Creativity in action

May 2, 2018

Winter of discontentThe Government suffered a defeat yesterday (appropriately, the 1st of May) brought about by the creative actions of two former ministers.  

The vote was over the proposed measures against money laundering by the Government, and considered by opponents to be weak on disclosures from well-known territories including the British Virgin Islands and Cayman Islands. This in turn followed revelations in what became known as the Panama papers.

The leaders (or ring-leaders, from another perspective) of the opposition were an unlikely couple, a former labour cabinet member, and Andrew Mitchell, a former conservative international development secretary. Both are currently out of favour.

Both have reputations of independence of thought and strong enough characters to take on all-comers in causes they believe in. However, without context, it is hard to imagine them plotting together.

The context, and the creativity of their actions deserves study. According to The Guardian, [May 2nd 2018] Mitchell ‘has frequently worked across party-lines’ , requiring independence and resilience in bucketloads. Hodge was a powerful and outspoken chair of the publics account committee for five years.

The strategy they adapted was aimed at protecting recent back-bench MPs from rebelling, as they were easier targets for political influences from the Government heavies (aka Whips). Instead, they concentrated on influential former ministers who were less vulnerable, and some with experience as members of the awkward squad opposing government policy. Mitchell was able to deploy an extra argument, that their proposals were a reviving of plans under preparation in 2015 by the former conservative leader (David Cameron).

In a nutshell, this was no knee-jerk reaction by two discontinued ex-ministers. It was a well-thought out plan which required both creative thinking and a lot of grunt work in the background.

 

 

 


The society we deserve

April 6, 2018

 

 

Politician David Lammy gives a new twist to the maxim Leaders We Deserve
This week [April 1-6, 2018] has seen an outbreak of violent deaths through knife crimes in London. It became a national story with social and political dimensions.
Grieving relatives told harrowing stories of children killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Sociologists vied with politicians to extract some morsel of digestible sense. Mostly, the views were as old as the problems of violence. No-one mentioned the story of Cain and Able, although it is not difficult to construct an explanation about the uncontrollable and wrathful anger of a spurned child in later life.
I did not expect much from radio-chat shows running out of the need for new experts, and short on fresh ideas. To my surprise, the labour politician David Lammy exceeded my expectations.
David Lammy is MP for Tottenham, a socially deprived  inner London constituency where he was born and grew up. In an interview on BBC Radio 4 he pointed angrily at the four violent deaths this year in his own constituency, and the failure of government and authorities (in his opinion) to act. He is seeking  consensual all-party commitment to action.
His long campaigning have led him to conclusions about the impact of availability of drugs on London’s streets (‘as easy as ordering a pizza’,) gang culture, no social prospects for young people on the Capital’s poorest estates, and leadership which seems to be arable to act. His anger is as much against London’s socialist mayor as against the Conservative and former Conservative/Social Democratic governments.
His abilities helped him win scholarships and eventually places at London University and Harvard. He has supported Labour’s leader Jeremy Corbyn, while preferring to remain a back-bench MP, seeing it giving him more independence in his political campaigns. on behalf of his constituency and his passionate campaigns against social inequality.
In the radio interview, The vivid turn of phrase which caught my attention was that in a democracy ‘we get the society we deserve’. Subscribers to LWD will see the fresh insights this provides to the many posts on Leaders we deserve, over the last decade.

Eddie Jones and why leaders over-reach

March 15, 2018

Eddie Jones

A video of England rugby coach Eddie Jones addressing a group of sponsors has reached the public. It makes an interesting case of a successful leader setting himself up to fail.

 

Background

The video was recorded several months ago. Eddie Jones is currently the coach of the England (male) rugby team. His appointment in 2015 was controversial. The premier national teams of the northern hemisphere have increasingly selected from coaches the most successful rugby nations. In practice this means coaches from New Zealand and the other Southern Hemisphere countries Australia and South Africa.

After a period of relative under-performing, England chose Eddie Jones, a colourful character of Australian, Japanese and American origins.
Jones played rugby to state level in Australia.. He then embarked on a coaching career mostly with spectacular successes, but not without the occasional setback. As coach of Australia he stared well but a series of successive losses ended his contract. His last loss was to Wales, a point which may have some further relevance.

He achieved success again as national coach to Japan. In rugby-playing terms, Japan is a minor nation. It also lacks an adequate supply of monstrous players in a game which has evolved to require high bulk and mobility. His style is a passionate one, invoking pride in his teams of national and cultural values. Rather than import hefty Samoans, he introduced a fearless flyweight style of play which brought shock wins and delighted spectators during the World Cup of 2015.
This track record, and Japan’s showing resulted in his appointment as England coach.

His initial impact was spectacular, and the team began to show potential to become a serious challenger for the next world cup. At the time of the video Jones could point to a remarkable turnaround of fortunes in results. His leadership impact was clearly a significant factor.
A run of twenty three matches was ended by a firy Irish team, which was also progressing well including a win over the near invincible New Zealand All Blacks.
In this summary I draw attention to the loss to Wales which coincided with Jones losing his Australian post, and then to the recent loss to Ireland which ended his winning streak.

The video

In the video, Jones is heard lauding his own success in converting Japan into an exciting new force in world rugby. He then turns to the defeat by Ireland.

“We’ve played 23 Tests and we’ve only lost one Test to the scummy Irish,” he told his audience. “I’m still dirty about that game, but we’ll get that back, don’t worry. We’ve got them next year at home so don’t worry, we’ll get that back.”

Jones was also recorded discussing Wales in the context of Japan Under‑20s losing 125-0 against their Welsh counterparts shortly after he took over as the Japan head coach in 2012. “Wales. Who knows Wales? Are there any Welsh people here? So it’s this little shit place that has got three million people. Three million!”

Dilemmas of leadership
Another dilemma of leadership. When a leader starts believing his or herself-constructed story. It has contributed to the aura around the leader. Some might call it the evidence of charisma. The leader flushed with success, acts out the self-image in terms which become dismissed as bluster or dismissive of others.

Remind you of any other leader?

Do these words remind you of another leader, often in the news for his provocative statements?

“I’m still dirty about that game, but we’ll get that back, don’t worry. We’ve got them next year at home so don’t worry, we’ll get that back.”

If so, what more general conclusions can we draw from the case of Eddie Jones? And is it coincidence that his team plays that “scummy team Ireland” this weekend, a team which has already won the six-nations championship from England this year, regardless of the result?


Who will challenge mighty Magnus?

March 6, 2018

 

 

Next Saturday, [March 10, 2018] eight top Grandmasters will start their Candidates Tournament in Berlin. The winner will gain the right to challenge Magnus Carlsen for the World Chess Championship crown, in a match to be played in November in London.

Magnus is the successor to a line of great players, often childhood prodigies, to become world champion, While there are others of his own generation, and emerging wunderkind able to complete, will any be strong enough to wrest the crown from him?

It is possible, but would be a surprise. The long-established ranking system at chess works pretty well.

If you think chess is boring and time-consuming, so do some innovators inside the game, who are playing around with the rules to cope with the invasion of technology into the game (or sport, as it controversially likes to term itself). Gone are the matches in which after a day’s play,, one of the papers would seal and move, and spend much of the night analysing what next to do. A century ago, chess clocks were introduced. Then all-night study was carried out replaced by seconds doing the hard-lifting. Then with the advent of powerful chess computers, overnight play withered and died.

Now, if a game seems to be in danger of extending into the night, the speed of play is increased, leading to a survival of the most agile and intuitively gifted. Matches are increasingly tailored to audiences watching on the web.

Today, I came across a humorous account of ten rules for introducing morality into computers (whose programmes are already capable of beating even Magnus). One of the computer programmes did a silicon bladed destruction job on the great champion Gary Kasparov. One of the rules of morality was for the IT chess computers to ‘let Gary win from time to time’.

Don’t know if the computers are quite ready to appreciate the humour.img_08241

 

 


Maplins and Toys R Us provide grim examples of creative destruction

March 3, 2018

 

In February 2018, the Beast from the East brings weather misery to much of the United Kingdom. There is economic misery too, as two high-profile retailers go into administration

Maplins, a major electronics retailer with over 200 stores and 2,300 staff in the UK has collapsed into administration. Attempts to find a buyer have so far failed.

Toys R Us, whose UK organisation is of similar scale, has around 100 stores and 3000 staff. The parent US company has filed for bankruptcy protection last September. The UK arm needed a deal with the Pension Protection Fund (PPF) in December [2017] to rescue its retirement scheme

Both firms provide examples of Creative Destruction, Schumpeter’s chilling term for the unintended consequences of major economic changes and technological ‘progress’.

 

The opening up of new markets and the organizational development from the craft shop and factory to such concerns as US Steel illustrate the process of industrial mutation that incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one … [The process] must be seen in its role in the perennial gale of creative destruction; it cannot be understood on the hypothesis that there is a perennial lull.

— Joseph Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 1942

Toys R Us appears to have failed to keep up with changes in the market, and particularly with the impact of the web-based suppliers, particularly the mighty Amazon. Maplin, appear to have been more vigorous in efforts to keep pace with technological developments. Nevertheless, the harsh trading environment since the economic turmoil of a decade ago eventually took its toll.

More detailed case analyses will probably identify missed opportunities for the two firms. Toys R Us appears to have been slow to appreciate the revolutionary impact of the web for retailers, and the benefits accruing to the mighty Amazon operation.

One commentator argued that Marlins failed to maintain stock levels in its stores. I am not convinced about that. The current concept of slimmed-down supply chains encourages Just In Time practices.


