Bird's Eye View

The Wall Street Journal, West Point, and U.S. Military

2010-01-07T12:15:00-05:00

We've talked about 2010 as an opportunity for whole new conversations on a breadth of topics. Here's one that needs to be reframed: how each of us feels about the young men and women who serve our country in the military.

Too often, when someone hears that a friend – or a friend's son or daughter – has signed up for military service, the announcement is met with sadness or even an offer to help change that young person's mind. The thinking reflects a view that the military is a last resort – a decision made only after other, more alluring alternatives are determined unavailable or too expensive or too demanding. A one-way ticket to a place our best and brightest avoid.

I submit the conversation about the men and women who serve our Nation in military service has to be framed anew. It's currently not reflective of the facts.

In last week's Wall Street Journal, William McGurn wrote an impressive, moving piece about West Point, suggesting we consider initiating a whole new conversation about who is signing up for military service and why.

It's an important conversation for many reasons. One of the most compelling is that the current conversation – the one that suggests our returning vets are anything but the kind of employees needed in our nation's leading corporations – is not only misguided, it does us all a disservice. Why? Because America has never been so challenged in the global marketplace and we need the best talent we can get in all our institution, including businesses large and small, in order to remain competitive. It's truly a talent war and nationally we are missing an important point in our hiring practices: returning veterans from the most recent conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq have a range of skills that place them well ahead of their civilian peers. Yet the unemployment rate for young veterans is significantly higher than for others.

Companies that have figured our that our veterans as employees are an asset to be coveted and nurtured – places like Pepsi-Co, Sears, Procter & Gamble, Home Depot and others – are hip to the notion of what John Campbell, CEO and Founder of MyVetwork calls the "Vet Effect." Campbell describes it as the "positive impact that veterans have on their colleagues in the work force." I was told by Leo McGonagle, an impressive former West Point instructor who now leads the Gordon Engineering Leadership Program at MIT to "think about it. Our veterans are amazing. As employees, they:

Don’t need positional authority to lead
(much to many people's surprise) Don't need to be given orders, nor do they need a super-structured environment
treat as "givens" discipline and work ethic
Are responsible for themselves and for others
Show up for work; don't goof off
Are "can do" and able to domore with less
Are great multi-taskers
Take seriously the axiom that "failure is not an option"
Have a high pain threshhold, don't take or ask for unnecessary sick day"

What's more, says McGonagle, these traits are found throughout our veteran community, regardless of rank or branch.

Have to give an disclaimer here: I'm advising John Campbell and his MyVetwork team on their 2010 strategy for the military-focused online community they have built. I'm suggesting this conversational framing is job one.

Think of your own business. What is the basis for meaningful conversation you'd like to initiate this year?

2010 Can Be a Whole New Conversation

2010-01-06T15:08:41-05:00

... and it should be, right?

Aren't we tired of the most-talked about stuff of 2009? The Tiger Woods debacle, the tea parties, the health care stupidities on all sides of the argument, the economy's problems, the unemployment stats... all of that. That conversational portfolio was unrewarding.

So what is going to be the topic of interest to you this year? Where will you make your conversational investment?

If you follow the axiom that ordinary people talk about other people, more interesting people talk about things and the most fascinating among us talk about ideas... then let's get you on the idea wagon and accelerate.

Makes sense from lots of angles, one of which is that the world rewards innovation richly, so if you've got a game-changing concept, follow it – even if it requires near-term sacrifice – and if it's good, others will back you. Be aware that the interim personal sacrifice may be tough. But that's OK if you value freedom over comfort because in the end if your idea is good, you'll get both comfort and freedom, and as Keith Cameron Smith says, that's far preferable to valuing comfort over freedom and never becoming truly free. Got that?

If we overestimate what we can accomplish in a year, but underestimate what we can accomplish in ten years, that should urge you to consider bypassing the New Year's resolutions that will just get you to 2011 and instead make long term goals that you're willing to pursue relentlessly.

And by the way, don't forget to nurture your friendships along the way. It's wise to build deep relationships before you need them.

So let's seriously consider your conversational investments this year. Take a good look at your conversational portfolio, on both a personal and professional basis.

Because what you talk about with others will determine where you are headed.

More on Mobile Phone Usage And Where It's Headed

2010-01-05T13:01:38-05:00

Yesterday's post talked about a recent Economist article on mobile phone use and how it reflects cultural differences.

The article went on to describe differences in the amount of mobile phone usage, depending on one's culture. Germans, who have an axiom – oft repeated – that "Silence is golden" spend only 89 minutes a month making calls on their mobile phones (called Handys by Germans). This national "silence is golden" perspective was reflected in a guest blog here earlier this year by Joanna Niemczyk, our intern from Poland, so apparently it's not only the Germans who think less is more when it comes to talking.

Americans, on the other hand, talk a lot, nearly 800 minutes per month, 10 times the German practice. And Puerto Ricans? They top the list at 1,875 minutes per month.

Differences in the ways people use their mobile on the street are cited as well, for example the practice in Spain to not only talk while walking, but involve friends walking with you, so that it's a kind of "group" call. In Paris, people talk on the street as well, but don't like to overhear others' intimate conversations. In England, people tend to find self-designated "zones" for chatting on the phone, say at a tub stop, or outside a store. And in Germany, since people use their phones much more sparingly, you don't see the ubiquitous chattering public you see elsewhere.

Will these differences eventually melt away so we'll all just be talking more, wherever we are? I imagine that is so, especially as our lives become even more complicated, requiring communication with co-workers, colleagues, family, wherever they are around the globe and at all hours. It appears we are headed to even more mobile phone usage no matter where we live or where we travel – even on the plane and in the train while we get there.

Will there be a global protocol that emerges, one understood by everyone as the "good mobile phone etiquette?" Perhaps. And, if so, what will that look like? I shudder at the thought of everyone being so tied to our phones that we put them on the table during business meetings and even take calls during the meeting, as many in China do. But then, who knows?

Apparatgeist Calls: How Mobile Phone Usage Reflects Culture

2010-01-04T15:18:08-05:00

One of the most provocative articles I've read on the use of mobile phones and how it reflects the cultures in which we live, is a recent one entitled "The Apparatgeist Calls" in The Economist Jan 2-8 issue.

I'm still thinking about its ramifications regarding the way people converse with one another, especially via mobile phones. Let's start with the initial concept that even the name a culture gives to hand-held telephones reflects a viewpoint that can be highly strategic and influential in the way the device is used – and viewed – by a population. In America, we talk of "cell" phones, referring to the modern wireless network on which our phone calls are carried. In other countries, people refer to their "mobile" which refers to the fact that the phone is not restricted to a particular place or location. In Germany, people refer to their "handy." which highlights the fact that it fits in the hand.

Why do we care? Because these names may be more than cosmetic; they may in fact reflect a perspective that can in turn influence future use of phones and the value people place on their utility.

In some countries, for example, the move away from spoken conversations on the phone to text messaging is dramatic. In Japan, this no doubt reflects particular aspects of the Japanese culture, among them the fact that people find it highly offensive to hear others taking calls in a public place, but have no problem with seeing others texting. The Japanese teenager, living in a crowded country in which there is little opportunity for privacy, were quick to catch on to the benefits of texting over verbal conversation (especially those that could be heard or monitored by others, including family members). In Japan texting has grown far faster than in other parts of the world.

How about in the US? Who is doing most of the texting and what do they see as its benefit? How about you?

We'll talk tomorrow about other aspects of the cultural mobile, er cell...(or is it handy?) conversation.

Way Too Quiet Around Here

2009-12-30T16:34:09-05:00

OK, I can't resist getting back into conversation with my blogging buddies.

Hope you had a wonderful holiday and are looking forward to 2010 as a banner year. Let's face it, in global terms 2009 was not our species' finest hour.

The New Yorker put it well on their recent cover...let's put 2009 out to pasture...give 2009 a broom or mop because there is a lot of mess to clean up (2009 is the old guy with the mop in the lower right corner).

Indeed, the last decade, at least from an American point of view, was not the best 10 years of our history.

And the near-disaster of this past week, when only through luck and courageous action on the part of passengers was an explosion on a jetliner headed from Amsterdam to Detroit averted, has set many people's nerves on edge. And rightly so.

