The Self Deluders

I don't normally write in detail about sport. Sport business yes but sport performance, very very rarely. Sport and more precisely the business of sport is more than a passion for me, it's a profession.

However, I usually keep my personal opinions, well...personal (haha, that's crap - I didn't even believe it as I was writing it). I rarely keep my opinions to myself and today they turn to the Australian professional cricket community - or as I now like to refer to them, the 'self deluders'.....

The utter train wreck that was this Ashes series will long be burnt into Australia's psyche. For many of us, this was the first time we have suffered such a globally public and shameful 'pantsing', and worst of all it comes at the hands of the old enemy. With the complete and remorseless dismantling of our cricket credentials, England can now rightfully turn its attention to worthy opponents such as India and South Africa who will at least test their mettle.

England is afforded that luxury because they follow the most basic rules of excellence, which include; set challenging goals, self awareness is a virtue, learn from those doing it better (or best) and success only resides in a place where accountability also exists.

For Australia's part, we are working to a different rule book....Cricket Australia, the selectors and the players seem to live on Delusion St.

Rather than Australia nobly coming clean with its public and saying, "look, we are know we are not very good at the moment, we are rebuilding and we are going to try some new strategies and some new players and this may or may not work" they continue to push the, "we trained hard and think we can turn it around at the...(insert name of ashes graveyard venue here)....

Australia must be close to a world ranking below #5. We must come clean with ourselves. We are a very ordinary cricket team. There is some chance we will not win a test (let alone a series) for quite some time, years perhaps, given we have the top 3 teams next on the calendar, AND it will get worse before it gets better. Cricket Australia should remove all of the trophies in their foyer of their Jolimont office and stop talking about the McGrath, Warne, Waugh era. It's gone. GONE!

I have a friend in the my office who finishes every debate on AFL football by saying '16 premierships' about his beloved Carlton. But like our cricket community this cry for past glory actually holds success back. England has shown that records can tumble very quickly. Our successful recent past will quickly fade into pleasant memory but will be a continued reminder of how far we have fallen.

Nobody, least of all me, can say for certain how we have gone from the greatest of all time to pretty awful, so quickly. However if England could move on up from the basement to the penthouse of world sport, to be a genuine leader in just about everything they compete in, we sure as hell can.

It's time for Cricket Australia to put a ban on peripheral activity....IPL, television commercials, et al...for Australian players who are under performing. Great financial success should be a reward for excellence rather than the consolation of mediocrity.

right, time to watch some tennis....

Equality of Opportunity VS Meritocracy

A few days ago I posed you a question via my various social media accounts.

I asked, 'what do you believe in above all else?' The responses I received were really interesting and interestingly, very similar. It made me think about what my 'not negotiable' values are. In the response of wikileaks and the millions of people who have recently demonstrated the importance that free speech plays in their lives, I wanted to figure out what cause or idea resonates the most in my life (and yours, hence the question).

I dismissed general slogans such as Freedom, Equality and Respect as they are obviously important and required ideals in any well functioning society but leave more questions than answers. They have so much grey, so many caveats that they make me uncomfortable.

After much consideration, and like many of you, I couldn't pinpoint one single ideal but rather I settled on two - Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy.

Meritocracy is very important to me. It is the idea that reward is given to the person who is most deserving of it. Meritocracy would not allow Prince Charles to rule Britain (and Australia for that matter) purely because of his blood line. It would not allow Sarah Palin to be a potential presidential candidate because of popularity alone. We would ask, ‘is this the best person to do that job?’ I put to you that in both examples above, the answer is no. In fact, in Prince Charles’ case, meritocracy would challenge the very idea of monarchy itself.

In a society ruled by meritocracy in its purest form, where you end up is determined by your ability alone. That seems fair to me. But as you are no doubt now saying to yourselves, 'what is the point of meritocracy if some people have an easier path than others? Of course their outcome will be better.' Quite right you are.

How can meritocracy exist when some people have access to great education and others have none at all? When some people can move passed illness or injury due to world class medical assistance and others are forever plagued with aliments that are easily treated in a more developed or prosperous environments. Surely here, meritocracy is meaningless.

If ability and ability alone determined outcome, as I believe it should, we would (and should) see far more minorities assuming positions of power and success. But we don't. We don't because meritocracy can only work when people start from the same point.

Enter, Equality of Opportunity. This is the idea that everyone is provided the same base from which to build their lives. That does not mean that everyone finishes the same way, like socialism for instance. It represents the idea that everyone is provided the same essential ingredients to succeed (education, health care, food, etc) and then it is up to them to do with that what they can. Some will invariably succeed and other will invariably not but their starting point would not be the determining factor.