Red Glory. Manchester United and Me, by Martin Edwards

February 7, 2018

Red Glory. Manchester United and Me, by Martin Edwards

Book Review

I learned about this autobiographic story late last year  through an event organised through Simply Books of Bramhall. For personal reasons, I went along to meet the author. It had been nearly thirty years since we had last met. We had both attended a dinner at Manchester Business School. The main guest of the evening was Harold Wilson, the former Prime Minister who was a life-long Huddersfield Town supporter. We both vaguely remembered the event.
In Red Glory, Martin Edwards writes as a former chairman of Manchester United Football Club over the golden period of the club’s sporting success. As Peter Schmeichel put it in his foreword to the book, it was the period when United ‘became the biggest and best club on the planet’.
The book covers ground much of which will be familiar to MUFC fans, as legendary in this footballing city. I already knew how Matt Busby escaped death in the Munich air disaster to go on and rebuild the broken team. But nuggets in the book are new. I did not know, for example, that Sir Matt was later granted rights to what became the famed Superstore at Old Trafford. Edward estimates Busby’s assets from these arrangements amounted to a hundred million pounds market value by 1998.

One anecdote describes the negotiation between the young Chairman of Manchester United and the chairman of Leeds United. The style was firm, but not blustering. Schmeichel confirms it matches Edwards’ typical approach to dealing with negotiations.  I like it as a counter illustration to the mythology of deal-making according to Donald Trump.

Without doubt, the book will appeal to fans and historians of Manchester United Football Club. I have no hesitation in recommending it to students of football for insights into how a seriously competent leader thanks and acts, written in such a readable fashion.

Acknowledgement: To Simply Books, for organising the book-signing event, and providing the image. [Your Editor is the somewhat shorter figure on the left.]


State of the Union address. Teleprompter Trump quietens Twitter Trump for the occasion.

January 31, 2018

Child's pram

I was awakened by a familiar voice from my bedside radio. It was that of the President of the United States (POTUS) who was half way through his State of the Union Speech (SOTU).

That’s at least one acronym too many  for an opening paragraph. It least it will remind me of what the acronyms stand for, in the various bits of news already filtering through the social media sites.

I listened as POTUS warmed to his task. After each sound bite (roughly, after each sentence ) he paused to tumultuous applause. I remembered. He is addressing the congregated masses of the Senate and House of Representatives in some pomp. Puzzled at the electrifying effect his words were having, I abandoned my security blankets and headed for a view of the proceedings courtesy of BBC news (presumably by courtesy of some US networking. Hey, that’s the special relationship for you, folks.)

On the screen, Donald is doing something rare and wonderful. He is stringing words together in a more than passable imitation of the English Language. He is, you might say, on message. This departure from his normal style has not appeared to weaken its rapturous reception. Before my eyes , I see the hypnotic state of the delighted audience as the promises fall from his lips.

There is a cornucopia of promises pouring forth. They are jostling for reality, each being another chunk of the American dream realised. Evil drug-masters will be caught. And imprisoned and never released. Guantanamo Bay will be rescued from closure. The Military will never be hamstrung for lack of funding. At home, Republicans and Democrats alike will work to gather the achieve these steps towards making America Great Again (MAGA, the third and greatest of parts of the Holy Triacronym ).

The desolated infrastructure will be rebuilt with American heart, American hands and American grit (as someone earlier also said) with a budget call of $1.5 trillion left over from walls and bombs.

And each offer was greeted by a vast multitude, more than anyone else’s multitude. But there is more to come. The POTUS has assembled heroes and victims of failed heroes to be honoured for the courage of their loved ones or themselves. A victim of North Korean torture was given special place, as he waved his crutches defiantly to even more thunderous applause.

A part of my sleep-befuddled brain was telling me this is not quite right. Why, persisted the thought, would his political opponents not baulk a little at coming across with permission to spend the odd $1.5 trillion to MAGA? After all, these near-treacherous Democrats were continuing to hold up progress with the possibility of crash and burn of a functioning administration in weeks.

A clue came from the post-mortem. It is one of the oldest theatrical tricks of all. Get your supporters in the front rows and their cheers around out the jeers of opponents. The unanimous admiration was confined the sectors of Republicans entrusted as cheerleaders. Elsewhere, as one reporter put it, ‘Democrats sat or stood in stony silence’. They appeared to have hissed as the retention of the infamous Guantanamo Bay complex.

Indeed this is much to reflect on. The absences as well as the presences. The enemies to be confounded were essentialized as North Korea, but no mention of Russia. The bid for internal harmony on Capital Hill, but no mention of steps which might be leading to a POTUS impeachment.

Culturally, I had trouble with the speech, but the man showed his skills as a consummate showman, yes, even one with the dangerous gift of charismatic impact. Of his predecessors, he reminded me most of the long-departed Billy Graham. I wanted him to heal that North Korean hero on the spot.

This was Teleprompter Trump, as a BBC reporter put it, who went on to speculate how long it will be, before Twitter Trump escapes again.