I don’t know about you, but I’ve been so alarmed with what is going on in the world – from our government’s politics, to global warming – that I feel a crushing need to do something. Maybe you can resonate with the fact that that seems easier to say than to do. overwhelm doesn’t begin to describe the feeling.

One things is very clear to me. We need to think and act very differently from how we think and act now. These crises are turning who we thought we were and we thought the world works on its head.

Bill McKibben, in a recent issue of “Yes” talks about national policy changes. A new understanding, for instance, that national security interests can only be met by shipping China technology that will help them use less coal and not by shipping missals and arms to China’s enemies. With the planet dying who is our enemy? Everyone? That’s a pretty hopeless scenario. We are all in this together and we will only get out of it together. In fact that’s one of the ways of thinking that has to change. The fear of others that makes them enemies instead of reaching for the understanding that will make them friends. The whole terrorism issue is interlaced with that.

Togetherness – community – these have begun to surface as the real keys to the survival of life on the planet. For Americans this is a huge challenge. We’ve been indoctrinated in the illusion of individualism. This has never been true about our country. Historically it was through community (barn raising?) that we “conquered” the frontier. Holding onto the illusion of separateness is an illusion that will kill us.

Russel Ackoff, of MIT fame, was moved over 12 years ago to inquire into the lack of Democracy in our organizations. Democracy can only flourish in community. Democracy is all about having people involved in governance. It takes real conversations by real people with free and easy access to information to make Democracy work. This is why the founding fathers supported public education. Only an educated person can find and use the information necessary to make informed decision about the Country’s future, their future and the future of others.

How different would your organization be if it was run democratically? Does that send shiver down your spine? What thoughts are running through your head? Are you afraid of what the employees might do? Do you think they would not know what to do? Do you think they would take all the money? Would it take too long to make decisions? What, exactly do you think would happen?

Now why do fear what we are fighting so fiercely for in Iraq? Why do we think that governing democratically in our organizations would cause them to fail? What about democracy do we not trust? What is it about us as individuals that resists the sharing and openness that is needed to act in concert with our “cherished” beliefs?

Ricardo Semler, a Brazilian businessman, wrote Maverick, the story about his success building a successful business whilst inflation was running at up to 900%. He writes about his epiphany when his employees wanted to take the business in a direction he didn’t what to go. He realized that he need to act in concert with the beliefs he had been proposing for years, the beliefs that had made a stunning success of his company, he needed to let go. He did, and it worked very well.

Jack Stack, of Springfield Reengineering, learned much the same lesson. After buying a business the employees (including him) realized they did not know how to run the business. He, however did an amazing thing, he created a process where everyone had access to the information they needed to make decisions (now called The Great Game of Business) so everyone could help in running it effectively. It worked and he now teaches other organizations to follow suite.

For both of these men the process was slow. People were educated, everyone underwent personal growth, trust was acquired on day at a time, risks were taken and great leaps of faith were made. Jack faced a situation where, early in the process, they lost their biggest customer. He was looking at layoffs. He agonized for days – then he did an amazing thing – he told the employees the news, he asked for their ideas. They had ideas – they all took pay cuts, they all marketed and they came out of that year ahead of where they would have been if nothing had happened.

Ben Franklin said, “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” He was a wise man, yet that is exactly what we do. If we treat people as if they don’t know what they are doing, if we treat people as if they wouldn’t understand, if we treat people as if we are afraid of them, then why should we be surprised when that is how they act? This is one of the prime lessons of parenting. What you expect is what you get. Yet we keep doing the same things over and over and expect different results. When those results don’t come to pass – we blame others and use that experience to reinforce our beliefs. What a silly set of circumstances – if it weren’t so sad.

Here’s your chance to set a different tone. I’m hear to tell you that increasing the participation of your employees is a transforming experience. Nothing will generate improvements faster. Nothing will cut costs, increase innovation and make work a more enjoyable and personally satisfying experience, Nothing! Over the years make techniques have been developed to allow people to have input quickly and satisfactorily. When ever you get people together to make decisions, plan, or think together, there is a technique that will work, often in surprising ways.

