inherent in capitalism.’ ”

“To quote Atifete Jahjaga, former president of Kosovo: ‘Democracy must be built through open societies that share information. When there is information, there is enlightenment. When there is debate, there are solutions. When there is no sharing of power, no rule of law, no accountability, there is abuse, corruption, subjugation and indignation.’ ”

In other words, if PHL is to develop a problem-solving culture and also of creativity, we need to revisit the imperatives of an egalitarian society: openness, transparency and diversity.

“Filipino intellectuals are detached from the hustle of ordinary Filipino lives . . . They cloak themselves with robes of erudition and pedantry. Intellectualism and knowledge production are ends in themselves…. Unless the intellectuals of this country immerse themselves in the nation’s problems and join in the great debate of Filipino-hood, they’ll remain useless erudites and pedants, or better yet books in libraries that gather nothing but dust.” [Cielito F. Habito, Public intellectuals in default (?), No free lunch, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 9th Dec 2014]

Is that a surprise given our hierarchical system and structure – against the backdrop of parochialism?

“Benedict Anderson, described as one of the most prominent Southeast Asian scholars of the 20th century . . . deplored what he saw to be ‘the long-term decline of the traditional public intellectual.’ This was against the backdrop of what he described as a ‘decade (that) started with an admirable outburst of reformist politics, but has ended depressingly with the entrenchment of oligarchies in Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand and Malaysia. In all these places, the level of economic inequality has rapidly increased, human rights have been constantly abused, and state control of the mass media has become more formidable.’ ” [ibid.]

This blog as some would recall was inspired by my Eastern European friends who were unequivocal in their need for help to traverse the path to free enterprise. First of all, even when I saw them as creative – from the appearance of the products they showed on my first visit – they still needed to learn both the art and science of creativity and problem-solving. And I was encouraged because they recognized and accepted the necessity of examining their “thinking” – which came from them matter-of-factly.

They were ex-socialists and so we had to start from square-one: “You are unprofitable because your margins are unacceptable. The first thing we must do is focus on driving margins, and in this business, they must ideally be 50 margin points, if you are to compete against Western behemoths. The object of an enterprise is to attain sustainable growth. Show me the money! And you can be a contributing member of society. And that presupposes putting the requisite building blocks in place.”

“We will define the businesses you are in and, conversely, the businesses you must not be in – to be focused – and attain competitive advantage. [This is one business principle that oligarchic economies ignore given the culture of impunity that is perpetuated via dominance of the local market with the regional, if not global, market an afterthought, and accounts for PHL’s poor competitiveness ranking, among others.] The portfolio must in its aggregate generate healthy margins and that means moving beyond cheap and economy brands. We will go to school and learn product-architecture modelling which is driven by value-addition, thus the value chain. It is synonymous to Maslow’s hierarch of needs. And the higher the value-addition the bigger the geography we can cover, beyond your small country which you claim is poor. Product development is more than being artistic. And a product is of value if it addresses a human need or problem. This is a simple business, we make things and sell things of value.”

To cut a long story short, 11 years later, our time is heavily spent on problem-solving and product development, both demanding lateral thinking – or connecting the dots as Steve Jobs would define creativity. And this is after we’ve put the requisite building blocks in place. For example, I found out that under communist rule, they didn’t learn accrual accounting and financial statements were historical in character, not meant or utilized as management tools. And they were celebrating topline or sales numbers even without knowing the bottom line.

The factory was dated and inefficient and had no chance of generating ideal margins, compounded by the focus on cheap brands. In short, we were changing tires while the car was running. “We need to look ahead and do a 3-year plan. We will need financing from banks but must be able to present a business plan that is credible. That means we will tell a straightforward simple story: This is where we are, this is where we want to be and this is how we will get there.”

And ever since, during budget and quarterly business reviews, the core of the organization, the business unit, comprised of R&D and Marketing and Manufacturing, will examine the business – brand by brand, SKU by SKU, channel by channel, major customer by major customer, country by country, among others – with the people on the ground, comprised of sales and local marketing. It is a model of openness, transparency and diversity.

Throughout the year, the business units are developing new products in order to keep the consumers engaged and gain their trust – i.e., that the enterprise is committed to respond to their needs. As Maslow postulated, human needs are progressive. And marketers cannot be stuck in the past – which explains why competitiveness matters.

If an economy is the aggregate of a nation’s products and services, it follows that it is made up of the countless enterprises in the country. And if enterprises by and large are schooled in creativity and problem-solving, then the nation will be competitive. Admittedly, private enterprise is more efficient than the public sector.

And that is why progressive public servants would look to the private sector and adopt their best practices. But that presupposes the public sector is committed to openness, transparency and diversity. Because they are the imperatives of critical thinking, creativity and innovation. But then again, they demand leadership of the visionary kind. Not our parochial and hierarchical system and structure that breeds political patronage, crony capitalism and an oligarchic economy.

While the education community will have to embrace the pragmatism of free enterprise because bread is what people put on the table? And that was the sob story I heard when I first arrived in Bulgaria. “There was a riot because our Communist masters simply failed to supply our daily rations of bread and vegetables.”

Problem-solving and creativity is not learned in the classroom and demands the right environment. It is like our manicured lawns, they are properly tended by our gardeners. “Filipino intellectuals are detached from the hustle of ordinary Filipino lives . . . They cloak themselves with robes of erudition and pedantry. Intellectualism and knowledge production are ends in themselves….” [ibid.]

Where we are . . .

The GPS has become ubiquitous that we take it for granted. Yet its concept is a great teacher in the pursuit of undertakings, big and small. And if we would pause and ask ourselves where we are as an economy or as a people or as a nation, chances are we will realize we’ve taken the GPS for granted: where are we, were do we want to be and how will we get there?

I’ve used the GPS analogy for many years as an MNC manager. And I have used it in my development work in Eastern Europe. And I remember agonizing with the question: why’s there always the risk of failure to execute? Even when people would be in endless meetings and conferences to get things done. And in an MNC, these sessions are not only in small groups, but across functions in the subsidiary organization, if not in a regional or global setting.

And in this blog I’ve shared that my claim to fame as an MNC manager was to move our budgeting process to a goal alignment exercise. And later I would be involved in fixing problem businesses or what the world especially Wall Street knows as “restructuring.” And from those experiences I would internalize the imperative to be proactive – not to wait for a challenge to snowball into a major problem necessitating a restructuring.

Where are we, where do we want to be and how will we get there? I would develop a simple model – and as academics like George Whitesides of Harvard would confirm, simple is not the perspective of higher education, yet Steve Jobs saw “simplicity as the ultimate sophistication” and Apple would swear to simplicity in the pursuit of creativity, which Jobs would define as “connecting the dots” – akin to an ecosystem comprised of: (a) the marketing mix; (b) the resource mix and (c) the execution mix.

Simply put, an enterprise must have a product and/or service that must not only be acceptable but preferred by the consumer, and generate healthy returns – and thus attain sustainable growth. But to get there, the undertaking must be able to assemble and employ resources efficiently and, as importantly, execute the thinking accordingly.

But I’d find myself constantly going back to the question: “where are we?” It is no different from the golf swing as both golfers and hackers know it. A good swing starts with what is called the “proper address.” Or simply, where is the golfer when he or she starts the golf swing? And that is why a golf instructor would always want to check the “stance” of the golfer because it informs how he or she is “addressing the ball.” And the golf stance is counterintuitive and requires a deliberate thinking process – “what was your swing thought when you hit that ball,” is a typical question from an instructor – and why the game is called “mental.”

Where are we as an economy or a people or a nation? And that can be captured by our long-held assumptions, beliefs and values? For example, many of us sincerely believe that to be critical of who we are or of PHL is unpatriotic? Sadly, we have taken the GPS for granted when Juan de la Cruz ought to behave like a mature person, not a juvenile or “onion-skinned”?

Take the FOI. What we enact into laws are a reflection of our assumptions, beliefs and values. And the fact that we do more talking than doing re FOI speaks volumes. Put another way, openness, transparency and diversity aren’t compatible with our assumptions, beliefs and values?

Where are we? Are we committed to an egalitarian society which is what openness, transparency and diversity are about? And that is pretty evident in our institutions – beyond the church and including the school, the government and our oligarchic economy? In other words, to be inclusive which is what we claim that we want to be is mere rhetoric because it cannot be fostered in our culture? Yet even Communist Vietnam and earlier China would embrace capitalism. In other words, how come we Pinoys see our culture as gospel truth – and cast in stone? And following the GPS analogy, we’ve heard that voice constantly: “recalculating!” Because we are neither here nor there?

That said, how can we establish where we want to be when we have yet to come to terms with where we are? If we can’t establish the fact of where we are, all the more we can’t define the intangible and more complex, where we want to be? Add to that the reality of leadership being a scarce resource with visionary leadership being more so. And given our culture of impunity, we need even much greater leadership.

Sadly, despite the absence of a predicate, we’ve chosen to offer solutions – or how we will get there – and that would explain the follies behind our efforts to move the nation forward? It is the classic example of the blind leading the blind?

And as we get deeper in the hole, the more efforts we exert the deeper we seem to find ourselves – as though in a quicksand? For example, while we’re supposedly knowledgeable in marketing, we have yet to become regionally if not globally competitive. And why is the point important? An economy is as big or small as its aggregate output of goods and services. We cannot speak of regional and/or global competitiveness if we don’t address the imperative to produce competitive products and services.