What's the answer? Are we truly incapable of discouraging people from trying to blow us up? And if we can't discourage them, can't we block them from it? After the billions spent on security systems in airports around the world, this last situation is a serious wake-up call to the fact that whatever we're doing is unfortunately not nearly enough. Our security systems--around the world--have myriad places where you could drive a truck through the line of defensive security measures. Literally, it appears.

I don't like ending 2009 on a pessimistic note. Indeed, I am an incurable optimist. At least most of the time. So I'm looking for the silver lining in things.

Perhaps I should simply focus on Lukas Charles Krahn, the baby boy born yesterday to a relative of mine in mid-Wisconsin. He is already bringing great joy to those around him.

What I want is assurance that Lukas Charles and all the other newborn babes of this year can look forward to growing up--and growing old--in a country that is free for all to pursue happiness and prosperity.

At the New Years Eve dinner party tomorrow night, we'll no doubt have conversations that touch on Tiger Woods, the Detroit near-disaster, and similar mishaps of 2009.

I'm thinking right now my greatest gift to the group may be a question that takes us in a future-focused direction and is optimistic. I'm still working on that question.

May Your Holiday Conversations Be Happy Ones

2009-12-24T10:28:07-05:00

I'll be taking some time with my family and friends over the next several days. Meanwhile, my best wishes to you and yours.

Will Your 2010 Conversations Be Different?

2009-12-23T16:47:01-05:00

As you look forward to a new year (in fact, a new decade!), how could you change your conversations?

How can you create the kind of scintillating, memorable, Wow! exchanges that leave participants transformed? We're surrounded by chatter, so how can you engage others in meaningful conversations for which they'll thank you?

Make a list of the people with whom you would like to have more compelling, more rewarding conversations. Include not only the people you find frustrating to engage in conversations, but also those with whom you like to talk but wish your exchanges were richer, more interesting.

I plan to spend some time in 2010 sharing conversational tips that I hope will be helpful to you as you navigate the path that leads to provocative, inviting discourse.

Let me know specific areas in which you have questions or challenges, and tell me what kinds of people you find especially challenging. Your boss? colleagues at work? Girlfriend? Dad?

I'm happy to work with examples, so send me questions and we'll go to work.

Is Polite Conversation An Anachronism?

2009-12-22T14:57:05-05:00

There are fewer and fewer genuine conversations in my life. Those who know me are familiar with my view that for a great conversation, both parties have to enter it with the intent to be changed by it.

But let's face it. Most "conversations" today are efforts to gain information ("Can you tell me what this costs?") or access ("I'd like to make an appointment with Mr. Smith. When is he available for a call?") or to give information ("Your product doesn't work" or "I'll get home late tonight" or "The bus leaves at 8 PM").

The conversations that make my day are those where I walk away knowing that things are now different: I've learned something, gained a new appreciation for a person or event, or been touched deeply.

The December 17 issue of the Economist includes an articled entitled, "Hi There" and the subject of the article is identified as "politeness." The article posits that "life is getting friendlier but less interesting and suggests that we should blame that on technology, globalization and feminism."

Now that's a subject we can sink our teeth into. It may be just the thing to bring up at Christmas dinner, if you'd like to focus on something other than the great food, wine and traditional cookies.

The Economist article looks at the loss of formal titles. We're talking here of titles like Lady So and So; Lord Such and Such; Your Grace, Your excellency, Dr. so and so, Herr Professeur and the like.

English is now the dominant language globally and it has no verb forms for politeness, humility and respect as is common in many other languages, for example Japanese. There is no "familiar" pronoun that distinguishes close friends and family from those one knows less well (as, for example, the use of the familiar "tu" used in French with loved ones, versus "vous" which is the way one addresses everyone else).

So, suggests the Economist article, if you are familiar with literally everyone, as least in the way you speak with them, how do you signify to others that they are truly important to you? Or that you revere them?

For sure, email has broken many of the traditional standards of politeness in address. Gone is the "salutation (does anyone under 30 even know what that means?) and the formal "close" of letters penned in the past. Feminism threw out the Miss and Mrs. with which we used to distinguish a married woman from a single woman (why, you may ask did we bother to do that, anyway?). Physicians are in a quandary about how to address their patients, much less how they want to be addressed themselves (Dr. Smith? George? Yo, Sally?). See the New York Times article of December 14 on this subject.

