What Business Are The Banks In?

via news.bbc.co.uk

The BBC reports that Bank boards are to come under closer scrutiny. In the article it is pointed out that several banking heads have no banking industry back ground and no banking qualifications.

This shouldn't really come as any surprise. The reason this has happened is because business and society have bought into the 'MBA' myth that has historically reinforced the idea that a professional manager has 'transferable skills' allowing them to manage any business regardless of its commercial setting.

General tools, deployed by general managers who all speak the lingua franca of business-ese. The language of 'forces', of 'gap analysis', of ROI, of 'brand equity' and so on and so on.

This 'managerialist' philosophy is 'taken for granted', so deeply embedded that its truth and nature is, for most aspiring managers self evident. It is 'the' way to run a business successfully, because it 'stretches competences' (sic) and wraps ruthless scientific rationality up in the soft velvet of service and relationship rhetoric.

Kurt Lewin said there was nothing more practical than a good theory. The implication of this observation is that the way in which a person conceives of their world determines how they act in it. Chris Argyris calls them 'theories for success', deeply held ideas that determine how problems are defined and solutions created.

So why would a supermarket retailer get a job as a top banker then?

One reason is because he is a 'general manager'. At one level all businesses are the 'same' so they can all be run in the same way. The other reason is because of the answer to that most profound of business questions - 'what business are you in?'

This question will have a senior management team split asunder if they have never pondered on it before. It demands an explanation of what exactly the business 'does'. So what business are the banks in?

Generating ROI for investors (the avowedly Freidmann-esque position)?

The 'Service' business (the deceptive landscaping of the service offer pushed by most banks to disguise the fact that they are aggressive sales led organisations)?

The 'Retail' business (we sell consumable products to individual consumers through high street and on-line channels to market)?

Add the last explanation to the previous two and you have a justification for employing Barrow Boy MBA at the senior level of your banking business!

On the other hand, characterise the business of banking as something rather more profound, something rather more central to social welfare of the country and its citizens, something rather more essential to the working of a modern society, then, the business the banks are in is nothing at all to do with getting the sales team to push the latest 'gee-whiz' offering from new product development, nothing to do with callously casting itself as a friendly service provider who cares for YOUR finances through the journey of life.

What if Banking is a prudent guardian of financial stability, the essential counterpoise to the pull of rampant consumerism with its powerful and persuasive temptations to overstretch the wallet? What if it is about 'saving' to spend rather than 'borrowing' to spend?

Retailers want every last penny from us, because every little helps their profit margins, they don't care if its baked beans or shoes for the kids. The banks should,and the way to do it to have absolute clarity about what business they are in!

Posted via web from Gullibimundi

Are The British Gullible About Afghanistan?

via news.bbc.co.uk

Dr Huw Davies writes a fascinating article in this BBC article about British involvement in Afghanistan. Given the recent shift of strategy to increase face to face combat instead of using air support it is tempting for the armchair strategist to reach for history books and predict the improbability of success.

The key of course is to recognise that the 'context' is different from before. The British and their allies are in the country to deal with a specific group of ideologues, and whilst they might have local knowledge it is only their terror tactics that provide local support. In other words their apparent 'supporters' do not believe in them, unlike say the Viet Cong, who admittedly used 'terror' tactics and also had a base of support in the population at large.

So are the British being gullible thinking they will achieve a positive outcome? I don't actually think so.

Posted via web from Gullibimundi

BNPs Griffin's Foolish Idea To Sink Immigrant Boats

via news.bbc.co.uk

'There's nothing so practical as a theory' to paraphrase Kurt Lewin. This means that your 'philosophy' determines how you act. In particular it means that how you 'see' a problem determines how you 'see' the solution (sic)

So for Simple Nick the solution to a perceived immigration problem is to sink the boats they travel in. Well we all know about GIGO - garbage in garbage out. in this case we have foolish thoughts in foolish proposals out.

Just imagine...this is Simple Nick in 'restrained' mode. What would he be like if there were no restraints?

Posted via web from Gullibimundi

Every Quantitative Measure We Have Says Robert McNamara Has Died

via news.bbc.co.uk

By his own admission Robert McNamara admitted the gullibility of having blind faith in your assumptions.

Famous for claiming about US endeavours in the Vietnam War that "Every quantitative measure we have shows we are winning this war" His statement is a classic of managerialist thinking that shows just how crazy over-reliance on numerical metrics is when trying to determine social behaviours and outcomes. He came from a school of thought that claimed that only rational scientific methods should be used for determining policy. Take the subjective and the emotional out of the equation and you are closer to the truth.

The fact is Mr McNamara has died. It is also true that his thoughts and opinions live on as fascinating historical perspectives on a diverse and high power career. So has he really died?

His legacy? Whilst maybe not directly attributable to Mr McNamara the 'sanitised' measurement and reporting of warfare is from his time. bodycount, megadeath are just a couple of terms that echo from the past. We might also remember that the term strategic hamlet does not refer to a well earned cigar whilst pondering the latest loss of ground to the enemy!

Posted via web from Gullibimundi

Self-help makes you feel worse

via news.bbc.co.uk

So here is the scientific argument that 'Self Help' might easily become 'Self Delusion'.The appeal of mantras that you can 'be whoever you want to be' and 'do what whatever you want to do' are certainly appealing.

Many therapeutic, counselling and advisory approaches do a fantastic job of helping people recognise self imposed limitations on their ambitions. This is invariably achieved through helping the 'client' notice what is missing or ignored from their mental map of the world and then guiding them in drawing upon their often undervalued resources and potential.

Much of this approach is founded upon a philosophy that manifests itself through Positive Psychology a type of psychology that affirms the good in the situation and the capability of the individual.