In other words, we cannot move the debate to social issues as the panacea or the road to progress and development when we are unable to feed the economic hopper with the requisite inputs that will yield regionally if not globally competitive products and services.

And our failings don’t end there. Given all the foregoing, we have demonstrated our shortcomings in execution. And that would explain why despite PPP, for instance, we remain regional laggards in infrastructure development. And if we mustn’t move the debate to social issues when we’re faced foursquare by the shortfalls in economic output, we likewise cannot move the debate and skirt the infrastructure challenges of metro Manila because it has become unmanageable. We need to create a much broader (mega-metro Manila infrastructure) vision like the Japanese experts recommended. They know what they’re talking about.

We’re back to Pareto’s principle – i.e., metropolitan areas will account for the vital few drivers of the economy while recognizing there is a compelling need to develop for the rural areas their requisite ecosystem. We know the US has its economic hubs – in the east and west – and so does China and every other country. And in the case of the US, Warren Buffett made one of his biggest investments in rail transport to get Middle America connected to the nation’s economic centers. And it proved a very wise investment indeed.

In sum, we have failed to establish the environment and the platform of an ecosystem. And so we constantly find ourselves in a maze – with no sense of where we are, where we want to be and how we will get there?

“What is simplicity?”

“The point is that you get into trouble when you ask a single question with a single box for an answer, in which that single question actually is many questions with quite different meanings, but with the same words. Asking, ‘What is simplicity?’ I think falls in that category. What is the state of science? And, interestingly, complexity is very highly evolved. We have a lot of interesting information about what complexity is. Simplicity, for reasons that are a little bit obscure, is almost not pursued, at least in the academic world.” [George Whitesides: Toward a science of simplicity, TED Talk, Apr 2010; he is an American chemist and professor of chemistry atHarvard University. As of December 2011, he has the highest Hirsch index rating of all living chemists. The h-index is an index that attempts to measure both the productivity and citation impact of the published body of work of a scientist or scholar.]

“We academics -- I am an academic -- we love complexity. You can write papers about complexity, and the nice thing about complexity is it's fundamentally intractable in many ways, so you're not responsible for outcomes. Simplicity -- all of you really would like your Waring Blender in the morning to make whatever a Waring Blender does, but not explode or play Beethoven. You're not interested in the limits of these things. So what one is interested in has a lot to do with the rewards of the system. And there's a lot of rewards in thinking about complexity and emergence, not so much in thinking about simplicity.”

After 11 years in Eastern Europe preaching simplicity to my friends, I finally heard the magic word in a very profound way in our recent budget review from one of the business unit managers. “It is very simple, our role in the business unit is to create great products, and your role in the field is to get them to the hands of the consumer. It is the simplest way to explain the 4 Ps [product, pricing, placement, promotion] or the marketing mix.”

Of course, to get to that point, the enterprise had to toil and overcome several hurdles. For example, they had to unlearn what a poor country had taught them: to sell a packaged good it has to be for no more than 50 euro cents. In short, there is such a thing as the value chain. And the higher the value-addition the greater the geography it can cover; and given economies of scale it would generate healthy returns and attain a virtuous circle. [Unfortunately, in the case of PHL, given our inward-looking bias, geography to us has been limited to our borders thus the underdevelopment of the requisite building blocks of regional and global trade and competitiveness. And it all starts in the mind, informed by our assumptions, beliefs and values – that we have taken as gospel truth? But we are so polite – or is it compassionate? – to debate the issue and aren’t able to get to the bottom of the problem?]

And that is where critical and creative thinking must be employed given the 21st century demands of innovation. And the Design School in Stanford calls it “design thinking” – which is anchored in “empathizing” with people or the consumer in order to truly figure out their needs and problems.

Still, the marketing mix is only a subset of the broader ecosystem; there is also the “resource mix” and the “execution mix.” An enterprise beyond creating great products must employ resources efficiently and execute plans accordingly – in order to attain sustainable growth and contribute to a nation’s economic output and wellbeing.

“The characteristics, which I think are useful to think about for simple things: First, they are predictable. Their behavior is predictable. Now, one of the nice characteristics of simple things is you know what it's going to do, in general. So simplicity and predictability are characteristics of simple things. The second is, and this is a real world statement, they're cheap. If you have things that are cheap enough, people will find uses for them, even if they seem very primitive. So, for example, stones. You can build cathedrals out of stones, you just have to know what it does. You carve them in blocks and then you pile them on top of one another, and they support weight.” [ibid.]

