Why not be great? The plan for the next decade

My inspiration for the coming decade….

The thing is, we still live in a world that’s filled with opportunity. In fact, we have more than an opportunity — we have an obligation. An obligation to spend our time doing great things. To find ideas that matter and to share them. To push ourselves and the people around us to demonstrate gratitude, insight, and inspiration. To take risks and to make the world better by being amazing.

Are these crazy times? You bet they are. But so were the days when we were doing duck-and-cover air-raid drills in school, or going through the scares of Three Mile Island and Love Canal. There will always be crazy times.

So stop thinking about how crazy the times are, and start thinking about what the crazy times demand. There has never been a worse time for business as usual. Business as usual is sure to fail, sure to disappoint, sure to numb our dreams. That’s why there has never been a better time for the new. Your competitors are too afraid to spend money on new productivity tools. Your bankers have no idea where they can safely invest. Your potential employees are desperately looking for something exciting, something they feel passionate about, something they can genuinely engage in and engage with.

You get to make a choice. You can remake that choice every day, in fact. It’s never too late to choose optimism, to choose action, to choose excellence. The best thing is that it only takes a moment — just one second — to decide.

Before you finish this paragraph, you have the power to change everything that’s to come. And you can do that by asking yourself (and your colleagues) the one question that every organization and every individual needs to ask today: Why not be great?

via Seth’s Blog: Only two years left.

How Do Innovators Think? – HBR Editors Blog – Harvard Business Review

Fryer: Which of these skills do you think is the most important?

Dyer: Weve found that questioning turbo-charges observing, experimenting, and networking, but questioning on its own doesnt have a direct effect without the others. Overall, associating is the key skill because new ideas arent created without connecting problems or ideas in ways that they havent been connected before. The other behaviors are inputs that trigger associating — so they are a means of getting to a creative end.

Gregersen: You might summarize all of the skills weve noted in one word: “inquisitiveness.” I spent 20 years studying great global leaders, and that was the big common denominator. Its the same kind of inquisitiveness you see in small children.

via How Do Innovators Think? – HBR Editors Blog – Harvard Business Review.

Via Rajesh Jain

Global Warming Is Manageable — if we are Smart

Why is it that what you are saying about global warming is so contradictory to everything else that most people read, see and hear in the media?

Well, there are several reasons. It is partly because they dont read the U.N. reports, which on many of these issues confirm what I am saying very clearly. And since the sensational always goes over better than the merely sensible, stories in the media play into the stereotype of global warming. There is much more sizzle in saying the world is going to come to an end than there is to saying, it is a bit of a problem and we need to fix it smartly, but that is it. The scary stories also appeal to the visceral hatred of materialism harbored by many, even when they are materialist in their own habits.

It is much easier to find a real person who died in the heat wave in 2003 in Paris, and tell that story. It is much harder to tell a compelling story about a person who didnt die from cold in Paris in the winter of 2003. So it is often much easier to show all the problems from global warming, and very much harder to show all the distributed benefits from pursuing more sensible policies.

Finally, politicians obviously garner a lot of support by saying we want to save the planet much more than they garner support if they talk about making smart, simple policies that might also be politically difficult to get through. Essentially, they get to promise they are going to cut emissions in 2020 or 2050 — when they are not going to be politicians any longer.

Al Gore talks about global warming as our generational mission. He asks how we want to be remembered by our kids and grandkids. Well, why would anyone want to be remembered for having spent $180 billion to do virtually no good a hundred years from now, when less than half that sum could fix virtually all major problems today? With better information, most of us would have no difficulty choosing how we want to be remembered.

via Global Warming Is Manageable — if Were Smart – Barrons.com.

Do we need to change behaviour at all?

I have been writing about how Kevin Rudd’s plan to introduce carbon trading included payments to millions of households on the increase in expenses. I suggested that was the wrong thing to do and that we need to change behaviour of consumers to solve this.

What about the other side? What if the emissions reductions are possible through large systemic changes in electricity production, energy efficiency at the business level etc and leave the consumers out of it directly. Consumers will still pay for the increased business costs through increases in product costs however, that is dependent on the market (which is somewhat free in Australia).

In a way the business guys are better at doing this than each individual consumer. Let them sit back and have fun and pay a bit more in product expenses.

What say?

The Henry Ford of Heart Surgery

“Japanese companies reinvented the process of making cars. That's what we're doing in health care,” Dr. Shetty says. “What health care needs is process innovation, not product innovation.”

At his flagship, 1,000-bed Narayana Hrudayalaya Hospital, surgeons operate at a capacity virtually unheard of in the U.S., where the average hospital has 160 beds, according to the American Hospital Association.

Narayana's 42 cardiac surgeons performed 3,174 cardiac bypass surgeries in 2008, more than double the 1,367 the Cleveland Clinic, a U.S. leader, did in the same year. His surgeons operated on 2,777 pediatric patients, more than double the 1,026 surgeries performed at Children's Hospital Boston.

Next door to Narayana, Dr. Shetty built a 1,400-bed cancer hospital and a 300-bed eye hospital, which share the same laboratories and blood bank as the heart institute. His family-owned business group, Narayana Hrudayalaya Private Ltd., reports a 7.7% profit after taxes, or slightly above the 6.9% average for a U.S. hospital, according to American Hospital Association data.

via The Henry Ford of Heart Surgery – WSJ.com.

Emissions profile for Developed Countries vs Developing Countries – Is it 46/54 or 80/20? The Australian misleads the real numbers

The Australian has a story today about a study with the headline

“Developing nations outstrip rich on greenhouse gases”

When you go into the details the numbers are different.