Equality of opportunity would mean that all people, regardless of background, culture, language, sex, sexual preference, religion and any other variable you can think of, start the race from the same line.

That too seems fair to me....

Wikileaks - my musings

I know I know you are sick to death of the topic but the wikileaks saga has captured my interest and focus more than anything else has in years.

Some of my thoughts in no particular order:

- The fact that western govs are frantically changing legislation to stop wikileaks from operating, directly indicates that to date, wikileaks has not broken any laws - if they had, they would have just been arrested.

- The information censorship of wikileaks is as oppressive and undemocratic as anything in China, Russia or the middle east. American politicians calling for the assassination of Julian Assange for information distribution should be read as his leaked docs in action...life imitating leaks so to speak....

- Democracy is not a 'choose your own adventure' novel. It doesn't apply in some situations but not in others. Just because the information is hurtful to the govt of the day doesn't make it any less worthy of exposure. The govt is elected by us. they work for us. the information is ours.

- The idea that the information being exposed endangers lives can not be supported by fact. To date no one can point to a single incident of wikileaked info directly leading to deaths of civilians or govt operatives.

-I am yet to be convinced that what wikileaks is doing is any different to what the news organisations used to do, when they were more competent. If the NY Times broke these stories in the 50's would we be listening to the same outcry? No they'd be getting pulitzers.

- The fact that our major on and offline institutions can be coerced to infringe on wikileaks rights without a charge being laid is frightening. we should not be discussing what Zuckerberg and Facebook are going to do with our information, we should be asking what is a democratically elected government doing restricting the rights of a media institution that as not broken a single current law?

Fight on wikileaks, fight on....

I have succumbed....

I have succumbed to business catchphrase clique.

I tried to fight it for so long. The ROI, PPP, CSR set have long espoused ideas which can be neatly wrapped into a cute little box, easily digestible for the rest of us.

I'm afraid it gets worse, much worse. Today I am going to join the ranks of the offenders. I stand before you guilty of a crime against business language.

To that end, I would like to introduce you all to my little friend, ROR.

ROR is simple to say, simple to use and pack one hell of a punch!!!

ROR, or Return on Reach is simply an executive and board tool for determining the extent to which your company drives value in proportion to it's market reach. Measured against a number of variables such as sales, staff cost, advertising spend etc....

For instance, if Facebook with 500 million members (a big big reach) generates $2BN in annual revenue how does that really compare with a single city television network with a maximum market of 9 million homes driving $600 million in revenues? Changes the perception of value and success a little bit, no?

We've been doing some comparisons of media entities, big and small at Mummu HQ and the results are both surprising and fascinating. We are now starting to measure all of our own media assets (and we have few of them) against an ROR criteria - and it works!

So go forth and sing ROR as loudly and proudly as you throw out it's cousins, ROI and CSR....

I feel so cheap and tawdry now....

It's not linear....

There is very little about business, particularly entrepreneurial business that is linear.

Not growth, not opportunity, not investment, not customer relations or brand development. In fact I would go so far as to say that real entrepreneurship, market changing innovation can only occur in a state of controlled chaos.

Controlled Chaos is the state in which guidelines and boundaries exist at the outset... and then explode into new directions, and previously unforeseen outcomes (think of things like distribution channels, customer management, inventory management, risk profile tend to fairly common across industries).

All industries converge when it comes to operating in the consensus view of 'best model practice'. It is not until someone challenges the consensus view and demonstrates true innovation that the market evolves and a new consensus view is established.

Given this, entrepreneurial warriors need not only the appropriate temperament and skill set for operating in chaos, they actually need to be the catalyst for chaos.

A state of chaos serves two distinct benefits for the entrepreneur:

1. It necessitates flexibility, quick thinking and nimbleness

2. It unbalances your competition who are only comfortable competing in the traditional way, across traditional levers. Change the levers and watch them drop the ball on the traditional game as they try to catch up on the new one!

I will come back to chaos again shortly but be weary of the traditionalist third party service provider (lawyer, banker, investor, board member) who dismisses chaos out of hand - just make sure it's controlled....

pipeline (the second epiphany) online paid models...wtf?

I exist in a universe where incredibly the following is unfolding before my eyes....

- The media and advertising landscapes are morphing into something that is changing the relationship between them and their individual and combined relationships with their audiences / customers, FOREVER.

- 'Old world' pipe masters such as News Corp, Fairfax, et al. are trying to use their once heralded commercial domination to perverse the free supply of information online to protect their cash flows (see paid online subscription models at both orgs above)

- Younger generation 'information consumers' will (and are) questioning the need to transfer the old 'pay for information' model into the digital world (thanks Google). After all, why pay for an article from the WSJ if you can search for a topic or article and find information aplenty albeit from a different source (perhaps not as familiar or credible - on the surface).

- Old world pipe masters are STILL trying to pull the same levers as they always have to affect their bottom line - price, cost cutting, subscription, advertising. This begs the question, do they REALLY understand where the value exists in their business?

Let's break this timeline down a little:

• Consumers want free information access
• Advertisers want to 'return on reach'
• Traditional media products are drawing smaller audiences, so
• Traditional media products move online
• Advertisers follow the old masters online (brand recognition) but not with the same fervor
• Traditional media entities now online try to change online consumer behaviour

I hear you all screaming... 'hold on there, Amazon and iTunes make you 'pay to play'. True but they provide you with something tangible that we have always been happy to pay for literature and music. True we used to hand over $2 or a printed newspaper, some (myself included) still do, but information online is an entirely different proposition. Information has NEVER been more accessible, there has NEVER been more of it and truth and quality is no longer the exclusive domain of major media entities. Never in history have so many conflicting voices had an opportunity to share a pulpit.

So what does all of this have to do with pipeline I hear you say.... well, everything.

Pipeline saves traditional media owners from having to turn the www world into an online version of 1985.

Follow the logic....

• Media orgs carry the risk of losing brand loyalists for moving to paid online models
• Media orgs have a growing distressed advertising inventory in traditional formats
• Media orgs are looking to keep advertisers happy and invested in their brand

Hence Rupert Murdoch and his fellow pipeline masters are damned if they do go to paid online subscription (suffer consumer backlash and over time, dwindling authority) and damned if they don't (suffer continued advertising losses). Hmmmm, what's a billionaire to do???

Why the answer is simple my dear Watson....

Change the relationship with your advertisers....remove the master / servant model of the past 60 years and genuinely come together for the same end. The one thing advertisers want is quality reach - not coincidently, this is the one thing pipeline delivers.

The answer comes in the form of the chain...

Pipe - Destination - Consumer Product - Advertiser Product

OWN THE CHAIN, OWN THE CHAIN, OWN THE CHAIN.....

The 'M'

It's a new beginning. Mummu Media is born and the result is that I feel renewed and re-energised. The excitement and challenge of starting from scratch is something I have missed and is a little intoxicating.

The freshness of heady and ambitious plans, a new environment, a new look and being in constant problem solving mode is agreeing with me.

The shift has only been a slightly tangential direction but the day to day result of moving slightly off the well tread path onto a new one has already had a dramatically positive affect.

Commercial artistry is around the corner again....watch out!

precious

It's not gold, it's not diamonds, it's not money....

This is precious....

from all sides

today is not a day for pleasant tidings.

today I will not play in my usual playground of business and politics.

today i recognise I am trapped man. it is becoming more and more obvious to me that one's inability to control every aspect of one's environment has a far greater and more sinister affect than causing occasional inertia and trepidation.

today is about loss. today is about enlightenment. today is about understanding that when trying to please everyone around you, you invariably please no one.

today the consequences of the choices to be made could not be more real. more raw.

today I could lose it all. all that is important. all that matters.

today I can see that finding the one sparkling star in a sky littered with glittering illusions isn't enough.

today there is only hope for tomorrow.

Rant 1: Politics....I'm, baaaack!

OK, as promised, Rant 1: Politics - you knew it would be...

The extent to which I am quietly seething about the ineptitude of our politicians and the farce that is the current federal election campaign should not be underestimated.

To my reckoning, we have been blessed with the following inspiring choices from the major parties in two weeks time:

1. A sharp and shrewd politician who is clearly not strong enough to stop the gag from her own party and has more internal leaks and back fighting than Julius Caesar's Rome . The sanitised, party approved version is so saccharin that it makes you wonder if she even knows who she is any more. I mean seriously, Woman's Day???

2. A lunatic, right wing, uber religious, bigoted moron pretending to be a hippie and an environmentalist. He certainly doesn't know who he is, indicated by the fact that his policy positions change more often than he has said his favourite three words 'great big tax'. I have three words for him, 'we're not fooled'...

At least when Sir Joh and Pauline Hanson were running around we knew it was a joke...

Quick note to say that I will be back with a vengeance shortly. I have taken a brief hiatus and the nonsense will start flowing freely again soon.

Stay tuned, much to rant about....

coming rants include:

FIFA World Cup
Australian Federal Election
Hollywood Celebs (particularly that low life scum bag Mel Gibson)
Huffington Post (more of a love affair than a rant really)
Many more....