Keys to success are: get the right people in the room (you may have never talked to them before), follow a process that has been designed for participation, take the time to do it right (no one hour meetings), Be clear on the purpose and needed outcome, make sure all the needed information is easily available. I’ve used Appreciative Inquiry, Future Search, Dialogue, the Four Tools Process, ACI/ToP methods, all to great advantage.

Using Future Search with the Juvenal Justice system in Sacramento, California we brought together judges, lawyers, parents (of both victim and perpetrator), legislators and others to spend two day talking about changes need to the system. It was an astounding success. People learned things they never knew and gained a new perspective on the role and purpose of juvenal justice.

You CAN do this. It is not rocket science. All it takes a willingness to try something different. This is one step we ALL can take to begin to make the changes we need to make to shift our world. If we want to survive we need to learn to work together. That doesn’t mean that we all do what I want. It means using the brains and experience of everyone who is involved or impacted by the choices we are making. If you want to learn how to do this, you can begin to enlist everyone in your firm’s success. Call me – Google the techniques, there are tons of resources.

Everything needs to shift – changing how we work together will allow us to think differently about the pressing issues of our time. We Can Do It!
anniversary party favors

Marketing is misunderstood and much maligned. The industry is dogged by pejorative associations with concepts such as ‘spin’, ‘hype’, ‘gimmick’ and ‘ploy’, and it is not uncommon for fellow board members to refer to the marketing director as ‘the chief flower arranger’.

 

So it’s perhaps not surprising that when times get tough, marketing gets it in the neck from governments too. Marketing is seen as an agent of consumerism, and is, therefore, an obvious scapegoat for major societal problems such as obesity, binge drinking, global warming and debt. It is much easier for governments to publicly ‘punish’ marketers with legislation that restricts their licence to operate, than it is for those governments to tackle some of the issues themselves. Marketing and democracy provide similar benefits, as I and my fellow author Katherine Jocz outline in Greater Good – How good marketing makes for better democracy (Harvard Business School Press, February 2008). For example, marketers give consumers information and choice, they seek to engage them to earn their loyalty, they try to bring quality and innovation to the masses. Marketing also provides ‘social glue’ via successful exchanges, and improves living standards and consumer wellbeing. Similarly, democracies depend on informed citizens participating in the political process and making choices among political alternatives.

 

They also promote the welfare of all citizens, which leads to improved prosperity. But marketing is better than democracies at providing these benefits. For example, while consumers in the commercial world ‘vote’ every day at the cash tills, citizens have to subsume their individual preference to a collective will, and consume the policies of the party that has been elected. Marketing is also quicker than democracy to spot and embrace new trends, while strong brands can forge the kind of long-term loyal relationships with their consumers that politics, with its mass market approach and lack of any real competition, can only dream of.

 

Marketing is also being used as a force for social good – witness the rising popularity of Fairtrade goods and the commitment to tackling climate change by brands such as Marks & Spencer. Indeed, you could argue that the practice we get as consumers every day in the commercial marketplace makes us better, smarter citizens – which may be why our politicians are frequently such a disappointment to us. The difference in the way politicians and brands ‘advertise’ themselves is further evidence of marketing’s more highly evolved status.

 

Brand advertisements knocking the competition are frowned upon in the commercial world – marketers know that a tit-for-tat war of words turns consumers off the category as a whole – but they are par for the course in politics. The penalties of this approach were obvious in the US Democratic race, where Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama took every opportunity to undermine each other’s credibility. Their subsequent efforts to present a united front against Republican John McCain in the Presidential campaign were met with understandable cynicism.

 

It is time governments, NGOs and the general public sat up and recognised the positive social and economic impacts marketing has on society as a whole. It contributes significantly to economic development, for example. In the US alone 17 million people hold marketing, sales and customer-service jobs. Marketing also supports the pillars of democratic society. It funds our diverse media, including the internet, giving citizens access to information about political figures, policies and programmes. And marketing knowhow helps public policy makers change citizens’ behaviours by, for example, encouraging seat-belt use, good nutrition and responsible drinking. So instead of treating them merely as taxpayers, donors and voters, politicians should treat citizens as well as marketers treat their customers. They could improve the democratic process as a result.

 

Previously published in the Business Review, Impact Executives

 

Interim Management


About the Author: