On Risk

by Thomas Heng

Risk is inherent in today's world. Some may believe that in an increasingly risky world, it would be best not to do anything at all and watch the world go by or sort itself out, that it is better to wait till it's 'safe' again. Nothing could be further from the truth.

While it may seem that the world has become a lot more dangerous today than ever before (by the way I would disagree with that, though it will probably best be left to another post!), the opportunity for ordinary people to become all that they can be is also greater than ever. Having said that, it would be prudent to examine the nature of risk before plunging headlong into a venture based on a nebulous concept of reward. For to undertake any meaningful enterprise without clarity as regards its potential risks and rewards is, well, very risky indeed.

It is essential to distinguish between the risks that are external to oneself, and those that are created within. Risks that are solely external to oneself are few and far between; most of the time such risks occur suddenly without forewarning, and can at best be managed only after the event. However, it is precisely the management of risk that can and should be the premise of the individual, that is, risk management is wholly internal in nature.

This insight provides comfort for those of us who feel that life is increasingly outside of our control, that business is becoming unsustainable, and that the future of our very existence lies in the hands of people (or other entities) whom we do not know, let alone understand. One of the keys is in our perception of risk and the occurrence of unexpected events. How one handles major global events is not identical to how another deals with them. Which means that we have the power of choice to determine the precise meaning of each event that 'happens' to us.

A strategic approach to life and business that incorporates the principle of risk management does not mean that we start treating the people in our lives as chess pieces. Rather, it means that we are acutely sensitive to the environment around us, and that we pay particular attention to how, on an individual level, affect others around us, and ponder upon our words, thoughts, and actions as we release them from our inner being.

Resolution

I came across something that I find rather meaningful. The original post, as far as I know, can be found here. And apparently the originator is none other than the CEO of Coca-Cola. Brian G. Dyson.

Basically it says that Life is like trying to balance 5 balls -- Work, Family, Health, Friends and Spirituality. Sometimes it is easy to see all these 5 balls as the same thing, but there is one very important difference. Work is a ball made of rubber, even if I drop it, it will bounce back to me sooner or later. But the rest of the other balls are not made of rubber, they are made of glass. So if I drop one of these balls it will chip, crack or even shatter...

In good times I appreciate that such a goal is not easy to accomplish. However, what I do realise is that in challenging times such goals are perhaps even more important to strive towards. All too often in the pursuit of material things, or more relevantly today, in the struggle for survival, people can forget their innate needs for connectedness, and become mean and downright nasty to the ones they care most about. Also, wishing that Life isn't as what has been observed by Mr Dyson doesn't make it so. No matter how we slice or dice it, there are matters in life that are so important to us that even if we ignore them our entire lives, they will return to us with either the price that we pay for neglect, or the rewards that we reap for taking heed.

The choice my friend, as ever, is yours..

House of Cards

Authorities in the US and Europe have officially declared that recession is taking place in their respective economies -- finally. Months of debacles beginning with the sub-prime housing mortgage crisis in the US in late 2007 have cumulated in the stunning collapse of Lehman Brothers, a leading investment bank of the times. Additionally, the financial world has recently been hit with the double whammy of AIG and Citigroup, both respected and indeed revered institutions that now have to go cap in hand to seek the Federal Government's assistance to bail them out. What indeed could have precipitated such a drastic turn of events?

Commentators on the sidelines have proclaimed rather loudly that greed is the root cause: bank executives are greedy to extend mortgages to people who simply cannot afford such payments; credit ratings agencies are greedy and scared to lose market share to competitors and create perceptions that such-and-such a product is AAA-rated, based on 'reliable third-party information', when in fact it is downright shoddy; US Federal Reserve is greedy in persisting with low interest rates that lead to unbelievably cheap credit despite global trends that indicate the contrary; investors are greedy for demanding ever-increasing rate on return on investment no matter what the cost. Yet should we take such 'expert opinions' as an accurate reflection of the cause of such events, and indeed are the various remedies suggested logical steps that address these causes at the core?

The course of human history has been for the most part beset with actions and over-reactions. The Great Depression of the 1930s led to massive government spending; the punitive measures towards Germany after the First World War indirectly led to the rise of Hitler during the Second World War; the meteoric rise of Japan after the Second World War was followed by a lost decade in the 1990s. Perhaps the issue lies deep within the psyche of humans themselves. Rather than address the behaviour of greed per se with punitive measures such as fines, jail sentences, and government bailouts, could one not take aim at the psychology that lies beneath the decision to engage in 'greedy behaviour'? It is likely that humans are innately unable to regulate their behaviour towards a stable norm that conforms to neat patterns that can be observed and predicted in a cold scientific light, as what most classical economists would hope. The aggregate such behaviours are more likely than not to cause points of crisis in the time continuum. 

Another classic case of human myopia on a massive scale is the refrain that 'What happens over there won't happen over here.' In an increasingly interconnected world such as ours, such a mentality cannot be more inaccurate. Sooner or later the credit crunch will affect the shores of Asian countries; exports will dwindle, as will factory orders, and the dreaded R-word will be back on the lips of citizens in these countries.

One would do well to minimise the impact of external events without being unnecessarily impacted by them. For instance, job security is mostly a myth, booms and recessions are never permanent, and opportunities are like hope -- they are out there so long as one has eyes to see. Increasingly, one should also realise the futility of projecting ever increasing rates of growth just because the short-term investor market demands it be so. Persisting in such logic flies in the face of historical principles, no matter what the economists and other experts say. The sustainability question is ever-present, but is more than often hidden amidst the hyperbole of gung-ho predictions by governmental authorities and private-sector industry players alike. 

On Profits

"Profits Are Better Than Wages" -- Jim Rohn

To the uninitiated, there doesn't seem to be a difference between profits and wages. After all, don't they both come in more or less the same form, Cold Hard Cash?

Perhaps this little reflection of mine can help you make some distinctions between these two concepts. I wrote this in response to Jim Rohn's quote:

Wages make me a Living; 

Profits make me a Fortune.

It is sad when I speak with some executives. You know, those regular-hour types that seem to earn ever-increasing amounts as bonuses for doing the same thing day-in, day-out. They tend hardly not to seek out opportunities around them, and are content to drift along. Evidently they are either too young to be promoted, or too old to learn something new. Well, I completely empathise, because I was one of them! Believe it or not, working for a Living was something I used to do.

Being in an environment that is at best unsupportive, and at worst, outright hostile, doesn't help the aspiring executive either. It seems that there is just too much cynicism in the workplace. Invariably this results in people being too focussed on keeping their jobs rather than simply doing them, regardless of their pronoucements that they are indeed doing the latter!

So why am I seemingly fixated with Fortune? So that I can give it away! Seriously, can you give away your Living to someone else? Being thirty-something is not too early to consider leaving beind a legacy; Life is just too short not to think of such things! I have seen, heard and experienced enough to know that drifting along is no longer an option. In fact, it never was an option in the first place! 

Thus I commit to Working Hard on My Job, But Working (Much) Harder on Myself.

Choose Freedom

Have you ever felt unappreciated for the things you do, or worse, for being who you are? I have, and trust me, it's not the greatest of emotions! I mean, after working hard for something that I truly believe in for almost all my life, only to realise that the things I hold dear mean next to nothing to the organisations that we shall collectively call SpongeDry Inc. Sure you may say 'The company is not supposed to consider employees needs and wants, let alone feelings', which begs the question, just what on earth is a company for anyway? To satisfy the owner's ego, or siphon off shareholders' equity, or to create havens for money that is ill-gotten? Doesn't anyone create companies for something other than for their own shallow selves anymore? Or are we so blinded by the profit of the here-and-now that we forget that organisations have the potential to outlive their owners and their descendants?

Some time ago, I have had the last straw in my experience of being in full-time employment. Somehow, being in the position of employee entitles the employer to shuffle staff like a deck of cards, with little or no regard for prior results, preliminary consultation, nor the space to address potential disagreement or resentment from the person most affected by such a move.

So out of the realisation that I would never be able to reconcile my values with those of SpongeDry Inc, I wrote these as a postscript to my resignation letter:

• People Above Profits
  
• Family Above Career
  
• Truth Over Rules
  
• God Above All
  

Maybe my mind has indeed gone to cuckoo-land, but if organisations don't realise that there are limits to what they can do to their employees, then pardon me, but they must be Crazy...

On Leadership

by Thomas Heng

There is no success without a successor.

The quality of the leader is not in the leader himself, but in the people he leads.

A leader of leaders has fewer concerns than a leader of followers.

Leaders provide the climate that determines the growth of those who follow him.

The greatest joy of a leader is the successful thriving of his team in his absence.

Leadership requires continual improvement on the part of all members.

Leadership by example is by far the most effective leadership of all.

Leadership is enhanced by personal branding, but personal branding is no substitute for genuine leadership.