Peace

AAJ

clarity

I'm a father again. Our beautiful little daughter arrived on Friday....

NOTHING, NOTHING like it.

shame Cleo shame

Apologies up front to all non Australians reading this post. Context below...

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24948059-661,00.html

Big brother caused me some concern, Paris Hilton's television exploits made me scratch my head, channel 9 has me forever questioning the notion of commonsense and decency but CLEO magazine has got to take the cake....

Ben Cousins, are you people serious??? Ben Cousins as an eligible Australian bachelor of the year? How any adult in a senior executive position in a media company could seriously allow Ben Cousins to make this list simply defies belief...

This has all the worst elements of publicity stunt and so unashamedly shirks the corporate responsibility of a media outlet that shapes the attitude and perceptions of young people. This glides past poor taste, zooms past irresponsibility, eclipses bad judgment and lands squarely in the negligence box.

Let's get the facts:

1. Ben Cousins is not a hardened criminal.
2. Ben Cousins does deserve a chance to redeem himself and win back respect
3. Ben Cousins is a self admitted, recovering drug addict
4. Ben Cousins is the OPPOSITE of a role model, although in a few years if he stays clean and can reach his past football exploits again, he might get there...
5. Bachelor of the Year represents the BEST in the community, the most worthy in the community, the most 'winnable' young men in Australia

I ask you three critical questions:

1. What self respecting woman is yearning for a mixed up, sexed up, recovering addict who has yet to prove to his family, friends, employer, governing body and most importantly himself that he is past the danger point of his particular vice?

2. In an age of increasing equality for women, where girls and young women aspire to the loftiest of goals and can legitimately achieve them, what does it say about a magazine that says you should chase a man based exclusively based on his looks and fame (regardless of moral strength, values, intelligence and manner) because looks and fame are the only criteria by which Cousins could possibly qualify.

3. When will the community say enough is enough of crappy, gutter journalism that positions for the lowest common denominator and chases, hounds and crucifies good people for making everyday mistakes but then champions popular losers regardless of their reckless and dangerous behaviour.

Someone should be fired for this and the magazine should apologize to the women of Australia for treating them with such little respect.

Shame.

What's the difference? What the f%^#!!!!

So I have been asked a couple of times recently what the difference is between a consultant and an advisor (given I run a specialised advisory firm). Fair question I guess, and the answer is quite simple. One's a teacher, one's a doctor.

I liken a consultant to a highly skilled teacher. They will come in with a specific expertise (HR, Logistics, Leadership, etc) For the most part, the presentations and value is largely consistent (often re branded with some specific new client relevant content) so that it can be presented in a workshop format - time specific, scalable, teachable to new consultants in the business and after a while provides credibility in a specific area.

A consultant is essentially working to strengthen their client organisation so that they reach a point where they can attack the issues internally after 'learning' the skills required from the consulting team.

By contrast, an Advisor is akin to a business doctor. Think of it this way, do you go to the doctor with the intent of being taught medicine so that you can eventually self diagnose and treat yourself? Of course not. You are unwell and you are empowering the doctor to make the requisite decisions to make you well. Sometimes the doctor will work in concert with other specialists, other doctors or nurses. No decisions are made without you the patient, but you bend yourself to the specific experience and expertise.

An advisor is essentially the same. You take on THE RIGHT advisor to find the right cure for what ails your business. You are asking them to develop the strategy AND do the deals that deliver it. You empower the Advisor to produce that little bit of skill set that is not viable to invest in for the long term.

Don't misunderstand me. Consultants can be extremely valuable and can play a critical role in the development of an organisation. Advisors are not more valuable than consultants or vice versa, but they're not the same thing...

PEACE

3 things

Three things I am loving today...

1. Space: to think, to breathe, to feel, to develop, to expand, to explore and to dream

2. Change: of circumstance, of environment, of comfort, of engagement, of status and of energy

3. Control: over time, over direction, over choices and over energy

come on people

The world is getting smaller, right? We hear about it constantly. You can't escape a book store without reading a blurb that describes the frightening contraction all around us. Many of us now count friends, colleagues, clients, bosses and family living on the other side of the planet.

We engage in our daily lives doing ordinary things, but now we do them with people that are not in the next cubicle or office, they're in a different time zone, hemisphere and state of economic development. The average 7th grader can tell you what the current time is in NY, Tokyo, London, New Delhi and Shanghai. Movies are made with international cultural considerations in mind, books are written in multiple languages during their first run, organisations seemingly have more international offices then they do local staff and universities are building campuses on every continent. I'm not dreaming this, right? Then why the hell do we (as a global community) have so many problems?

