NOTHING ELSE IS NEW. PROJECT PROPONENTS and managers – after putting up an industrial plant, inaugurating a mining site, or erecting a cement plant – are usually shocked by the consequent hostility of host communities.
A power plant in Mindanao, a few years ago, was about complete and turbines were just about to crank out electricity, but other important installations could not be delivered to the site because the roads were blocked by protestors lying in the middle of the road.
A mining site could not start operations due to an implacable resistance by the community, raising environmental concerns. A changing of the guards was hastily made for a new tack, but even the local church prelate remains unconvinced.
A cement plant in the north did not see the light of day due to the vigorous opposition of local residents, confronting the project proponents with serious environmental issues that remained unanswered to this day.
The good news is, the power plant in Mindanao has long begun operations, due to a belated realization that there was a “political” crisis in the community, and then officials staged a successful stakeholder communication effort.
It addressed concerns on the possible pollutions of rivers and risks on health, and reached out to the leaders in the area at all levels of decision-making, from the barangay chairman to the governor.
The protesters were not won over completely, but a mechanism of “critical collaborations” was agreed on. Thus, plant authorities to this day are always on their toes anytime the multi-sectoral monitoring group calls their attention to a possible health or environmental risk.
The mining project continues to be hobbled by a lack of genuine communication effort, but hopes are high that the entry of a high profile executive, known for his commitment to the environment, might yet resolve the impasse.
Engineering marvel is not enough. There must be a gap somewhere. And most project managers have a “blind spot” in the area of “political risks,” which can be addressed by a wide-ranging and well-informed “stakeholder communications” program. This program proceeds from the concept that host communities, among many others, are “stakeholders” of a project.
Engineers and construction experts may build an engineering marvel, harness the best project management methods, complete the project on schedule and within budget, go through scientifically tested simulations exercises, even perfect technical information dissemination among themselves (which they call “communication” in a severely limited way) – yet the projects are delayed or moth-balled because they were met with great resistance by people.
In a study I’m making, I found out that we are not lacking at all in books and journals on project management and risk assessment. But, a cursory reading of such books and investigation of other data bank shows a very limited appreciation of the crucial importance of reaching out to the community, listening to their hopes and fears.
If the project handlers do this, they will invariably find a common ground and thus achieve “co-existence,” at the very least, or “mutual trust,” at best.
Mitigating or eliminating risks. Project managers, deep into engineering disciplines, may understandably gloss over the importance of “human communication” in their risk assessment exercises. Often, they realize a little too late that beyond technical, financial, construction and other risks are the more unpredictable but very important “political risks.”
Jose P. de Jesus, president of the Manila North Tollways Corporation (MNTC) and formerly Public Works and Highways Secretary, zeroed in on “political risks” as the proverbial hard nut to crack.
In a speech before the Management Association of the Philippines, the MNTC chief pointed out that political risks “confront every major project in terms of changes in the political dispensation, community resistance, legislative inquiries, and organized opposition by civil society.”
De Jesus added that a “proactive and comprehensive public information program, government liaison and communication efforts can mitigate these risks.”
A risk management expert, Helga Odden Resknes of Norway, refers to these political risks in a more academic way. In a presentation she made before project risks managers, she emphasized the need to “establish binding contact between social science and natural science in order to create the best possible platform for risk communication.”
Go for a shared future. She meant that real communication in the realm of the social sciences must complement the comfort zones of the engineering discipline mostly grounded ion the physical sciences. If you think this sounds “too academic,” just bear in mind that considering the human and social factors might yet save your project or add an important element to your risk assessment.
“A project is never without risks,” said Daniela Van Well-Stam, co-author of “Project Risk Management ,” published by Kogan Page, adding that “performing risk analysis and management is actually necessary to maintain control over a project.” Other books refer to such analysis as “uncertainty analysis.”
Ahead of every project manager be it an industrial plant, the Olympics, a space shuttle project, an IT prototype or even a corporate anniversary celebration is an uncertainty in varying degrees of severity and likelihood.
The lesson learned is this: Engineering precision and predictive techniques must be complemented by a program on coming to grips with community, political even regulatory risks. When you do your homework, as proponents of some successful projects did, you can actually mitigate or completely eliminate the risks.
After all, even host communities would prefer to spend their time co-existing with a structure that promises them a brighter common future than to waste valuable time on the sidelines with screaming placards in opposition to an otherwise good project that has been poorly communicated.
Project managers who turn a “blind eye” to and dismiss political risks as a needless distraction to their perfect engineering marvel will get a surprise of their lives. But, if you heed the words of experienced project risk analysts and take to heart the wise counsel of veteran Ping de Jesus of flyover and NLEX fame, you will be glad you did.
Friday, February 17, 2006
Sunday, July 24, 2005
‘Go on offense when others retrench'
“Jack Welch and the 4Es of Leadership”
McGraw-Hill, 2005
This sounds like an unlikely advice in the latest book on the leadership style of former General Electric Chairman Jack Welch. After all, Mr. Welch is renowned to have a “rulebook” that the bottom 10 percent (of low performers) of the multinational giant “be fired every year.”
But, that’s the paradox of Welch and of how he views business, according to author Jeffrey A. Krames in this book “Jack Welch and the 4Es of Leadership.” Krames writes of his icon:
“You have to shrink in order to grow; you have to give up things in order to gain things. By eliminating jobs and closing unproductive factories … he was creating the means to reinvigorate the places that would spark the company’s transformation.”
Averse to keeping things hanging, Krames adds: “Welch understood that many apparent contradictions in business resolve in the face of a larger vision – and may not be contradictory at all.” This so-called propensity for giving low achievers their “walking papers” has not endeared Welch with professors of the finest graduate business schools – at least in the Philippines.
And yet this new book may provide the answer to the riddle, as it lists the 4E’S of leadership, saying: The 4E Leader has energy … energizes … has edge and … executes.
As the author describes the 4Es of leadership, one notes a consistent theme running through the discussion like a unifying thread. Jack Welch wants his leaders to have “energy” – the fuel that drives the business, the passion to get things done. He wants a leader who runs 95 miles per hour --75 miles elsewhere in the same book -- “in a 55-mile-an-hour world.” (Don’t try this inside the North Luzon Expressway!) And so he is impatient with those who lack passion for their work, and who wind up in the bottom ten percent in his organization.
The next attribute – the leader who energizes – is simply the logical consequence of a suitably driven leader, who then “sparks others to perform.” In this section, the theme recurs, quoting Peter Drucker: “One can only build on strength.” And those who are weak, reminiscent of the Darwinian “survival of the fittest,” must go.
Welch does not waste time on those who are weak links (or, pardon the pun, “weaklings”) – since how can you energize one who has no energy in the first place? I remember a training manager who dished out a homegrown philosophy with this bald statement: “Huwag magtiyagang maghanap ng kuto sa ulong kalbo!”
The Welch style acquires more edge as Author Krames discusses the last two qualities in the 4Es of Leadership – the Leader has edge and the Leader executes. The book confronts “people decisions” so that the firm retains the competitive “edge” – making the principle sound bland enough: “Use a differentiation system to keep the best and weed out the worst.” The author says it simply, downplaying the bloody process of thousands of heads rolling: “He cut costs relentlessly (including the payroll).”
Krames shows the results in two sentences: “When Welch took over, GE had revenues of about $25 billion. When he stepped down, GE was a $130 billion company.”
Ever emphasizing the need for passion and strength, the last E – the leader executes – should mean that the boss must have the managerial will to drive the company effort to its desired conclusion, meaning: positive results. The book emphasizes the need to improve the leader’s “execution quotient,” chalking up high scores in nothing less than the bottom line.
The book, meant to develop leaders around the 4Es Leadership Formula, succeeds in making us understand Mr. Welch better who actually had to adopt a “retrench” policy just so he can mount an aggressive “offense”. He narrates how the controversial retired GE Chairman likened his business team with Super Bowl winners or Olympic gold medalists with this obvious conclusion: He wants only the best in his team.
So the seeming ruthlessness, the apparent indifference to human dimensions are better understood now under the overall theme of “winning,” the title of Welch’s other book. The author, earlier in the book, gives a hint: “To Welch everything is about winning, winning in the marketplace, winning customers, winning new business, winning for shareholders.”