“So there has to be function, the function has to be predictable and the cost has to be low. What that means is that you have to have a high performance or value for cost. And then I would propose as this last component that they serve, or have the potential to serve, as building blocks. That is, you can stack them. And stack can mean this way, or it can mean this way, or it can mean in some arbitrary n-dimensional space. But if you have something that has a function, and it's really cheap, people will find new ways of putting it together to make new things. Cheap, functional, reliable things unleash the creativity of people who then build stuff that you could not imagine.”

“Let me close with my two aphorisms. One of them is from Mr. Einstein, and he says, ‘Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.’ And I think that's a very good way of thinking about the problem. If you take too much out of something that's simple, you lose function. You have to have low cost, but you also have to have a function. So you can't make it too simple.”

“And the second is a design issue, and it's not directly relevant, but it's a nice statement. This is by de Saint-Exupery. And he says, ‘You know you've achieved perfection in design, not when you have nothing more to add, but when you have nothing more to take away.’ And that certainly is going in the right direction. So, what I think one can begin to do with this kind of cut at the word simplicity, which doesn't cover Brancusi, it doesn't answer the question of why Mondrian is better or worse or simpler or less simpler than Van Gogh, and certainly doesn't address the question of whether Mozart is simpler than Bach.”

“But it does make a point -- which is one which, in a sense, differentiates the real world of people who make things, and the world of people who think about things, which is, there is an intellectual merit to asking: How do we make things as simple as we can, as cheap as we can, as functional as we can and as freely interconnectable as we can? If we make that kind of simplicity in our technology and then give it to you guys, you can go off and do all kinds of fabulous things with it.”

Indeed design, beyond the challenge of simplicity, can be an expression of change as explained in the exhibits titled “Disobedient Objects” at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London: “Many of the rights and freedoms we enjoy today were won by disobedience. Activist social movements have changed our world from the grassroots up, popularizing new ideas and values. The objects made as part of these movements have played a key role in those cultural and political changes . . . The objects on show were not made by commercial designers, but by people collectively taking design into their own hands to make a change in the world.”

Jony Ive, “The genius behind Apple’s greatest products [Leander Kahney, Portfolio/Penguin, 2013] . . . was a museum-goer . . .  he and his dad made many visits over the years to the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, one of the world’s leading art and design museums.” And indeed Apple products have become synonymous to simplicity and change.

But obviously there are barriers to simplicity and change. For example, PHL institutions, not just those of higher education, are reflective of our hierarchical system and structure – e.g., government, the church and oligarchic economy. And by definition, hierarchies are bureaucratic and complex. Yet successful global companies with their mantra of simplicity can be leading edge science-wise and rapidly get their products to the hands of consumers around the world. Of course, there are products that may not have obvious societal benefits. But that’s precisely why design thinking must be founded on human empathy.

The bottom line: simplicity and contributing to a people’s wellbeing are not incompatible; while complexity may not even be meant to deliver outcomes – an ego trip being a good example?

The reference to Jony Ive of Apple is apropos to the topic of simplicity; and Apple is today the world’s largest enterprise, bigger in market value than some major economies. They are the benchmark I’ve used in training my Eastern European friends. And I will shortly be training our newest batch of brand managers. But this time I will be assisted by a 24-year old Bulgarian who graduated from the Central Saint Martins College of Arts and Design in London. I was so impressed by how she articulated the concept of a product we’re developing for the Western market – i.e., it was very coherent yet very simple and very brief. And the thoughts all came back to me as my wife and I, joined by two other couples, friends from the Philippines, were at the Victoria and Albert Museum [see above re Jony Ive and his dad] in London [just before the cruise we took. I am writing this while on Queen Mary 2 and reading the book on Jony Ive.]

We can use help . . .

Just like in the US, we seem to have developed the habit of watching the performance of the economy like a boxing match, i.e., blow-by-blow. The big difference is the US is a well-developed economy and is an established ecosystem albeit far from being the model of perfection. And so with the deceleration of the economy in the third quarter of 2014, not surprisingly, came a slew of Monday-morning quarterbacking reflected in news reports like: “Train wreck”; “Blame game backfires: Palace blasted for bungling priorities”; “Troubled road PPP back to square one”; “US gov’t backs policy formulation on electricity rates reduction”; “Go global, DTI tells SMEs”; “PH urged to establish niche in IC design”; “Japanese experts to improve PH railways,” etc., etc.

I still remember Economics 101 [in our MBA class] where we learned the rudiments of calculating GDP numbers. And it’s a feel-good sense to believe that we had a handle on something as complex as an economy. But coming from the private sector and decades later though, I would smile at the naiveté that our class demonstrated. First of all, we weren’t trained to be economists and the course was just a very small piece of the program.

In the private sector we had to learn to move across the continuum – to and fro – between the short-term and the long-term. And where nirvana is defined as attaining sustainable growth – and be a contributing member of society, and presupposes putting in place the requisite building blocks, and not be led astray to conclude that “a swallow makes a summer.” 33 years ago, the CEO of my old MNC company visited the Philippine subsidiary and it was like yesterday that I still remember how he answered a question I asked: “If you have to respond to the demand of a short-term need at the expense of the future, you will not want to do it.”

And after decades of experience, I would learn that strategic plans or road maps aren’t sufficient if an enterprise is to measure up to the yardstick of sustainable growth when two elements are missing: a sharply defined future scenario – call it a vision if you will – and the absence of the requisite ecosystem. For example, even an IBM, renowned for its best minds and the owners of the most number of patents globally, had to toss its own road map that promised increasing market value.

And this blog has raised the imperatives of: (a) visionary leadership and (b) an ecosystem. Visionary leadership doesn’t come in abundance and much less in former Soviet satellite countries, as I would note during my earlier years in Eastern Europe. “We were in the dark ages that we never imagined that there is such a thing as a bright future.” In PHL, do we need to revisit our view of the future so that we would think beyond “fire-fighting” – and not to miss the forest for the trees? And given our professed compassion do we see poverty reduction as nirvana while taking economic development for granted?

Einstein would see a Higher Being behind the model ecosystem that is the solar system. And man has learned the imperative of an ecosystem while pursuing progress and development. But he can’t claim perfection and thus despite having stepped on the moon and reached Mars and Comet 67P, among other breakthroughs, disasters would still strike similar efforts. And that’s precisely why man can’t sleep on his laurels. Perfection is not of this world. Yet it doesn’t mean man mustn’t give it his best shot, if indeed he is to tame if not rule his world, the challenge to Adam and Eve when they were driven out of Eden?

Ecosystem? Let’s start with basic infrastructure. But with ASEAN 2015 upon us, what else does it entail? “The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) is encouraging small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to expand their foothold in the global market and has lined up export promotion efforts to help them gain greater access.” [Go global, DTI tells SMEs, Voltaire Palaña, The Manila Times, 28th Nov 2014]

“This year’s export promotion efforts mainly included outbound and inbound business matching activities; participation in trade fairs in the country or abroad; a nationwide campaign to inform exporters of the opportunities in foreign markets covered by free-trade agreements (FTAs) entered into by the Philippines; and information sessions to keep exporters and potential exporters abreast on foreign market access requirements.”

And what does “to keep . . . exporters abreast on foreign market access requirements mean”? In today’s globalized and highly competitive world, it is about competition not simply access! Thus, the imperatives of investment, technology and innovation as well as people, product and market development.

Are we finally recognizing that we can use some help? How long have we had a “power crisis”? Yet, wittingly or unwittingly, we celebrate how the big boys are getting the spoils of a rather belated and fumbling efforts in infrastructure development?

“US gov’t backs policy formulation on electricity rates reduction,” says a Manila Bulletin article. “The UP School of Economics just initially proffered that its research agenda will be ‘to develop institutional linkages with the US universities and institutions with expertise in the energy sector’ – to include the University of Hawaii, Tufts University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of California Energy Institute.”

“Over the years though, it was observed by various stakeholders in the power industry that academic institutions in the country – including UP – have yet to learn and truly understand the intricacies of the Philippine electricity market before gaining core expertise they so badly need to credibly recommend viable policy formulations to the Philippine government. The institutional linkages and capacity enhancement though could be the much-needed stimulus to reinforce widely-perceived energy knowledge gap, especially so since EPDP has been aiming to become an ‘independent think-tank.’ ”

Are we finally getting it? And how do we demonstrate that an “independent think-tank” is truly independent? Do we need to dismantle our assumptions, beliefs and values? “Are we changing our paradigm? And the obvious riposte to that is: What is so threatening about a change in paradigm, unless one stakes one’s reputation with an obsolete model of things? And this, I fear, is the problem. Much of the resistance that advocates of a thorough overhaul of legal education comes not so much from theoretical objections, as from threatened egos and shattered self-assurances anchored on what many have quite speciously taken to be their badges of distinctiveness!” [Genuine outcomes-based education, Fr. Ranhilio Aquino, Pensées, Manila Standard Today, 24th Nov 2014]

And beyond the egos are vested interests. “Given the impoverished state of Philippine print and broadcast journalism today, there are not too many journalists I turn to for the nourishment of spirit and higher faculties . . . Which only makes more painfully obvious the pallid and insipid hogwash that is made to pass for journalism by those are best licking boots in high places rather that pontificating on issues far in excess of their less than modest intellectual endowments! Inelegant turns of phrase, non sequiturs strung together in some contemptible poor excuse for argument, bits of science artfully combined with voodoo and a generous dose of lower Philippine mythology—these are the morsels these quacks who pass themselves off for bona fide journalists regularly throw the way of their hapless viewership.” [Cheap shots (!), Fr. Ranhilio Aquino, Pensées, Manila Standard Today, 17th Nov 2014]

But are the Americans dictating on us again? And separate and apart from that, we can’t manage major project biddings – because there is always a justification to be equivocal? Is our culture of impunity a reflection of our shortcomings in character-building? And is it at the heart of our failings in nation-building? And what makes it sad is we sincerely believe it is what compassion demands?

How do we square a culture of impunity with compassion? As my late maternal grandfather would put it, “Where is the backbone of Juan de la Cruz?” Thinking back, perhaps because I was too young, he skipped the predicate: “Rizal was hanged because he wanted to enlighten us . . .” And with that the context would have been clearer? He looked up to Rizal – and was a Free Mason himself.

Indeed we can use help . . . and yet must demonstrate that we’re up to it? A horse can be brought to water but not be made to drink?

Art for art’s sake

“Are we changing our paradigm? And the obvious riposte to that is: What is so threatening about a change in paradigm, unless one stakes one’s reputation with an obsolete model of things? And this, I fear, is the problem. Much of the resistance that advocates of a thorough overhaul of legal education comes not so much from theoretical objections, as from threatened egos and shattered self-assurances anchored on what many have quite speciously taken to be their badges of distinctiveness!” [Genuine outcomes-based education, Fr. Ranhilio Aquino, Pensées, Manila Standard Today, 24th Nov 2014]

                                     

Our saving grace as Pinoys is the challenge isn’t confined to PHL. In the West, industry has long raised the issue and at my old MNC company, as did countless global companies, we developed an extensive education and training curriculum in pursuit of continued people and organization development efforts.

“Outcomes Based Education . . . I argued, was one kind of an ‘integrating’ paradigm in ASEAN and even beyond! There is outcomes-based education, to which I fully subscribe . . . One reason for OBE is the frequently-raised (but hardly ever addressed) complaint of the mismatch between schooling and the needs of society and of industry. Our graduates . . . are loaded with knowledge and skills of which society has no need . . . OBE starts by asking what the needs of society and industry are and moves backward by constructing a curriculum and deciding on the course-content.” [ibid.]

“[T]he Japanese have this much to teach us: It is wrong to think that of the law school as principally orientated at producing lawyers . . . If our concept of legal education does not go beyond the production of lawyers, then given the fact that only about 25 to 30 percent each year of graduates who sit for the Bar Examinations ever make it through, then law school is a tremendous waste of human resource and human potential . . . That points to the fallacy of equating legal education with the production of lawyers. OBE then forces on legal education a very important question: How does Philippine society make use of its law graduates—whether they become lawyers or not? And knowing that, we shall be better able to restructure a responsive law curriculum.”

Disclosure: At my old MNC company I was part of the council that developed our education and training curriculum. And the initiative was driven by the need of global companies for succession planning and by definition, the imperative to excel in individual development efforts – i.e., knowledge, attitude, skills and habits. While a big piece of that is leadership, to describe the challenge in a universal sense, industry translated it for the benefit of the education system as: to develop people’s critical thinking, communication and teamwork skills.

In other words, OBE is not art for art’s sake. “Much of the resistance that advocates of a thorough overhaul of legal education comes not so much from theoretical objections, as from threatened egos and shattered self-assurances anchored on what many have quite speciously taken to be their badges of distinctiveness!” [ibid.]

The education community has their work cut out for them? And if it’s in fact a cultural challenge, it won’t be easy to overcome? In the meantime, industry will have to address their needs and invest in education and training. And especially my Eastern European friends, knowing full well that they're relatively new to free enterprise, and are doing it with doggedness. And one of the responsibilities I’ve taken on is that of trainer and coach – the overarching challenge being for the enterprise to attain sustainable growth. But is the industry perspective something that the education system doesn't necessarily embrace – being too narrow for purposes of higher education?

But then again, growth and development is integral to nature – and to individuals, peoples and nations. And if the barter trade was one of the earliest expressions to actualize development, how could economic development not be inherent to human development – even assuming that it is the outcome of the efforts of commerce and industry but, as importantly, good governance? And good governance goes beyond “daang matuwid” – i.e., it includes creating the environment and the platform of an ecosystem.

And in PHL it appears we have yet to get a full airing of what an ecosystem is about? Yet we want to be holistic and/or inclusive – but without a good handle on the requisite ecosystem, we are pulled in different directions (unable to focus on the vital few) and in the end hierarchy wins out, not surprising, given our cacique system and structure? For example, for decades given the dependence of rural Philippines – and where the bulk of the population is – on agriculture, we assumed that farm-to-market roads were a panacea?