I understand there is religious difference. I understand there is cultural difference. I understand there is a disparity of power determined by gender, wealth and education. I accept that there is more grey than black or white and that our challenges are vast and complicated. But you see, our resources are larger and more powerful, our intelligence is more nuanced, our empathy is more heartfelt, our time is better managed and responsibility has never been clearer....and remember...the WORLD IS SMALLER.

It simply doesn't make sense!

We as the adults need to ask ourselves whether the hubris we show in our consumerism, popularism, religious fervor, aggression and absolutism is a reasonable burden for the next generation. I'm not happy that my generation will be forever paying for the environmental degradation and cultural animosity brought about by the actions and decisions of the generations before me and I am therefore mindful that my actions and decisions will impact those that will come after me. Surely every parent wants a better life, a better world for their children than they themselves had...perhaps we can start there....

Sorry, I guess these are the ramblings of a young parent with another child arriving very very soon... let's get our house in order people, my kids are relying on us.

ding ding....where to get off...

It's all about choice. It's all about choice. It's all about choice.

The bus keeps going around and around. Each stop offers a new, unique, exciting and challenging experience....they're all appealing. They all offer something worthwhile. They all offer opportunity for growth. They all require compromise.

Where do I get off? That is my question of the day.

convergence...divergence

Ok, so you knew I wouldn't only post one blog....I can't keep quiet for long enough, and even if I wanted to, I don't have the discipline.



A great deal has been on my mind in the days since my last writing session. The impending birth of my second child (only 4 weeks away), the majestic growth of my little boy, my new business venture, the seemingly incurable disposition of the middle east, the disintegration of the once invincible Australian cricket team and the fact that there are never any positive stories on the evening news....but I guess what has kept me really ticking over is the idea of unavoidable change - limitless, overwhelming and ever growing change.



In the past few days I have learned that no less than six people I know well, all successful, all stable and all intelligent are dealing with the challenge of massive life change...it seems that the world has spun a little too vigorously on its axis and is shaking normality loose.



We are watching the dissolution of some of the world's most prolific companies, the change of governments from Asia to Europe, the America's and throughout Africa. We are experiencing the loss of millions of jobs worldwide, the reshaping of the economic, social and ideological landscape.



I can't help but think that life will look dramatically different in a mere 5 years time...Let me illustrate this feeling by a couple of observations....did I mention that you're really patient with me and it's greatly appreciated...



1. There are a plethora of middle and senior management together with executive suite personnel facing the reality of redundancy and downsizing. This group of people is educated, experienced, networked and for the most part capable....most would find work in a normal environment. But here's the kicker, the companies that would normally hire them are experiencing the same heartache and are not putting people on, rather they too are adding to the army of future entrepreneurs...so I predict more than any time in history we are going to see entrepreneurship flourish. We will see the creation of more new business and more 'bosses' than ever before. We will begin to notice astounding innovation born from focused niche activity as well as the release of bureaucracy. I say: It's about time.



2. We will see a closing of the rich:poor gap but not as many hoped...it will not be the poor getting rich but rather the rich getting poorer...not altogether a terrible thing, but disappointing given the prosperity and opportunities of the past decade. I have recently read a number of reports about the amount of hurt being experienced in the not for profit sector. It stands to reason of course, I mean when you can no longer afford your mortgage or food on the table, it's no surprise that there is not enough to go around for the that needy village in Africa or that cancer charity you believe in or even that local church group down the street. I say: what a disgrace, what a tragedy.



Oh, another thing that has intoxicated me this week is the idea of convergence and divergence. One result of the overwhelming shift in the workforce is that many people who were on track to meet one another will no longer do so, and people who were never going to meet due to their previous circumstance will now cross paths. I think this is a delicious prospect. Just think who will enter your life in the next five years as a result of redundancy and the exuberance of start up activity.

Well I think I've shared enough for today.

Peace

AAJ

The first, the last? the only?

This is my first blog. It may be my last, but I doubt it.

My intentions are clear:

1. to participate in the world around me in a consistent and personal way

2. to present honest, real and uncensored discourse in the areas I know (or perhaps more accurately, areas I think I know) well - sport, media, politics, business and entertainment.

The frequency? Twice a week

The schtick: Brutally honest & open for well thought out criticism

Believers: Anyone who prefers questions to answers and anyone who knows that the world is far from perfect but is still a work in progress

Non believers: Well, let's just say they'll figure it out quickly...

Underlying message: Think, Question, Create and Never ever allow others to shake your resolve. If you really believe it - Own it.

Peace

AAJ