Developing countries of the world; where 5.7 billion people live emit 54% of the world emissions; and the developed world where 1 billion people live emit about 46% of the world emissions. From 1990, the developing countries have been growing faster than developed countries. This is true for two reasons – one, more population and two, higher economic growth.

The author of the study has this to say too,

  • The study said that the increase in emissions from developing countries was in part due to their manufacture of goods for export to rich countries.
  • Professor Le Quere said that emissions per person remained much higher in rich countries
  • Professor Le Quere said that the study did not take account of historic responsibility for greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. She said that developing countries were responsible for only 20 per cent of cumulative emissions since 1751.
  • “Emissions in rich countries have only stabilised because they have reached a certain stage of development which other countries have yet to attain.”

The last part is the critical. They have stabilised at a very high per capita per person because of a certain stage of development and developing countries with their higher population are responsible for only 20% of the world emissions from 1751.

If carbon emissions need to be cut then the developed nations responsible for 80% of the emissions from 1751 need to do it first. Only if headlines told the real story.

The Drucker Centennial

November marks the 100th anniversary of Peter Drucker’s birth. In more than 30 sharply written essays for Harvard Business Review and other publications, he delved into executives’ basic challenges and opportunities. Assembled here are some of his classic contributions, as well as new perspectives on Drucker’s influence.

via The Drucker Centennial – Harvard Business Review.

More here – Drucker Institute

The Time is Ripe to Green Trucking (and why MPG is inverserly propotional)

Due to the logarithmic nature of fuel efficiency there is more to be gained to green trucks than work on small cars.

For 50 years, long haul tractor-trailer designs have remained fundamentally unchanged. Basically a giant box hurtling down the highway at 55 miles per hour, most trucks average only six miles to the gallon.

[...]

But the time is ripe for change. According to recent analysis by Rocky Mountain Institute the technology already exists to double the energy efficiency of long-haul trucks in the nation’s fleet. Their size, speed and poor aerodynamics mean they are laden with “low-hanging fruit” in terms of cost-effective efficiency and retrofitting opportunities.

via The Time is Ripe to Green Trucking | GreenBiz.com.

I learned about this first from an article by Seth Godin.

This very interesting article in Science, “The MPG Illusion” by Richard P. Larrick and Jack B. Soll at the Fuqua School of Business in Duke University (Vol 320, June 20, 2008, p. 1593), points out the mathematically obvious truth that gas used per mile is inversely proportional to miles per gallon, which means that you have a steeper slope at lower MPG ratings, and diminishing returns at higher MPG ratings.

And,

There are some important policy implications of this. Relatively small MPG improvements in the most gas-hungry vehicles pay off greater than larger improvements in already efficient cars (hence, it does make sense to offer tax breaks for modest improvements in SUVs versus tax breaks for hybrids, which typically replacing already gas-efficient sedans). Also, personal driving habits, especially for gas-hungry cars, can often times add or subtract a few MPG to a car’s efficiency on average. For example, a car that may get 25 MPG “average highway” will degrade to under 15 MPG if you gun it out of stoplights in city traffic. That’s a huge increase in gas consumed per distance driven, especially for the less efficient cars, whereas for more efficient cars it doesn’t hurt as much to goose the engine a bit.

Apparently the thinking that gas savings is linear with MPG is not uncommon. A survey of college students revealed that a majority of them shares this misconception.


The Berkeley Blog

The university of Berkeley has launched a Berkeley blog where more than 150 Berkeley professors will be discussing topics of great interest to me and importance too.

From the Press release:

Berkeley — The University of California, Berkeley’s best and brightest are often asked to share their insights at the White House, on Wall Street and with the media worldwide. Now, they are furthering that conversation in a new format – The Berkeley Blog.

Launched on Oct. 12 by UC Berkeley’s online NewsCenter, the blog (http://blogs.berkeley.edu/) features campus faculty members fielding a wide spectrum of questions about the hottest current events. The blog appears to be the first such enterprise based at a major university in the United States.

So far, about 150 UC Berkeley professors have signed on to share their knowledge, experience and ideas with the academic community and the general public. They are responding to topical questions posed two or three times a week by the staff of UC Berkeley’s Office of Public Affairs, which hosts and moderates the blog. (An alphabetical list of faculty participants is online at: http://blogs.berkeley.edu/all-authors.)

Some of the topics right now,

Economics
How does Nobel economist Oliver Williamson’s work apply to 21st century capitalism, both here and in developing countries?

Energy & Environment
What is at stake if world leaders fail to act when they meet in Copenhagen in December for the World Climate Conference?

Science & Technology
The blockbuster discovery of a 4.4 million-year-old hominid, Ardi, adds another chapter to the history of human origins. What does this discovery tell us, and what more is there to learn about the story of human evolution?

 

Climate Hijack

Climate Change has taken so much of the mind space that other environmental and I may add developmental issues have taken a backside. The focus on climate change will hurt our ability to solve other issues.

Biodiversity loss, desertification, unsustainable fishing… where are the spaces at the top table for these?

By singing the climate tune so loudly, have environmental groups unwittingly helped to create a situation where climate change is all that politicians and the public hear?

Has the media contributed? A couple of years ago I added up the number of articles we had written on the BBC News website within the preceding nine months about various issues.

The scores were four for deforestation, four for desertification, 17 for biodiversity – and on climate change I stopped counting when I reached 1,000.

In large part, what journalists report reflects what is going on in the big world; but have we, too, forgotten the larger messages of the UN Geo-4 report, the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, and other audits of a society whose environmental problems run much wider and deeper than climate change?

via BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | Hijacked by climate change?.