Come to think of it. A local business leader, when he took over a giant beverage company shocked the entire organization with downsizing decisions. Today, the company remains the most admired in Asia.
Is winning the only metric by which to measure the caliber of an executive? Or, changing the question, we ask: Can you forgive a CEO who, due to some other considerations, bring your firm down to bankruptcy? Is business a game, and heads roll as a natural consequence of the overweening desire to win?
Even philanthropists believe in the primacy of “doing well” as a pre-requisite to “doing good.” Read this book, wade through the many digressions of the author, and you will hit oil – or gold. You will have the answers, but you will also ask even more questions. Isn’t that the paradox of business?
McGraw-Hill, 2005
This sounds like an unlikely advice in the latest book on the leadership style of former General Electric Chairman Jack Welch. After all, Mr. Welch is renowned to have a “rulebook” that the bottom 10 percent (of low performers) of the multinational giant “be fired every year.”
But, that’s the paradox of Welch and of how he views business, according to author Jeffrey A. Krames in this book “Jack Welch and the 4Es of Leadership.” Krames writes of his icon:
“You have to shrink in order to grow; you have to give up things in order to gain things. By eliminating jobs and closing unproductive factories … he was creating the means to reinvigorate the places that would spark the company’s transformation.”
Averse to keeping things hanging, Krames adds: “Welch understood that many apparent contradictions in business resolve in the face of a larger vision – and may not be contradictory at all.” This so-called propensity for giving low achievers their “walking papers” has not endeared Welch with professors of the finest graduate business schools – at least in the Philippines.
And yet this new book may provide the answer to the riddle, as it lists the 4E’S of leadership, saying: The 4E Leader has energy … energizes … has edge and … executes.
As the author describes the 4Es of leadership, one notes a consistent theme running through the discussion like a unifying thread. Jack Welch wants his leaders to have “energy” – the fuel that drives the business, the passion to get things done. He wants a leader who runs 95 miles per hour --75 miles elsewhere in the same book -- “in a 55-mile-an-hour world.” (Don’t try this inside the North Luzon Expressway!) And so he is impatient with those who lack passion for their work, and who wind up in the bottom ten percent in his organization.
The next attribute – the leader who energizes – is simply the logical consequence of a suitably driven leader, who then “sparks others to perform.” In this section, the theme recurs, quoting Peter Drucker: “One can only build on strength.” And those who are weak, reminiscent of the Darwinian “survival of the fittest,” must go.
Welch does not waste time on those who are weak links (or, pardon the pun, “weaklings”) – since how can you energize one who has no energy in the first place? I remember a training manager who dished out a homegrown philosophy with this bald statement: “Huwag magtiyagang maghanap ng kuto sa ulong kalbo!”
The Welch style acquires more edge as Author Krames discusses the last two qualities in the 4Es of Leadership – the Leader has edge and the Leader executes. The book confronts “people decisions” so that the firm retains the competitive “edge” – making the principle sound bland enough: “Use a differentiation system to keep the best and weed out the worst.” The author says it simply, downplaying the bloody process of thousands of heads rolling: “He cut costs relentlessly (including the payroll).”
Krames shows the results in two sentences: “When Welch took over, GE had revenues of about $25 billion. When he stepped down, GE was a $130 billion company.”
Ever emphasizing the need for passion and strength, the last E – the leader executes – should mean that the boss must have the managerial will to drive the company effort to its desired conclusion, meaning: positive results. The book emphasizes the need to improve the leader’s “execution quotient,” chalking up high scores in nothing less than the bottom line.
The book, meant to develop leaders around the 4Es Leadership Formula, succeeds in making us understand Mr. Welch better who actually had to adopt a “retrench” policy just so he can mount an aggressive “offense”. He narrates how the controversial retired GE Chairman likened his business team with Super Bowl winners or Olympic gold medalists with this obvious conclusion: He wants only the best in his team.
So the seeming ruthlessness, the apparent indifference to human dimensions are better understood now under the overall theme of “winning,” the title of Welch’s other book. The author, earlier in the book, gives a hint: “To Welch everything is about winning, winning in the marketplace, winning customers, winning new business, winning for shareholders.”