This is all well and good, and psychologically we have 'bad' feelings because of their evolutionary benefit. They help us recognise the 'reality' of situations and they protect us from engaging in unnecessarily risky behaviours. Imagine acting on the song lyrics 'I believe I can fly...believe I can touch the sky..." when standing on a cliff top. The result of such an attempt would rapidly confront you with ontological reality of gravity, velocity and mass.

Perhaps the most famous positive thinker was King Canute who sincerely believed he could stop the tide coming in!





The message is clear. Don't be gullible and believe everything you read from a blogging 'Life Hack'. Remain sceptical of their claims, and be sure that you check that they advise what they advise for 'your' benefit and not theirs!

Posted via web from Gullibimundi

School bans black-face Morris Men

via news.bbc.co.uk

Which fool decided that there was any connection between the black faces of Morris Men and potential offence? This is a tradition of hundreds of years and has no racist connotations whatsoever.

The people who make these pronouncements need to publicly defend the logic of their position far more robustly than simply 'imagining' any and every offence that could be taken in this case and any and every possible case.

Usually the ability to spot patterns that connect is a highy valued intellectual skill. That of course is if the patterns are relevant and meaningful.

Prejudicial hypersensitivity is a debilitating and negative outlook. It is NOT intellectually clever to make any old connection and claim that their might be a risk of offence. The precrime thought police seem to be the ones who are prejudiced. Predjudiced against innocent traditions, predjudiced against common sense, and predjudiced against normal people who they regard as simpletons.

How dare they assume that we are all gullible and cannot see the danger lurking behind the face paint of Morris Men, how dare they presume our gullibility, how dare they think that they have privelaged insights to which we are all blind.

They are the people who are drenched in predjudice. So soaking wet in it they leave their soggy thinking footprints wherever they go.

These people should grow up and take their sixth form hand wringing out of public office.

Posted via web from Gullibimundi

Madoff Gets 150 years To Reflect On His Gullibility

via news.bbc.co.uk

The Bird that Madoff has got has to be a pigeon because it's certainly come home to roost. 150 years should be enough time for him to ponder on the havoc he's caused in people's lives by betraying their trust. He was however gullible in thinking that it was only the other people who were the gullible ones.

Events always catch up with people who reckon they are too clever by half. Abuse of confidences, abuse of power, he should find himself in expert company in the land of 'watch your back'.

Mr Madoff...imagine...all the ways you are going to be taken advantage of now!

Posted via web from Reasonable's posterous

Evidence of Gullibility

Its been a while since I reviewed my Technorati page I notice that my 'authority' sits at 7 and that I've attracted 55 fans.

One neat aspect of Technorati is the 'watchlist' and a key word for me is as you would expect 'Gullibility' Over the last few days there have been a couple of great links.

The first is this one that claims to be images recovered from the inside of ill fated flight AF 447 Titled Gullibility (hooray!) the images seem to be clips from a TV series.

Next is a blog called Daily Irrelevant which covers a story about prize winning students who later had their prize revoked"prize-winners, Guillaume Chauvin and Rémi Hubert, read out a statement admitting to the hoax, stating that they had wanted to make a “powerful artistic gesture” attacking the “voyeurism” and gullibility of parts of the press" as they took Paris Match for a ride.

Candid World
talks about the gullibility of people involved with Scientology, posting a fasciinating comment stream too.

It would seem that a fairly low intensity but steady stream of gullibility pervades the blogosphere.

Michael Jackson Super Nova

via news.bbc.co.uk

The passing of any super talent is like the explosion of a super nova. In a flash the brilliance is signaled to the world and in a flash it is gone.

Putting the usual experiences of the bereaved to one side, such as the loss of something that was thought to be enduring, the taken for granted access to the individual who is now unequivocally gone, the demise of Michael Jackson brings home once more just how reliant the human race is on a very few individuals to change world views, be the source of original thinking to lead the way forward. The ratio of these significant individuals to the people of the world is microscopic, these are people we rely on to take our world forward and their number and frequency is very very small.

The media will lapse into pseudo intellectual deconstruction of every twist and turn of his life, people and fans will share their views. This however is the passive, uncreative approach to life used by people who rely on the creative leadership of others rather than taking responsibility for generating original ideas themselves. They feast on the dead bodies of the talented for the raw material for their 'pop' philosophising and mawkish sense-making.

How best to celebrate the life of Michael Jackson? My suggestion would be to originate something that gives pleasure to others. It needn't be global in its reach. It would be in the image of the King of Pop

Posted via web from Reasonable's posterous

The Rise of Hate 2.0

via news.bbc.co.uk

We'd be gullible if we thought that the digital space was any different from the FtF space. The full diversity of sense-making and behaviour from people of various persuasions will clearly be able to find a voice and constituency in the fluid and far reach medium of digital conversations.

This recent BBC article http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8097979.stm is certainly thought provoking.

This merely serves to underscore the need to develop the education and critical skills of all digital media users. This will enable them to readily challenge the flawed logic of the hate-mongers and spot a gross generalisation and simplification at a 1000 meters.

People on the whole have become more media savvy. They know that people have agendas when they communicate. The disturbing feature of social media is that it enables 'the disturbed' who might have been previously disjointed to connect. And in this 'connection' to believe that they are establishing a general norm instead of a perverse small group norm.

Do we see a Hate 2.0 career path here? Does leaving a flame comment mean you will become a Troll, does becoming a troll mean you are predisposed to finding affinities with more established hate groups, does an on-line hate group manifest itself in physical action?

There might be a saving grace in the very nature of social media itself! The power of crowds only really works in the physical realm. Crowd psychology is a powerful thing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crowd_psychology The Nazis may have utilised the new technologies of film and radio but it was only in the setting of mass public meetings that the virulence of their thinking took hold.

Posted via web from Reasonable's posterous