James Drogan

I have been struck by a couple of articles that I have read over the last few days.  Struck in the sense that first, "Somewhere over the rainbow" from the January 26th - February 1st issue of The Economist, represents a view of state of the world that seems to be dramatically at variance with the view that one would form from reading and listening to MSM (main stream media).

"In a week of financial uncertainty we look behind the headlines to a world that is unexpectedly prosperous and peaceful"

This view is, and perhaps I'm too cynical here, not what sells newspapers and gets listeners to tune in to the talk shows.  In a sense, MSM is becoming little more than a sophisticated set of fire engine chasers.   That's not what we need.  We need to better understand the world and MSM is not very helpful in that regard.

Second,"Waving Goodbye to Hegemony" in the  January 27th New York Times Magazine postulates a useful, in the sense that it should stir thinking and discussion, alternative future.

'Just a few years ago, America’s hold on global power seemed unshakable. But a lot has changed while we’ve been in Iraq — and the next president is going to be dealing with not only a triumphant China and a retooled Europe but also the quiet rise of a ‘‘second world.’’'

This also seems to go against the grain of MSM thinking. 

Reality bites (as those who have dabbled in synthetic investments are discovering), but must nevertheless be dealt with.  Wishing doesn't make things true.

What is and will be true is function of the quality of one's ability to sense, interpret, decide, act, and learn.  The responsibility for these abilities is increasingly falling to the individual.

From Boing Boing comes "Library of Congress dumps a ton o' pix on Flickr," a brilliant example, I think, of harnessing knowledge through the 'net to create a greater level of understanding.

Kudos to the Library of Congress. 

The photos can be found here.   They are from the WW II era.

From Greg Mankiw's blog comes this article, repeated here in its entirety.

"NY Times columnist David Brooks writes:

One of the best pieces of career advice I ever got is: Interview three people every day. If you try to write about politics without interviewing policy makers, you’ll wind up spewing all sorts of nonsense.

Brooks was not talking about economists in particular, but this piece of wisdom can be taken as a critique of much of the economics profession. Many economists who write about policy rarely, if ever, encounter actual policymakers. Instead, they prefer to sit in the comfort of their ivory tower offices. (I know I do.)

I wonder how different the economics profession would be if economists were expected to do a year of service outside of academia or, at the very least, if university hiring committees rewarded a year of real-world experience as the equivalent of, say, a couple of academic publications. My conjecture is that the profession would be less creative but more useful."

It's not just the economists that need a taste of the real world on a regular basis, but all policy makers and, beyond them, all teachers. 

Re Conversations with Dave.

I don’t take a lot of stock in miracles, but I do understand the notion of chance and that chance has favored me in many ways.

By chance,

1. I was born in the US
2. of parents of modest means,
3. in a small, rural community
4. which instilled in me fundamental values of fair play and hard work.
5. I graduate from high school in 1960 when the draft was in place,
6. but went to Southern Illinois (after being rejected by West Point, Annapolis, and Colorado Springs),
7. then got married,
8. then became pregnant,
9. and was not drafted to Vietnam.
10. I joined IBM (the first to offer a job to a very pregnant man and woman)
11. and found myself as a programmer the year after System 360 was announced.
12. I installed serial number 13 of the IBM Data Acquisition and Process Control System to control pipeline gas flow
13. and was a member of the team that installed the first online Service Order Retrieval and Distribution System in the global telephone industry.
14. I became a IBM salesman in 1969 when IBM unbundled
15. and, over the course of four years, earned six Hundred Percent Club pins and a Golden Circle.
16. I became IBM’s global expert in the railroad industry,
17. becoming associated with a number of first-of-a-kind projects and was on the forefront of taking Transportation Industry Marketing into the field of logistics.
18. I was a member of the second set of IBM Consulting Group Principals,
19. cutting my management teeth establishing the Freight Consulting Group.
20. I survived the restructure of IBM in the early 1990s – going from the heady days of the late 1960s through the nadir of the early 1990s and emerging in the late 1990s.
21. I retired from IBM at about the right time and found my way into higher education as a teacher involved in the governance of academic centers
22. and meeting, and continuing to meet, interesting people with interesting opportunities.
23. All the while I have remained married to the same woman, with whom I’ve raised three great children who, in turn, have brought into the world two great grandchildren.
24. My physical, mental, and spiritual health is good, my debts modest, my outlook positive, my friends true.