Come to think of it. A local business leader, when he took over a giant beverage company shocked the entire organization with downsizing decisions. Today, the company remains the most admired in Asia.
Is winning the only metric by which to measure the caliber of an executive? Or, changing the question, we ask: Can you forgive a CEO who, due to some other considerations, bring your firm down to bankruptcy? Is business a game, and heads roll as a natural consequence of the overweening desire to win?
Even philanthropists believe in the primacy of “doing well” as a pre-requisite to “doing good.” Read this book, wade through the many digressions of the author, and you will hit oil – or gold. You will have the answers, but you will also ask even more questions. Isn’t that the paradox of business?
Sunday, July 10, 2005
Capturing the ‘moment’ to win, not to fail
“Lend Me Your Ears”
(Updated and Expanded Edition
By William Safire
W. W. Norton & Company, 2004
The attention of the entire country continues to be riveted on the speech of apology of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, delivered recently over nationwide television. What the speech sought to achieve, when the Head of State said “sorry” over what are now called the “Garci tapes” was not, however, achieved.
Instead of assuaging the feelings of both her disappointed allies and unrelentingly acerbic critics -- the speech triggered a series of rambunctious and chaotic Congressional hearings and emboldened a lynch mob with even shriller voices crying for her resignation.
The mishandling (?) also planted a poisoned idea to politicians with moist eyes for the threatened Presidency and for a Senate seat two years from now, and prompted an unflappable Susan Roces to give vent to pent up emotions with uncharacteristic bravado – thus leaving the rest of us wondering what went wrong. And asking: What could have gone right?
Observers were wondering why the Palace, with its vast information resources at its command, could not even muster a phone brigade programmed to provide support to the President right after her “confession.” In fact, the confession was totally unnecessary, but the Palace committee of wordsmiths woefully stumbled all over to string together contradictory statements, needless absolute statements, and a sophomoric line: “I will serve you to the best of my ability.”
Those of you who still doubt the power of rhetoric to make or break a political career or to espouse or frustrate an idea must now be convinced that a careless phrase thrown into a speech invites disaster.
Some observers volunteered the insight that the Palace wordsmiths patterned the GMA speech after the apology of Bill Clinton concerning his links and acts of indiscretion with Monica Lewinsky. If they did, they committed a grievous wrong failing to note the contrasting contexts between Bill’s very private act at the Oval Office and Gloria’s very public act speaking to the arbiter of a Presidential election.
And, if you read Clinton’s speech (the delivered version), you would note the deft hand of seasoned rhetorician. This brings me to speak to you about “Lend Me Your Ears,” a book that I picked out at a cozy bookstore, Ink & Stone. This is actually the updated and expanded edition of “Great Speeches in History” selected by noted rhetoric expert and writer William Safire. The earlier edition was published in 1983.
Editor Safire says in his “introductory address” in this book: “What makes a great speech? Occasion. There comes a dramatic moment in the life of a person or a party or a nation that cries out for the uplift and release of a speech. Someone is called upon to articulate the hope, pride, or grief of all… Some great occasions are frittered away with pedestrian addresses.”
If you have a copy of the President’s speech, and you get hold of the “delivered version” of Clinton’s piece, you will note similarities – and contrasts. One difference is this calibrated phrase from Clinton: “I know that my public comments and my silence about this matter gave a false impression. I misled people, including even my wife. I deeply regret that.” Isn’t it clear that Clinton is apologizing about the consequences of his silence? Compare that with the lachrymose phrasing of GMA’s speech -- “Pinagsisihan ko ito ng lubos,” not even making clear what she is repenting of.
The book also includes the “undelivered” version of the Clinton apology which the former American President had the good sense to reject it. GMA’s contrite speech sounds like this other speech – not thanks to her advisers.
Three undelivered speeches are actually featured in this anthology of 1,156 pages, plus rhetorical pieces classified as memorials and patriotic speeches, war and revolution rhetorical classics, tributes and eulogies, debates and argumentation, trials, gallows and farewell speeches, sermons, inspirational speeches, lectures and instructive speeches, talks on social responsibility, media speeches, political pieces, and commencement addresses.
The speeches date to as far back as the time of Pericles years before Christ and as recent as Tony Blair’s spirited exhortation to fight terrorism right after 9/11. The “moment” cited by Author Safire has been captured by the masters of the spoken word. And when such a moment is “seized,” the speaker is rewarded – if not public support in his time and generation – with a special place in history. And be anthologized to join the ranks of “great speeches” and compelling speakers.
This book, obviously, is a timely read for Palace insiders. Executives in the corporate world can also keep this thick book handy when the moment comes to rally the corporate troops – not with a bland memo – with a soul-stirring speech.
(Updated and Expanded Edition
By William Safire
W. W. Norton & Company, 2004
The attention of the entire country continues to be riveted on the speech of apology of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, delivered recently over nationwide television. What the speech sought to achieve, when the Head of State said “sorry” over what are now called the “Garci tapes” was not, however, achieved.
Instead of assuaging the feelings of both her disappointed allies and unrelentingly acerbic critics -- the speech triggered a series of rambunctious and chaotic Congressional hearings and emboldened a lynch mob with even shriller voices crying for her resignation.
The mishandling (?) also planted a poisoned idea to politicians with moist eyes for the threatened Presidency and for a Senate seat two years from now, and prompted an unflappable Susan Roces to give vent to pent up emotions with uncharacteristic bravado – thus leaving the rest of us wondering what went wrong. And asking: What could have gone right?
Observers were wondering why the Palace, with its vast information resources at its command, could not even muster a phone brigade programmed to provide support to the President right after her “confession.” In fact, the confession was totally unnecessary, but the Palace committee of wordsmiths woefully stumbled all over to string together contradictory statements, needless absolute statements, and a sophomoric line: “I will serve you to the best of my ability.”
Those of you who still doubt the power of rhetoric to make or break a political career or to espouse or frustrate an idea must now be convinced that a careless phrase thrown into a speech invites disaster.
Some observers volunteered the insight that the Palace wordsmiths patterned the GMA speech after the apology of Bill Clinton concerning his links and acts of indiscretion with Monica Lewinsky. If they did, they committed a grievous wrong failing to note the contrasting contexts between Bill’s very private act at the Oval Office and Gloria’s very public act speaking to the arbiter of a Presidential election.
And, if you read Clinton’s speech (the delivered version), you would note the deft hand of seasoned rhetorician. This brings me to speak to you about “Lend Me Your Ears,” a book that I picked out at a cozy bookstore, Ink & Stone. This is actually the updated and expanded edition of “Great Speeches in History” selected by noted rhetoric expert and writer William Safire. The earlier edition was published in 1983.
Editor Safire says in his “introductory address” in this book: “What makes a great speech? Occasion. There comes a dramatic moment in the life of a person or a party or a nation that cries out for the uplift and release of a speech. Someone is called upon to articulate the hope, pride, or grief of all… Some great occasions are frittered away with pedestrian addresses.”
If you have a copy of the President’s speech, and you get hold of the “delivered version” of Clinton’s piece, you will note similarities – and contrasts. One difference is this calibrated phrase from Clinton: “I know that my public comments and my silence about this matter gave a false impression. I misled people, including even my wife. I deeply regret that.” Isn’t it clear that Clinton is apologizing about the consequences of his silence? Compare that with the lachrymose phrasing of GMA’s speech -- “Pinagsisihan ko ito ng lubos,” not even making clear what she is repenting of.
The book also includes the “undelivered” version of the Clinton apology which the former American President had the good sense to reject it. GMA’s contrite speech sounds like this other speech – not thanks to her advisers.
Three undelivered speeches are actually featured in this anthology of 1,156 pages, plus rhetorical pieces classified as memorials and patriotic speeches, war and revolution rhetorical classics, tributes and eulogies, debates and argumentation, trials, gallows and farewell speeches, sermons, inspirational speeches, lectures and instructive speeches, talks on social responsibility, media speeches, political pieces, and commencement addresses.
The speeches date to as far back as the time of Pericles years before Christ and as recent as Tony Blair’s spirited exhortation to fight terrorism right after 9/11. The “moment” cited by Author Safire has been captured by the masters of the spoken word. And when such a moment is “seized,” the speaker is rewarded – if not public support in his time and generation – with a special place in history. And be anthologized to join the ranks of “great speeches” and compelling speakers.
This book, obviously, is a timely read for Palace insiders. Executives in the corporate world can also keep this thick book handy when the moment comes to rally the corporate troops – not with a bland memo – with a soul-stirring speech.
Sunday, June 19, 2005
Key to real success: ‘Bulletproof integrity’
“Integrity Is All You’ve Got”
By Karl Eller
McGraw-Hill,2005
WITHOUT meaning to, this book is as timely as the headlines in print and broadcast media in this part of the world. I am referring to the political and ethical dilemma our head of state has been thrown into-to speak or not to speak about wiretapped voices. And to speak or not to speak the truth about her kin’s involvement in “jueteng” an illegal numbers game.
From this book, here’s a quote that may show her the light at the end of a dark tunnel. It begins with a question: “What should you do when your reputation takes a major hit?”
Answer: “Don’t hide, deny, dissemble or fake the truth. Above all, don’t lie. Face the facts. Speak immediately and frankly. Nothing disarms your critics as being totally candid and quickly correcting whatever went wrong.”
The author says it simply on other page: “A straight shooter is someone who does what’s right and keeps his or her world.”
This book is entitled, “Integrity Is All You’ve Got,” and yet it turns out to be an insightful guide for entrepreneurs-and leaders-about selling, creativity, hammering out win-win formulas, opportunity-seeking, making connections, the joy of giving-and, of course, success because (not in spite of) integrity.
Karl Eller, a billionaire who made good in the billboards business, tells his story with distilled truths. You sit up and listen, because the insights come from someone who, in his words, has his “follies, takeoffs, crashes, comebacks and final reckoning.”
It is one thing to talk about integrity or earning trust-but it’s another to live a life of complete honesty.
The author, after whom a school of management was named, has lived integrity first and now is talking about it.
In other words, unlike many people we know, he has remarkably gone beyond paying lip service to this much desired virtue.
Speaking of trust, Eller is laconic: “Your handshake matches the tightest contract drawn up by the fanciest law firm in town.”
“I’ve been around long enough to confirm that integrity is key to business life and success. Integrity is what allows you and me to trust each other. Without it, we begin suspecting and then fearing each other , and soon bad things happen.”
Written on a prominent wall at the Eller College of Management is a quote from the author:
“Without integrity, motivation is dangerous: without motivation, capacity is impotent; without capacity, understanding is limited; without understanding, knowledge is meaningless; without knowledge, experience is blind.”
The book laments that “the priority of MBA student seems to be learning a thousand ways to kill your competitors, rather than the one true way to really succeed – develop bulletproof integrity.”
At the home front, this seems to be not the case. My alma mater, the Asian Institute of Management, has ethics in its curriculum – so with other major graduate business schools.
While the author devotes an entire discussion titled “Integrity is your only collateral,” he dishes out words of wisdom on succeeding as an entrepreneur, and yet still peppered with ideas on forthrightness and earning trust.
For salesman, he has a brilliant one-liner: “Love selling and sell what you love.”
For those having a problem with optimism, he quotes Winston Churchill: “A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”
And idea makers, this quote is graphic: “Minds are like parachutes; they work only when open.”
He has advice for CEOs who think they can take over any company, even a different industry and erroneously think they can succeed: “If you’re going to take over a business, you had best arrive with a real understanding of what makes it work.”
“I learned that lesson the hard way,” he says, and he relates heartbreaking stories when he lost billions of dollars because of disastrous decisions.
What about the seeming staple of entrepreneurs – luck? Quoting his friend, Mort Feinberg, he writes: “You need to keep running, so that when the train comes by you’re ready to jump on. If you keep missing the train, you have no one but yourself to blame.”
This book is for rising managers – and for CEOs who must still run their businesses and are daily confronted with ethical decisions.
The book also throws in nuggets of wisdom on what makes business a calling and an exciting life’s work.
After giving us the impression that everything is business to him, using all his waking hours thinking and concluding business deals, he dishes out a life-saving advice. He asks: “How do you keep failure from wrecking your life?
His answer could prevent a disastrous bout with depression: “Business is only part of life, and not the most important. Your family, your friends, role as citizen of your community and nation – these are what counts.”
After reading this book, remember the truth in Oliver Wendell Holmes’ quote: “Man’s mind, once stretched by a new idea, never goes back to its original dimension.”
By Karl Eller
McGraw-Hill,2005
WITHOUT meaning to, this book is as timely as the headlines in print and broadcast media in this part of the world. I am referring to the political and ethical dilemma our head of state has been thrown into-to speak or not to speak about wiretapped voices. And to speak or not to speak the truth about her kin’s involvement in “jueteng” an illegal numbers game.
From this book, here’s a quote that may show her the light at the end of a dark tunnel. It begins with a question: “What should you do when your reputation takes a major hit?”
Answer: “Don’t hide, deny, dissemble or fake the truth. Above all, don’t lie. Face the facts. Speak immediately and frankly. Nothing disarms your critics as being totally candid and quickly correcting whatever went wrong.”
The author says it simply on other page: “A straight shooter is someone who does what’s right and keeps his or her world.”
This book is entitled, “Integrity Is All You’ve Got,” and yet it turns out to be an insightful guide for entrepreneurs-and leaders-about selling, creativity, hammering out win-win formulas, opportunity-seeking, making connections, the joy of giving-and, of course, success because (not in spite of) integrity.
Karl Eller, a billionaire who made good in the billboards business, tells his story with distilled truths. You sit up and listen, because the insights come from someone who, in his words, has his “follies, takeoffs, crashes, comebacks and final reckoning.”
It is one thing to talk about integrity or earning trust-but it’s another to live a life of complete honesty.
The author, after whom a school of management was named, has lived integrity first and now is talking about it.
In other words, unlike many people we know, he has remarkably gone beyond paying lip service to this much desired virtue.
Speaking of trust, Eller is laconic: “Your handshake matches the tightest contract drawn up by the fanciest law firm in town.”
“I’ve been around long enough to confirm that integrity is key to business life and success. Integrity is what allows you and me to trust each other. Without it, we begin suspecting and then fearing each other , and soon bad things happen.”
Written on a prominent wall at the Eller College of Management is a quote from the author:
“Without integrity, motivation is dangerous: without motivation, capacity is impotent; without capacity, understanding is limited; without understanding, knowledge is meaningless; without knowledge, experience is blind.”
The book laments that “the priority of MBA student seems to be learning a thousand ways to kill your competitors, rather than the one true way to really succeed – develop bulletproof integrity.”
At the home front, this seems to be not the case. My alma mater, the Asian Institute of Management, has ethics in its curriculum – so with other major graduate business schools.
While the author devotes an entire discussion titled “Integrity is your only collateral,” he dishes out words of wisdom on succeeding as an entrepreneur, and yet still peppered with ideas on forthrightness and earning trust.
For salesman, he has a brilliant one-liner: “Love selling and sell what you love.”
For those having a problem with optimism, he quotes Winston Churchill: “A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”
And idea makers, this quote is graphic: “Minds are like parachutes; they work only when open.”
He has advice for CEOs who think they can take over any company, even a different industry and erroneously think they can succeed: “If you’re going to take over a business, you had best arrive with a real understanding of what makes it work.”
“I learned that lesson the hard way,” he says, and he relates heartbreaking stories when he lost billions of dollars because of disastrous decisions.
What about the seeming staple of entrepreneurs – luck? Quoting his friend, Mort Feinberg, he writes: “You need to keep running, so that when the train comes by you’re ready to jump on. If you keep missing the train, you have no one but yourself to blame.”
This book is for rising managers – and for CEOs who must still run their businesses and are daily confronted with ethical decisions.
The book also throws in nuggets of wisdom on what makes business a calling and an exciting life’s work.
After giving us the impression that everything is business to him, using all his waking hours thinking and concluding business deals, he dishes out a life-saving advice. He asks: “How do you keep failure from wrecking your life?
His answer could prevent a disastrous bout with depression: “Business is only part of life, and not the most important. Your family, your friends, role as citizen of your community and nation – these are what counts.”
After reading this book, remember the truth in Oliver Wendell Holmes’ quote: “Man’s mind, once stretched by a new idea, never goes back to its original dimension.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)