But as the world now knows, infrastructure development demands much more – from power to roads and bridges to airports to strategic industries that are globally competitive, among others, as demonstrated by the Asian Tigers – if a nation is to satisfy the yardstick of an ecosystem. And at the industry level, an ecosystem – given the demands of global competition – is characterized by a commitment to investment, technology and innovation as well as people, product and market development.

The debate about agriculture taking precedence over industrialization must capture that the world has become highly competitive and global. That agriculture like any industry must develop the capacity to move up the value chain – into agribusiness and beyond basic produce. Irrespective of industry, basic products must pull its weight in the broader portfolio that in aggregate must generate sustainable returns – and which is what food security is about. For example, Greece is a major producer of olives yet branded olives – that find a wider global market and yield higher income levels – are synonymous to Italy. And precisely why we need progressive leadership to benchmark our perspectives and efforts against the rest of the world, and be truly competitive. There is no free lunch. And more precisely, nations can be parochial – and uncompetitive – at their peril.

And so the reality is commerce and industry isn't anathema to higher education because problem-solving is at the heart of an enterprise and that can’t be narrow by any stretch of the imagination? For instance, Einstein was a product of higher education but was also discriminating: “the value of education is not the learning of many facts but the training of the mind to think.” Of course, unfettered capitalism is abhorrent, and is in fact a disservice to free enterprise being an expression of freedom and democracy. When I first worked with a group of ex-socialist Bulgarians, they were unequivocal in their need to traverse the path to a free market. But one would wonder if they were at home with the characteristics of an egalitarian enterprise – i.e., openness, transparency and diversity.

To make them tangible, we had to establish the core of the organization around R&D and Marketing led by a business unit manager that was also responsible for manufacturing. From the get-go it would undo any thoughts that one discipline or another is more superior hierarchy-wise. And it would pave the way forward into business planning and execution – i.e., pulling in and making the sales team to consciously interact with the core of the organization and ensure that the right hand knows what the left hand is doing. In short, an organization must be a synchronized system.

Still, the need to develop their skills in critical thinking, communication and teamwork would be a constant. For example, the education system in both East and West given the construct of a course syllabus makes linear thinking the conventional thinking process. Yet problem-solving and the spirit of discovery go beyond – and thus the imperative to develop the skill-set around lateral thinking. That is to say, to make openness, transparency and diversity the default perspective – because they are a mandatory in the pursuit of critical thinking, innovation and creativity. But in PHL we take them for granted because of our hierarchical cacique system and structure? And more to the point, are our assumptions, beliefs and values compatible to openness, transparency and diversity? How do we explain the struggle to enact the FOI?

Simply put, without openness, transparency and diversity, how would critical thinking, communication and teamwork be nurtured and much less thrive in an organization or an economy or a nation? Why have we as a people failed to confront the challenges and problems that have stunted PHL progress and development? Is it because we are philosophical about the world and so we like to claim we're the happiest people? Or is it because our hierarchical system and structure makes us truly leader-dependent – making innovation and creativity alien to us? Or are we simply not a problem-solving culture? Or are we a very sophisticated people that art is for art's sake? Or does it boil down to the human condition – that it is all about me and myself?

Things don't just happen

That is paraphrasing Speaker F. Belmonte Jr. as he stressed the imperative for Congress to focus on amending the economic provisions of the Constitution if we are to indeed have a platform to attract FDI. But that would be truly revolutionary if we deliver against such a challenge.

As my wife would ask, talking about Bulgaria, as we were traveling on the 400-kilometer highway towards the Black Sea: “This is likewise a poor and even a much smaller country and won't ever have the traffic that we have between Manila and Baguio. And Baguio is not even that far. Can you imagine how efficient travel to Baguio would be, and we've been doing it ourselves for half a century, since our childhood days. Yet our big boys are getting the spoils and we assume everyone is happy – when we're only reinforcing that PHL is truly an oligopoly? It was only 10 years ago when we first went to the Black Sea via their old highway. Which brings us to NAIA; how can we Pinoys tolerate such backwardness?”

And a week later we were traveling from Sofia to Malaga and had a 7:20 AM flight via Paris. And it was just 11 years ago when we first arrived in the old terminal building, courtesy of their Communist rulers (which they upgraded into the current Terminal 1 for domestic flights; and they have a new Terminal 2 for international flights.) And checking in for our flight we noted they opened 8 counters and at the security check they had 3 X-ray machines running. In no time we were at the lounge enjoying our cappuccinos as we awaited our departure.

The previous evening friends hosted a dinner. And there were two sets of kids present: one attends the equivalent of our high school and the other, grade school. “I want to enroll in a university that has a program where I can be in London and the US; I'm European and London is a natural but I want to be in the US too because the world is meant to be small.” The grade-schoolers, beyond their local teachers, have a Brit, an American and a Dutch in their class. “Imagine, the very few English words I learned growing up that I picked up while playing with other kids, and they were gutter English,” volunteered the father.

Yet in this country the medium of instructions and business is still Bulgarian. But there are efforts to look beyond their borders. In other words, people can be nationalistic and not be parochial – because no nation can progress and develop apart from the rest of the world, North Korea being the obvious example? Their politics are not the best. They just formed the latest government after kicking out the previous two because of their frustrations with corruption. My wife and I once even joined the daily protests they held over several months until the world took note and the EU intervened. Things don't just happen.

In PHL we're finally recognizing that the OFW phenomenon is not to brag about (for example, Cardinal Tagle had pointed out its social costs to our elite class, and a recent editorial even raised it as modern-day slavery) despite being the engine of our economy – and how we created a handful of billionaires. Yet we remain parochial at the core? The reason we saw our OWFs as a positive was because despite our underdevelopment we had 10 million Pinoys with jobs that paid more than local ones. But how myopic was that? And I would include myself because I saw them no differently until international institutions lectured us otherwise.

We shut the rest of the world out to preserve our inward-looking, cacique hierarchical system and structure to the detriment of nation-building? And still we have no consensus, if not clueless, about what nation building is – because our assumptions, beliefs and values haven't changed? And foreign investors are keenly aware of that: “The European Union (EU) yesterday called on the Philippines to strengthen its justice system to sustain its economic growth, alleviate poverty and protect human rights.” [EU to PHL: Strengthen justice system to sustain growth, Pia Lee Brago, The Philippine Star, 29th Nov 2014]. Is that the kinder way of saying that we must emerge from the dark ages? And how long have we been talking about our restrictive economy? Things don't just happen, which was the moral of the Juan Tamad story?

Over dinner the adults were talking about something not that different. While looking at me one said: “I was with Vladi and we discussed that what he learned as sales manager and what we learned as a local Bulgarian company is irrelevant in his new region. He has half a dozen countries with per capita GDPs over 5 times more than ours. And so his focus is not on our economy brands. He is working with our senior-most managers to draw up the right business model, including developing products that will respond to their needs and lifestyles, and driven by an integrated marketing effort.”

Earlier in the day, one of the managers came over: “I want to update you on the discussions we're having with a potential partner. I am convinced that while we're meeting with the local representatives, the mindset is there. This group developed their business in the West and have enough Western players in the team. They understand the principle of partnership and I want us to do our homework so that both parties would truly value working together and succeed beyond the immediate future.” He's a protégé and I could not help but feel proud.

“You're starting on the right foot and the parameters you've covered with this group are a good foundation. The key is to jointly develop a business model that would satisfy our definition of success as well as theirs. And if indeed both of us appreciate the size and value of the business potential for the partnership, however either of us currently defines success, we must recognize that that may not necessarily hold true in that future scenario. And which goes back to your point of doing our homework; and it means rigorously testing and critiquing our own assumptions – but that will be a function of how sharply and confidently we spell out that future scenario. If we can demonstrate that with credibility, then we will show this group the way forward.”

Indeed, things don't just happen.

“How then, can the free flow of capital and investments, as well as the free exchange of professional services in the ASEAN, happen as far as the Philippines is concerned without our Constitution being amended?” [Biting the bullet of change, Rita Linda V. Jimeno,Out of the Box, Manila Standard, 24th Nov 2014]

“Assuming there will no longer be constitutional impediments come 2015, can the Philippines compete in light of its serious inadequacy in physical and technological infrastructures? Investors have stayed away because of peace and order concerns and the instability and slow process of our judicial system. There too is the nation’s heaviest baggage of all – politics.  While there should now be a frenzied scramble toward preparing for the ASEAN economic community in 2015, energies are instead focused on the 2016 national elections.”

“It is as it has always been: the Filipino people just have to bite the bullet.”

“We Filipinos like to think we’re among the intelligent peoples in the world, that we’re up-to-date on what’s going on the planet, that we’re knowledgeable about many things.” [We think we’re advanced, Leandro DD Coronel, Manila Bulletin, 23rd Nov 2014]

“What we don’t realize is that other nations are way ahead of us in demanding accountability and transparency in how the people’s money is used. We don’t realize how backward we are for tolerating the theft of our own money by politicians that we wrongly trust and give deference to as our leaders and betters.”

“That is the sad fact about a nation that in many ways is advanced but is also in many ways so backward as to not even know that it’s being led astray by its own leaders.”

Is this the best shot we Pinoys can make for the country we claim we care about? Are we simply a bunch of losers? I came to Bulgaria because a group of people said they wanted to emerge from the dark ages . . . Things don't just happen!