The move to informality everywhere in the world appears inexorable. Maybe that's a good thing. But, I must admit, I miss some of the grace that care in addressing others can bring to a conversation. The only people who say "Ma'am" or "Sir" now seem to be Southerners or members of the armed forces addressing their superiors.

Sigh.

Facebook Addiction

2009-12-21T16:35:42-05:00

I'm fascinated by the story in today's New York Times indicating that some people are deciding Facebook is more "in your face" than they can handle. They have determined they are addicted to their Facebook account. Can't stay away from it. Have to know what others are saying and how their friends feel about every minuscule particle of whatever the conversation is at the moment.

It's early stages, and there appears to be a variety of ways people are attempting to handle their addiction. There are some who have formed support groups so they can monitor end encourage each other to minimize Facebook activity. Some ask others to change their Facebook password and not tell them what it is until after the weekend, say, or after an important exam.

Behavioral scientists are getting into the act, studying the implications of this Facebook backlash. It's probably too small a sample to mean much right now. But it gives me hope that we've got some smart young people who know a waste of time when they see it...and are including a lot of Facebook activity in that bucket of lost hours.I talked with a young college student who told me--expressing surprise--how much she was enjoying talking with her dorm mates rather than sitting in her dorm room spending hours connecting with friends from elsewhere.

Duh! Sounds like common sense to me. A face to face conversation trumps the online kind almost always.

How Do You Celebrate Valentine's Day?

2009-12-18T16:30:59-05:00

My name is Ryo and I am an intern at Wf360. I come from Tokyo, Japan and want to share with you a few holiday traditions from my country that fascinate my foreign friends whenever I tell them about it.

Now that Christmas is quickly approaching, I wanted to share with you some interesting differences in holidays between Japan and the US. In Japan, Christmas is known as the most romantic day of the year similar to the “American” Valentine’s Day. I understand in the US, people spend time with their lover on this day and if they give gifts, it is mutual. Therefore, I was really confused because our way of celebrating Valentine’s Day is quite different. In my country, women have to make an effort to confess their love with handmade chocolates to their men. Sounds lovely doesn’t it?

The funniest thing is that there are so many generous women who freely give chocolates to men, without any meaning and without any love behind it. Women look at it like a charity because these men are lonely and would never get any chocolates otherwise. They feel like it is a nice gesture and are happy to do this. Generally single women use this day to give cheesy tiny gifts to men and they don’t even care if these men are taken. To be honest, their purpose is quite obvious. In Japan we have another day called White Day which is on March 14th. This is a reciprocal day for women: men who received chocolates from women on Valentine’s Day must gift back whether the chocolates were given with or without love.

As Valentine’s Day is for men, White Day is meant to be for women. However, lately no men express their love to women on that day. Unfortunately White Day is now only thought of as the day women get gifts from men. A difference about White Day to Valentine’s Day is a Valentine’s gift can be cheap such as chocolates or some snacks. On the contrary, a White Day’s gift cannot be cheap. Men have to spend more than $10 each on their gifts to all the women who gave them chocolates the month before. Isn’t that crazy? Imagine, $10 each for every woman that gave you a gift. That’s why women give gifts to many men on Valentine’s Day so that as a result, they get a whole lot of presents on White Day. I believe that’s their strategy.

I am a university student now so I don’t have to be that afraid of receiving many gifts (it’s more common when you are older and in the workforce). My brother is a different story. He works for a Japanese company with many women employees and is afraid and dreads Valentine’s Day. Every year he receives chocolates from more than 40 women at his company and it doesn’t mean he is a popular guy. It happens to all the men working there. This has become a ridiculous concept because he has to start saving up for this day a month in advance so he can afford to give back to all the women that gave him cheap chocolates. The one good thing about this for men is that you don’t have to worry about the expense of food. There is a huge stock of chocolates and snacks in the fridge.

Lastly, I must say that there are also many genuine women who give chocolates with their true love and without the selfish reasons I mentioned. Both kinds of women exist so I don’t want you to misinterpret Japanese women to be greedy.

My question for the American men (and women) is how does this change your thoughts on Valentine’s Day? Can you imagine 2 romantic holidays in a year, one for each sex? Every time I share this Japanese culture with my non-Japanese friends, it opens up great conversation!