Re An Extended Conversation with Dave

Let me set the stage for this. What follows is an edited conversation between Dave and me that was prompted, as you will soon see, by a simple inquiry on his part. This simple start blossomed into a rather rich dialogue which contains, as I see it, a number of points worthy of consideration, especially by that small cadre of my students who look in on droganbloggin from time to time.

Dave: November 7, 2007

"You there and swamped. Haven't had Drogan ping in a while."

Me: November 8, 2007

"Things are okay down here. I’m just busy on a number of fronts -- online class running, prepping for three spring classes, writing a paper for a February conference, kids coming down, Thanksgiving away, swing dance lessons with my bride (no demos available), governance activities at the college. I was looking for a bit of respite from all this. Mary and I think we’re both awfully busy (she just took a test for a certification in oncology and will be running the 5K Turkey Trot in Troy over the holiday) for a couple of people in their mid-60s.

And I don’t work the hours I once did; averaging 44 hours per week through the first 43 weeks of this year versus 53 hours per week last year. Part of this is a lot of down time during the weeks of surgery and recovery this year; part of it is thrill of the chase is not there like it used to be; part of it is I’m not running at the energy levels I once was.

Ever Onward.

Dave: November 11, 2007

"Sounds like things are going pretty well. Your last paragraph sparked off some associated thoughts. Not all at once either but a slow cascade with a little reflection.

1rst pass - an old Heinlein quote came to mind. "It's amazing how much the supposed wisdom of age resembles being too tired to care".

Could leave it there having implicitly agreed with your assessment but, while there's some real truth in the observation, it struck me that more is involved. Partly my own experiences and partly others, including watching yours. To wit - I haven't noticed any serious diminuation in your energy levels (btw is formal hours the best or only metric ?). So 2nd pass - been there, done that. After a sufficient level of experience with banging your head against the wall and tilting at windmills one gets more than a little jaded. Is that being tired or getting jaded ? The Aging Hero Syndrome - among combat vets the ones with real panic in their eyes are the ones headed into their 2nd big fight. Imagine the aging war hero with all the medals and fights then who's headed into his 10th or 20th and knows what this'll cost. Drums, bugles and flags work for a while, possibly a long while but eventually you get smart about the consequences and chances of sucess. Then it gets really hard to summon up the "energy" to attack another problem when experiences tells you that it's going to be hard, frustrating and likely futile. Finding a way to summon the minimal energy becomes the challenge.

3rs pass - my deepest reflection, perhaps the most profound (at least relatively) is that one's priorities shift, a lot. From getting in the fight, winning, conquering challenges, making a difference, whatever to more personal, or even spiritual, goals. Whatever form they might take. After you've done all the youthful and inexperienced things you shift to wanting to make a difference for at least some wider constituency. Then to make a contribution. Finally, after having done that, it seems to me you settle back into the most fundamental concerns.

Not sure how to describe it but maybe, "what's your ground" is a start. That is what you do you value, appreciate and savor ? What things do you appreciate and take satisfaction in. Can you learn to notice and then become aware of and then appreciate a poem, a sunset, a symphony, a good piece of work, your friends ? Some folks never leave the first stage and that's fine for them. More power to them and whatever drives them. More folks lead rich and productive lives focued on their contributions,their civic responsiblities so to speak and live out their lives focused on pursuing that sort of accomplishment.

But eventually, given long enough and enough achieved, all individually defined and experienced, you come to these simpler, harder and deeper questions.

A last observation - it seems to me that you've developed a profound satisfaction and commitment to teaching your students as best you can. And not just about the technician's view of the world but about the broader and deeper issues they need to learn. That would fit the model perhaps ?

Me: November 12, 2007

"This is perhaps one of the best – clear, compelling, insightful, provocative – bits you have ever written.

I would like, with your approval and some editing, to post this exchange on my blog. There are some who tune in to droganbloggin on a regular basis that might find it of interest.

No, formal hours are not the best or only metric. And the mind, of course, never seems to really shut down. This reminds me of a few lines from an article in the New York Times regarding Edward Albee (“Albee the Enigma, Now the Inescapable,” Jesse Green, November 11, 2002).

‘It would certainly be hard to imagine a less romantic description of the writing process: One day he finds himself “knocked up” with a play that had been gestating unbeknownst. Then he merely “delivers” or transcribes it, pretty much intact.’

I sometimes think that’s how my mind works, brooding and musing in the background, then the words come out. That time is never counted in the formal hours.

I’ve often said that all that matters is to be invited back to fight the next battle. If that happens, then everything else – money, reputation, opportunities – seems to take care of itself.

So, the metric that counts for me is being invited back.

Heinlein’s quote is quite something, isn’t it? As I have gotten older, there seems to be a declining number of really important things. Yet, I never was as interested in aspects of foreign policy, economics, and sociology as I am today. Perhaps this represents the recasting of old issues in new, for me, paradigms. Be that as it may, one can enjoy the taste and aroma of the wine as well as its provenance. I think I’ll just enjoy the taste and aroma. Sinatra’s A Very Good Year suddenly comes to mind. I Did It My Way follows right behind.

I’m not bemoaning my lot in life. All things considered, I have had and will continue to have a pretty good life. I need to learn to say no a bit more often and, as Kipling said, “….meet with Triumph and Disaster And treat those two impostors just the same;”

Teaching is my focus at the moment and, as you point out, I find in it a great deal of satisfaction. I have three classes next term, one of which is Logistics within Supply Chain Management and will be in the classroom. I don’t mind teaching distance learning, but my real satisfaction is watching the lights come on in the student’s minds in the classroom. Somewhat orgasmic, if you’ll pardon the use of the word in this context.

Your take on “…part of it is thrill of the chase is not there like it used to be; part of it is I’m not running at the energy levels I once was.” is likely dead on. The days of Sisyphean tasks are about to end.

The end of this conversation between two middle-aged guys. 

One has three choices when it comes to Web 2.0.

1. Ignore the phenomena.
2. Accept what others say it means.
3. Think about what you observe of the phenomena and draw your own conclusions.
   

I've opted for the latter.

Web 2.0 has changed the relationship between the time since an event occurred and the number of sources that report on that event.

Communications has gone from "This is London." made famous by  Edward R. Murrow to real-time reporting of events from innumerable sources.  Now I grant you that developments such as the telegraph, radio, and television were steps along the line indicated in the diagram.  But I also think there would be little argument that Web 2.0, and I'm particularly thinking here of user-generated content aided and abetted by the ubiquity of the Internet, has dramatically accelerated the movement downward and towards the right.

What are the implications?  We trusted Murrow, but I doubt that we have extended our trust to all the sources that currently provide us with much data, less information, even less knowledge, and a miniscule amount of insight. 

In this sense, interpret, decide, act, and learn loop (SIDAL) we trusted Murrow to do much, if not all, of the hard work for us.  We trusted Murrow to look out for us, to have our best interests in mind, to report to us the truth.

Now, I sense, we can no longer spread this trust amongst so many sources.

We must take on the SIDAL tasks and we may well be ill-equipped to do this.  It is hard work, and being opposed to hard work, we cede our responsibility for these tasks to the media, the pundits, and the bloggers.  We do it not because we trust them, but because we dislike the hard work necessary to do this ourselves. 

Or we can learn how to perform SIDAL and invest the energy and time necessary to become good at it.  Thereby we become better informed and better able to discharge our responsibilities as citizens.  The latter half of the previous sentence implies that citizens are able to exert leverage to cause the government and the markets to to implement the recommendations that flow from our efforts.  That may be a big stretch.  This, of course, provides causes us to wonder whether our efforts to become SIDAL proficient are investments well spent. 

I call your attention to  "If It’s Fit to Blog, Is It Fit to Print?" by Clark Hoyt in the December 9, 2007 issue of the New York Times.  This is an excellent example of the impact of Web 2.0 and the difficulty inherent in the SIDAl processes.

"With good judgment, little else matters. Without it, nothing else matters."

This from an item on today's Wall Street Journal Opinion page.  It should be read putting the comparisons between two of the Democratic predential candidates aside.  Rather it is the notion of judgement as the critical factor in leadership that needs to be considered.

One might observe that judgement comes from experience, and that experience frequently arises from lack of judgement; "I told you the stove was hot."  But judgement is more than having accumulated experience, for in accumulating experience one cannot be sure that anything was learned.  The world is awash with examples of experience coupled with poor judgement.

Bennis and Tichy give us some indication of the characteristics of judgement; "Wisely processed experience, reflection, valid sources of timely information, an openness to the unbidden and character..."  Yet, what is judgement, especially good judgement?  How is such a thing recognized?

Certainly the definition of  good judgment is shaped by culture, values, and vision.  Globalization, therefore, will likely make our understanding of judgement more difficult.  The rise of special interest groups will likewise cause us some problems in assessing good judgement.

Bennis and Tichy say, "...we're not sure how to teach it."  I agree.  Maybe the best we can do is to create environments for learning where the students is exposed to examples of good and bad judgement, and must learn and not expect to be taught.

Mankiw's blog brings notice this morning that "Matthew Weinzierl and I will be presenting The Optimal Taxation of Height at Boston College."

The questions being investigated is: 

"Should the income tax system include a tax credit for short taxpayers and a tax surcharge for tall ones?"

 It seems to me that the efforts of these two gentlemen could be better spent on looking at something with the  potential of impacting the human condition, then an adventure in silliness.

Re Conversations with Dave. 

I’m a fan of Gill Corkindale who writes, amongst other places, at Harvard Business Online. Her latest is on O’Neal.

The Merrill Lynch Mess (MLM, not to be confused with MSM which has, insofar as I can tell, done a poor job at telling the MLM story) aligns well with previous conversations we have had regarding organisclerosis (did I remember that word correctly?), incentives, oversight, and power.

Boards, regulatory authorities, MSM are not, it would seem, doing their jobs. Ethics has become simply a word, and is not a fundamental value. The notion of someone overseeing a write-down of some US$8 billion and walking away with US$160 million, albeit without honor, is symptomatic of deep-rooted, harmful behavior in too much of industry, especially financial services.

To turn an old phrase on its head; we are a nation of men, not of laws.

In anticipation of your next questions – what do you recommend – I would answer leadership and perhaps a different way of naming leaders, especially of authorities having oversight. Is it really a wise thing to have cabinet secretaries (e.g., Paulson) come from the industry over which they are expected to exert some authority? Should boards be comprised of people nominated by the chairman?

This brings me to the current political scene. Of all the talk in MSM regarding the size of the candidates’ war chests and their policies for this or that, there is little conversation, it seems to me, as to their leadership capability and capacity. Policies are just so much fodder without an ability to lead, not manage, but lead. We’re getting little glimpse of the candidates’ characteristics in this critical area.

I have previously argued in this space for the importance of education as the basis for all else we wish to achieve.  I have also argued in favor of innovation and pointed out the gap existing between business and higher education.  I have indicated my regard for collaboration and the rise of COMs (composer, orchestrator, and maestro) as a means of dealing with increasing complex systems and the compression of time.

Irving Wladawsky-Berger has brought many of these ideas together in an elegant fashion in Some Thoughts on Multidisciplinary Innovation.  I believe he argues for change in approach across a broad number of fronts.  He does this not from some aerie of academic isolation, but from the point of view of a person with considerable experience at riding the waves of change in the global business world.

Irving is on my feed list becasue of the value of the insight and ideas he brings.  This article is an example of this value.

I highly recommend a read.