WEEKLY WAITE-O-GRAM (Rel. 51.0)

FACING UP TO FACEBOOK

One question I frequently get from senior executives is what to do about Facebook. On the one hand, they want to appear open to new technologies and social media. On the other hand, they don't necessarily want to share aspects of their personal life with employees and other stakeholders. The same goes for Twitter, YouTube and other social media channels. The desire to be "hip" (or at least appear to be in tune with younger audiences) often collides with the realization that a C-Suite executive is under constant scrutiny by the media, investors and other interested parties.  My advice? Unless there is a compelling, revenue- or image-driving business case, stay away from Facebook and Twitter... and only use a professionally-oriented site like Linked In... to position yourself in the context of your career and business objectives.

NO PRINCE HARRY SHOTS... OR SHOTS OF ANY KIND

If you are an executive at a movie studio...or a clothing retailer like Marc Jacobs...or a restaurateur like Wolfgang Puck...friending half the world on Facebook...or tweeting your every random thought... might be an excellent strategy. But even then, the activity should be professionally managed...and vetted. Tweeting is especially perilous. The first thought that comes into your mind and out into the Tweet-O-Sphere may seem to you worthy of Plato or Confucius... but read to others more like Charlie Sheen. As for Facebook, if you really feel you must use it, make sure you have someone go through your site with a fine tooth comb. That hilarious shot of you from a long-ago costume party...or throwing back shooters and catching beads at a Mardi Gras parade...may not be the lasting image you want to leave people with. And make sure you use the security features to limit access to those you truly want to see the site.

BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING...

If you have a son or daughter applying to university...or for a job... you might want to give them a heads up regarding social media. University admissions offices...and company human resources departments...are increasingly turning to social media sites like Facebook and myspace to screen candidates. Kaplan Inc. reports that 38% of university admissions offices take a gander at applicants' sites. And, according to a 2009 CareerBuilder survey, 45% of companies report they visit social networking sites to view job candidates...and 35% say they reject candidates based on what they find. And what gets candidates in trouble? Provocative or inappropriate photos (53%); Drinking or drug use (44%); Bad-mouthing previous employer, colleagues or clients (35%); Poor communication skills (29%); and Discriminatory comments (26%).

AND RECRUITING!

Ironically, even as universities and employers are checking social networks to weed out applicants... they are also increasingly using those same networks to recruit. Even the CIA and the IRS now employ Facebook to attract a younger demographic as future employees. And most North American colleges and universities have done the same...often using recently admitted students to help them fashion messaging to maximize a school's appeal. So it is a two-edged sword... with the ability to cut (you) in both directions.

CRAZY--LIKE A FOX?

Like most people, I have been watching the unfolding situation in Libya... and the machinations of its leader of 41 years, Muammar Qaddafi...with a combination of fascination and horror. Qaddafi, to my mind, has always been the Mick Jagger of despots, combining a kind of strutting swagger vibe with a sartorial splendor that hovered somewhere between Elton John...and Diana Ross. What I think gets forgotten in the west is that when he came to power, in the late 1960's, Qaddafi was able to draw on a huge well of resentment from an Arab population that had been humiliated by Italian colonization...followed by varying degrees of British, American and Italian interference in domestic affairs during the Cold War.  When he ousted King Idris I in a bloodless coup in 1969, Qaddafi promised to end foreign domination. In that very narrow sense, he was a success. And thus what seems to us to be the rantings of a lunatic in his recent public speeches -- the claims that the Italians or Americans will return; or that al-Qaeda is behind the revolt (and are busily seducing Libya's young people with psychedelic drugs) -- is actually building on decades of state-supported paranoia.

NO EASY ANSWERS

As always, there are those who are not happy with the response of the West to the crisis, especially in the United States.  President Obama is criticized for not doing "more", especially by some of those lining up to challenge him in 2012. The problem with some of these folks is that they'd rather grab a quick sound-bite on the evening news... than provide a thoughtful analysis of the issue at hand.  Any American (or British or Italian) intervention would run the risk of playing into the hands of the Qaddafi cabal...and any US or NATO ground presence would almost assuredly change the tone and direction of the revolt, not only in Libya, but throughout the region. On the other hand, the last thing anyone wants to see is another Rwanda or Bosnia, with the world standing by while civilian populations are slaughtered. Nobody said being the leader of world's last remaining superpower would be easy... but even "No-Drama Obama" must be feeling at this point that he's been invited to a five-alarm fire... with a too-short hose.

AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY BORING

While Americans are already gearing up for the 2012 Presidential Election... we here in Canada may well have an election of our own quite soon. We don't know exactly when, because the government has to "fall" before an election can be called. Governments here stumble all the time, but they only occasionally fall. It takes a "confidence vote" -- which is really a "no-confidence vote." In theory (in a minority government situation), one or more opposition parties decide to trigger an election because they think they might win. In the current situation, it looks like the incumbent Conservative Party is going to trigger an election... because the polls say they might finally win... a majority.

HOW TO TELL A CANADIAN ELECTION... 

It looks like the Conservatives will engineer a no-confidence vote by submitting a budget that at none of the other parties can support. If so, we will likely go to the polls in early May (or when the ice ships out of the lakes, whichever comes first.) For the uninitiated, here are the main differences between a US and a Canadian election:

1. No Primaries -- No Iowa caucuses; no New Hampshire or Wisconsin primaries; no Super Tuesday. We did try a caucus in Manitoba once, but two-thirds of the participants fell asleep and the rest  froze to death. 

2. No "Best Political Team in America" -- That's right, we somehow get through an election without three-dozen self-styled experts and political has-beens pontificating. And not one of our anchors is named "Wolf" or "Candy".

3. No Endless Campaign --  A Canadian election typically lasts for 36 days (it can go somewhat longer, but cannot be any shorter). Most Canadians think 36 days are quite enough.

4. No Exciting Candidates -- In reaction to "Trudeau-mania", an affliction that swept the country in the 1960'sa, '70's and early '80's, federal legislation was enacted that forbids anyone with an ounce (later changed to a gram) of charisma being nominated by any major Canadian political party. All parties have consistently complied with the dictate.

5. No Massive Spending -- In Canada elections are federally (taxpayer) financed, using a formula tied to votes obtained in previous elections. 

6. No Decisive Results -- In the States the House can "turn Blue"; the White House can be "captured" by Democrats; Statehouses "fall" to one party or another. In Canada, at least over the past three elections, one party eeks out a minority victory, establishes a timid and tentative agenda...and toddles along, trying not to "fall".  That's the likely outcome this time -- and, gosh darn, that's the way we like it!          

AND FINALLY...

Did anyone tell Prime Minister Stephen Harper that he's calling an election... right in the middle of the Stanley Cup playoffs? 

(The views and opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author, who is responsible for any errors, omissions or misstatements. For those contemplating revising their Facebook pages, I offer the following advice: 1) Remove all pictures of you and Ruby the Heartbreaker. And Stavros the Studmuffin. 2) Take down any personal photographs depicting communicable diseases...or ballroom dancing. 3) Delete any sections referencing your political, religious or extra-terrestrial beliefs. 4) Never use a picture that you can't actually recall being taken.)

WEEKLY WAITE-O-GRAM (Rel. 50.0)

CAN MANAGERS BE FRIENDS?

The short answer in my experience is that managers can be friendly and empathetic, but should not try to be their employee's best buddies. Why? Because, at the end of the day, you may have to carry out actions that are not very best buddy-like, including termination. The hard truth is that your job isn't to be loved, it is to run your department, unit, division or company in the most professional, productive way possible.

MICHAEL SCOTT, POSTER BOY

Much as "All in the Family" and Archie Bunker taught a wide audience about the perils of bigotry and social prejudice in the 1970's, the series "The Office" and Michael Scott (Steve Carell) can serve as a modern day primer on what not to do as a manager or executive. Michael, who hails from the sales side of the mythical Dunder-Mifflin paper business, wants everyone to love him, each other, and to be part of one big office "family". To promote this, he engineers an endless series of in- and out-of-office events to build "teamwork". All have two defining characteristics: 1) They are really all about him and; 2) They all end extraordinarily badly. 

MARLON BRANDO, YOU’RE NOT

The obvious question is where does one draw the line between being friendly and supportive as a boss... and a friend. It is a not always an easy call. I would argue that you should avoid things like vacationing with employees; accepting an offer to become a Godparent (don't laugh -- it happens!); I would even suggest shying away from at-home dinner invitations - once you accept an invitation from one employee (or invite one employee to your home), how do you ever justify not doing the same with others? Their lasagna’s not up to snuff? Having your entire department over to your home (say, for a holiday get-together, or summer cook-out) is a little different. But you as the boss should be aware that for many employees, spending time with the boss is not as scintillating a prospect as you might think.       

BUT SLIGHTLY AHEAD OF SCOOPING KITTY LITTER

Tom Rath, author of "Vital Friends", cites a Princeton University study of employees which found that interaction with the boss was rated, on average, "as being less enjoyable than cleaning the house". Rath's take on this is bosses should make a greater effort to befriend employees and argues that it will lead to greater productivity and cohesiveness. My experience is that you have creep right up to the fine line I described above...but try not to cross it. Like almost everything else involving management, it takes judgment and experience to get it right.

JOB-HOPPING -- GOOD OR BAD?

I recently wrote a guest column for Balanced WorkLife, a Scottsdale-based firm owned by my good (but not TOO good) friends, Jim and Lori Dryburgh. The topic is the pros and cons of job-hopping  for management types. While I was tempted to plagiarize myself and present the column as a Waite-O-Gram, I decided that would somehow be cheating. But you still might be interested in the piece -- it can be found at http://balancedworklife.com/blog/careermanagement/job-hopping-good-or-bad/  And if you can guess the name of the kangaroo, you can stay at the Dryburgh's for the entire month of February in 2012!

MY STRANGEST ASSIGNMENT

I said in the last Gram that I would relate the toughest assignment of my career. After I wrote that, I realised that the toughest assignment of my career was actually writing fortunes... to stick into fortune cookies...to be served at a dinner party held by Elizabeth and Bob Dole...at their Watergate apartment in 1980. The fortunes were supposed to be customized to to the guest...and funny. For example, Senator and Mrs. Howard Baker were to be among the guests. He's five-foot four. And his spouse, since departed, was usually three sheets to the wind by the time the second course arrived. Senator John Tower of Texas and his latest paramour were also to be there, along with Al Haig and others. The potential for humour was enormous. Too enormous. So, once again, it was a question of knowing where to draw the line. Which maybe I didn't...as I was never asked to write a Chinese fortune cookie fortune...again.

SECOND STRANGEST ASSIGNMENT

Two years later, now working for IBM World Trade, I got called into the office of the CEO. With him was the head of legal. In a briefing right out of "Mission Impossible" (but minus the self-destructing tape recorder), I was told I was to board a flight from New York to Jakarta, Indonesia (via Tokyo). Officially I was to inspect the archaeological restoration of a temple, Borobudur, which IBM had been supporting. Unofficially, I was supposed to determine if anything "funny" was going on with IBM's operations in the third-world country, which at the time was ruled by a strongman named Suharto. To IBM's credit, the company had zero tolerance for "funny business", be it in Indiana or Indonesia. No payments; no bribes; no compromising business relationships. It was unequivocal. The reigning IBM country General Manager in Indonesia, Fred (not his real name), had actually held my job as Director of External Programs before heading out to Jakarta. So he, better than anyone, knew the rules of the road.

TOMMY CAN YOU HEAR ME?

The crux of the matter was that rumours had filtered up to head office that IBM might be winning some Indonesian government and other bids...due to some sort of unusually close relationship with Suharto's son, "Tommy." The son was generally known as a bad actor, using his family name to build a personal fortune (like all good dictator sons everywhere.) I was supposed to try to get to the bottom of things...without raising suspicion...or getting myself killed. (In retrospect, I think I was picked for the assignment because I was a former reporter, and knew how to poke around; I knew "Fred" well enough to gain some confidence (but not well enough to put his interests ahead of IBM's); and, finally, I  was single... so if things went really, really bad, there would be no need for dealing with a grieving spouse!)

BALI LOW       

I got to Jakarta, poked around a bit...trundled off to Borobudur...and then returned to IBM's office in Jakarta. In the couple of days I'd picked up some warning signs in conversations...including many mentions of Tommy...but everyone was being very elliptical. There were hints and allegations (and maybe even lasers in the jungle somewhere), but nothing concrete. It was now Thursday and I was scheduled to fly out on Saturday -- with my mission very much unaccomplished. In what was routine procedure at the time, I had been asked to give my passport and plane ticket to Fred's secretary...for reconfirmation. So imagine my surprise when Fred later that day emerged from his office...holding my ticket and passport... saying "Bob, I can't let you come all this way...without visiting Bali. So I've changed your flights...and you can use my private villa, right on the beach. You'll have the whole weekend. I won't take no for an answer"  And sure enough, he had changed my flights. I was torn between smiling and saying thank you (so as to not arouse suspicion) and jumping through the plate glass window and running to the US Embassy. I said thank you.

ONE WAY TICKET?

When I got to Bali and to his villa...I did not have to be Columbo to figure things out. What I couldn't observe (and there was a lot to observe, from compromising pictures of Fred and Tommy, to the largest collection of S & M equipment east of Greenwich Village and a trove of heavy-duty firearms, to some pretty nifty Harley Davidsons) I could learn from the butler/valet, who made Watergate's Deep Throat look discrete. IBM had a philosophy of making the customer king...but clearly some lines were being blurred here. It was not hard to connect the dots between IBM's rising market share...Tommy's role in the bid process...and a relationship that screamed conflict of interest.  So I settled into the villa...and waited to be killed. Surely that had to be the plan...

NOT DEAD YET

Obviously I wasn't killed. When the weekend ended, I hopped a series of flights that returned me to New York. I made my report to the CEO and the head of legal. All verbal. More evidence emerged that Tommy had been helping guide the bids in IBM's favor (perhaps by signaling pricing).Within a couple of weeks the GM "retired" (with a very rich payout, I was reassured). He relocated to Australia and bought a farm. Several years later he was tragically killed on his property by a Ford tractor that rolled over him. I have often wondered to this day if it was truly an accident...

CONFLICT IS CONFLICT   

In retrospect, it seems clear to me that Fred must have wanted to be found out. There was no other explanation for his sending me to Bali. (And I should point out his undoing wasn't due his sexual preference -- it would have been the same had it been a daughter of Suharto, had she been integral to the procurement process. IBM, while pretty buttoned-down, was somewhat ahead of its time in tolerating what Tom Watson called "Wild Ducks".) 

NOR DO I GIVE UP MY PASSPORT...

One lesson I learned from all of this...is never take a meeting with the CEO...and the Chief Legal Officer. It can only lead to trouble. I also learned that you can be friends with people at work...as long as you realise that at the end of the day, you ultimately have to be absolutely objective in terms of what's best for the company.

AND FINALLY...

I am betting "The Social Network" will win the Oscar...while everyone else seems to be betting on "The King's Speech" and "True Grit". My reasoning is that social media, as much as anything, has turned the world upside down in recent years and the movie provided fascinating insight into the gestation of the phenomenon. For those favoring the other movies, I should add I am almost always wrong in my picks!     

(The views expressed in this communication are solely those of the author, who assumes all responsibility for any errors, omissions or misstatements. Should you receive word of my demise, by Ford tractor or any other farm implement, please refer my case to the Indonesian police, whom I am sure will give it their complete, undivided attention. Tommy, by the way, was convicted of murder -- he killed a judge who had convicted him of corruption-- and was sentenced to 16 years in jail. He is now free. His father died in 2008.)  

Job-Hopping: Smart Strategy?

The following article appeared as a guest blog on the Balanced WorkLife website on February 18, 2011:

Although the recent recession and its attendant real estate crisis slowed the pace, frequent job-hopping continues to be the strategy of choice among many North American workers, especially those under the age of 35.  And why shouldn’t it be? According to Chicago-based outplacement firm Challenger, Grey and Christmas, who survey on the topic annually, fully 94% of individuals changing jobs report receiving an increase in some combination of salary, bonus, benefits and perks. 

But is frequent job-hopping the right strategy for everyone?  Perhaps more importantly, does the instant gratification of a bigger pay packet necessarily lead to a better career path and greater personal satisfaction and well-being?

The answer, I would maintain, is similar to that given for many other perplexing questions—“It depends.”

For the purposes of this article, I am going to lay to one side the very folks that began the trend of frequent  job-changing more than two decades ago – the programmers, software engineers and other highly-skilled technical workers who made places like San Jose, Research Triangle and the 128 Corridor look and feel like the Sacramento or Yukon gold fields. My focus will be on management, the people who lead groups, functions or whole divisions within organizations. My thinking is very much based on my own experience as a manager at half-dozen large organizations or companies.

I fell into a pattern of job-hopping completely by accident. My initial career right out of university was as a newspaper reporter and editor in New England. One of the things that attracted me to journalism was that it gives you a license to ask questions – to continuously learn.  It also makes you curious about who holds and exercises power.  It was in that context that I made my first real career jump—to politics. I became a press secretary, first to Senator Edward W. Brooke; then to Senator Bob Dole.

Working in government was fascinating. Among other things, it soon became apparent that the nexus of power was not to be found in the halls, corridors and anterooms of Washington. D.C.  Business seemed a more likely answer.  Thus, a few years later, when IBM approached, I was very open to making a second leap, this time to the corporate sector.

This was the IBM of the early 1980’s, superbly confident and deeply committed to employee education and promotion from within. The company had an education center in Armonk, New York that rivalled the facilities one might find at a top liberal arts college. I was swiftly put through New Manager’s School, and, a year later, a kind of mini-MBA program called Advanced Management School.  I was made head of External Programs, IBM’s version of the State Department. There I came to see that while IBM wasn’t exactly running the world, they had pretty good access to those who did.

Life was good. But then, abruptly, I job-hopped again. Why?  The long arm of government, in the form of the Reagan Administration, reached out and grabbed me. After initially rebuffing recruitment efforts, one day I was called in by my boss, the CEO of IBM World Trade. “I received a call from Vice-president George Bush today,” he said. “It seems they need you. I think your taking this job offer is an intelligence test.” Not want to be revealed as completely stupid, I took the position.

It was a mistake at several levels. First, I was leaving a job I really liked. Second, I was leaving a department—my people—in the lurch. And third, I was leaving a boss, the CEO of World Trade, who, while in some ways a delusional megalomaniac, was at least MY delusional megalomaniac.  

I did not know my new boss, who had once been a roommate of George Bush’s at Yale. Getting to know him did not improve the situation. I stayed two years—in that day and age, it was thought ruinous to stay for a lesser period—and got out.

The experience completely changed my career philosophy. I decided I would no longer entertain frequent and abrupt job changes.  On the other hand, I also decided, in line with my desire to experience continuous learning (and avoid boredom), I would swap out not only companies, but also sectors, every five or six years.

My template has been fairly straight-forward. I come in, reorganize and rejuvenate a function; identify and, if necessary, recruit a successor; then after five or six years, move to the next opportunity. My experience taught me that a five- or six-year cycle allowed for an 18-month learning curve; three or more years of peak performance (and mentoring) and a year or so of transition.

I did this at Ford, IBM (yes, I returned for six years), CAE (an aerospace company focused on flight simulation), CIBC and Canada Post Corporation.  In most instances I worked for new- to- the-job CEOs, and was able to bring to the task a toolkit based on cumulative, real-world experience.

There are many reasons senior executives make a career change. Some are passed over for the very top job and want to find another path to the corner office. Some are lured by better compensation packages. Others move—or don’t move-- for lifestyle reasons.

I have a brother, Tom, who has worked for several consulting firms, including McKinsey and CSC Index. He always juxtaposed the consulting model, with its simultaneous multiple clients, with my model. “We’re proudly promiscuous,” Tom would say. “You, on the other hand, are serially monogamous.”

So is job-hopping a smart thing for management?  It depends. In my case, I needed to find a model that not only stimulated me to do my best work, but also satisfied my employers that a five or six year stint was in their best interests, too.  It worked well for my needs.  And the companies seemed well satisfied. And there is, of course, the additional bonus that you will get a lot of Christmas cards from all of the executive recruiters who have placed you over the years!

WEEKLY WAITE-O-GRAM (Rel. 49.0)

DELUSIONAL DESPOTS

I have been trying to picture what it must have been like when Hosni Mubarak's television lights were switched off last Thursday evening...right after his infamous "I'm still staying" speech. Did an aide say, "Good job, Mr. President"? Did Mubarak himself say "Gee, I think that went well...don't you"? Was there applause? Stunned silence? Much as Richard Nixon had his Henry Kissinger... did Mubarak have someone right there beside him, to comfort him... even pray with him? A person who perhaps will someday pen an insider's account of how, every step of the way, the Egyptian President could manage to be exactly 48 hours behind the curve? It seems 30 years in power had left him as isolated as the mummies...found buried in the Valley of the Kings.  

MEANWHILE, ELSEWHERE IN THE PALACE...

Mubarak family gatherings will apparently be somewhat awkward for the foreseeable future...as reports have surfaced that two of Honsi's sons, Alaa and Gamal, nearly came to blows even as their father was speaking to the nation. The oldest, Alaa, apparently blamed the youngest for "ruining everything". The youngest accused the oldest of "cheating at Monopoly" and "hogging all the first-name vowels". In other words, very reminiscent of an average North American Thanksgiving.    

SHIRLEY YOU JEST

I once worked with a guy who, when frustrated or not getting an answer he liked, would cry out, "Am I surrounded by fools??!!"  Being one of those surrounding him, I would offer that it was certainly a possibility...but at least we were HIS fools. Being an advisor, whether to a King, President or CEO, is always a tricky balancing act. You want to be loyal...after all, you serve at the leader's pleasure...but you also want to be useful. Telling a King, Queen (or CEO) only what he or she wishes to hear is of course ultimately a disservice...but the problem is you can lose your job...or head...before your unvarnished opinion becomes truly appreciated. In Medieval Europe the figure of the court jester or court minstrel fulfilled some of this need for candor...but in today's world, job postings for jester and minstrel are few and far between.

'AND THEN SIR ROBIN RAN AWAY...'

My favorite minstrel appeared in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail". He accompanied Sir Robin (who, you might recall, was so destitute that he could not afford a horse... and resorted to using two coconuts to simulate hoof beats). The minstrel "sang of his failures" (to which Sir Robin would invariably respond, "That's NOT true!")  All leaders need someone to sing of their failures once in awhile...or at least have a jester on call... to create an occasional pinprick in the hierarchical bubble. (Most of us call this individual a "spouse".)    

YEAR OF SPEAKING DANGEROUSLY

It is perhaps ironic that at a time when Hosni Mubarak was delivering some of the worst speeches since Dwight Schrute addressed the Northeast Pennsylvania Sales Association...we are treated to a movie, "The King's Speech", which focuses on the power of the spoken word. In the case of King George VI (known as Bertie, 'til his brother buggered off), it wasn't so much that the words were wrong -- the Windsors have never lacked for competent speech writers-- but that he couldn't actually say them. What saved the day was the willingness of his spouse...Elizabeth, remembered today as the Queen Mother... to reach outside the royal household for assistance. And not just outside the royal household...but to an Australian!  "The King's Speech" is a very good film on many levels, but most especially on the subject of moving outside one's comfort zone.

WATSON, COME HERE, I WANT YOU

Speaking of spouses and such, while most normal couples will be out at fancy restaurants for Valentine's Day...we will be camped in front of a television set...watching my significant other's true heart throb...Watson. Yes, beginning on Monday night, for three days running, IBM's Watson supercomputer will be dueling it out on the game show "Jeopardy" with two humanoid champions. My semi-romantic contribution will be to prepare dinner...and select an appropriate wine. I was thinking California ...perhaps a full-bodied red...from Silicon Valley. I will be rooting for the humans, by the way. My spouse, on the other hand, rooted for the Cylons in "Battlestar Galactica"; the invaders in "War of the Worlds"... and all those guys in black suits in "The Matrix". And lately she has been leaking a strange hydraulic fluid...and making a high-pitched whirring noise, 

WATCH THIS SPACE...

Next week, a discussion of whether or not C-Suite executives can (or, more correctly, should) be friends with their subordinates...and a case study in termination.

(This communication reflects the views of the author, who is solely responsible for any errors, omissions or stutters. The Waite-O-Gram was been published continuously since 1992, originally as an alternative communications channel at IBM Canada to thwart the completely fictitious IBM Thought Police. It's continued existence is a mystery. As is its numbering protocol.)               

Weekly Waite-O-Gram (Rel. 48.0)

TOUGHEST JOB IN CANADA

I met a guy this week who has the toughest managerial job in Canada. I don't mean the coach of the Toronto Maple Leafs (or the even more hapless Ottawa Senators). I don't even mean the CEO of a mere bank... auto company...or a retail outfit. The fellow I met is Deepak Chopra. No, not THAT Deepak Chopra. He is safely ensconced in San Diego, doling out New Age mantras.  I am talking about the Deepak Chopra who has been the CEO of Pitney Bowes Canada for the past five years... and who has just been named to head up Canada Post Corporation.  Why do I say his is the toughest job in Canada? Well, for one thing, he inherits a company with revenues from core businesses on the downshift...while delivery addresses, pension and benefit costs and fuel prices are all heading up. Each year, for example, Canada Post is mandated to service about 200,000 additional homes, apartment buildings and businesses...even as letter mail volumes drop.

STRUGGLE OR SNUGGLE?

For another thing, he gets to face off with what has frequently been described as Canada's most militant (and successful) trade union, CUPW. Their motto and rallying cry is "The Struggle Continues!" The struggle they reference is not with the elements... to keep the mail moving...or with UPS, FedEx and DHL to gain market share...or with the Post's antiquated equipment and technology, to become more efficient. It's with management. To be fair, most companies get the union they deserve...and Canada Post, which was run for decades on a military "command-and control"model, is a classic example of this. Only recently,,,and tentatively...have there been efforts made to move from confrontation... to something resembling cooperation.  Nobody would suggest that CUPW and CPC management get into bed with each other...but it would be nice if they noticed they were living in the same house...and that noise they're hearing is a smoke detector.      

MINORITY BLUES

And if a declining sector and a tough labour situation weren't enough, Mr. Chopra's only "shareholder" is the Government of Canada. So while most CEO's "only" have to worry about employees, customers and investors... the head of Canada Post is in reality playing a kind of three-dimensional chess match...not only trying to figure out what is best for the business in terms of beating the competition...but also how things will square with his political masters. What has made this particularly tricky the past six years or so...has been a succession of minority governments under Paul Martin and Stephen Harper. It's tough for a Crown Corporation CEO to be overly bold or make waves... when the government of the day's highest priority is just keeping afloat.

THE TIMES THEY ARE A CHANGING...

I met Deepak Chopra at the end of his first official day on the job at a stamp launch event marking Black History Month. (Although I retired from Canada Post in 2010, for unnamed sins I continue on as Chair of the Stamp Advisory Committee.)  My impressions from a 15-minute conversation are of a man modest regarding his own considerable accomplishments; open-minded about the task at hand; very focused on service quality; and extremely proud, as an immigrant, to have been entrusted with a national institution so deeply rooted in Canadian history. He told me that his grandfather had been a post master in India in the days of the British Raj...and that  it likely would have stunned him to even contemplate the idea that his immigrant grandson could one day take the reins at Canada Post. Almost as strange as the idea that a Canadian... and a woman -- former CPC CEO Moya Greene-- could one day assume the reins of the Royal Mail in the UK! 

LESSONS FROM FERGIE

As it happened, one of the two individuals honored with a Black History Month stamp was present at the unveiling festivities Tuesday evening -- baseball Hall of Famer (and Chatham, Ontario native) Fergie Jenkins. The former Cubs pitching ace (who also had stints with the Red Sox, Phillies and Rangers) was poised and gracious in his remarks, thanking coaches and scouts who had been instrumental in his development and success. In an especially poignant moment, he thanked his parents, both deceased, especially his mother who, although blind, never missed a chance to attend his games and root him on. He also made the point that while a pitcher is the focus of attention and gets the "W" or "L" at the end of the game...he is utterly dependent on the performance of his surrounding teammates. Not a bad lesson for any CEO, new or old, to draw upon. And as tough a job being the CEO of Canada Post might be...you have to draw hope from the fact that Fergie won 20 games six consecutive years...with the hapless Chicago Cubs. I would argue that Canada Post has a better starting line up than the late 60's Cubs (save for Billy Williams and Ernie Banks) and with a little support from team mates this Deepak Chopra will soon beTHE Deepak Chopra, at least in Canada.

WHAT THE HAL IS GOING ON HERE?

After 23 years of marriage, I find my spouse is in love with someone else. His name is Watson. They met at a conference last May, in Arizona, introduced by a guy named David Ferrucci from IBM. It started innocently enough -- a drink on a terrace overlooking the desert; candlelight dinner; some stargazing at the night sky. Fine. A little flirtation...but, hey,  she saved the last dance for me. But then came the dawn...the start of the seminar program... and Karen discovered that Watson was more than just a witty conversationalist...he could also play "Jeopardy". And not just play it...but play it really, really well. In fact, Watson dispatched two self-proclaimed "Jeopardy" whizzes in short order, right before our eyes...without breaking a sweat. Mind you...the fact that Watson is actually a computer...may have had something to do with his cool, perspiration-free demeanor.  But the fact the my wife loves "Jeopardy"...and the latest in electronic gizmo's and gadgets...meant sparks were sure to fly.

ELEMENTARY, MY DEAR WATSON

All would have been fine had this been a brief encounter; a momentary infatuation; a desert mirage. But no. Her obsession has continued. I personally wouldn't mind...but she's hurting others, too, neglecting her blackberry; acting strangely distant towards her Kindle; literally taking the "i" out of iPad. And what of Watson? He's poised to become a network star, playing two all-time "Jeopardy" champions of the human persuasion in a televised event February 14, 15 and 16. That's right -- she's going to be spending Valentine's Day evening with the big lug! This despite the fact that I remembered to book a restaurant for the first time in more than a decade!   

I MEANT THE OTHER CHER

A couple of people took issue with me saying that Hosei Mubarak on television looked like a combination of Herman Munster and Cher. Nobody quarrelled with the Herman Munster part...but a few thought I was being unfair to Cher.  They obviously haven't seen "Burlesque" yet.  

'DAISY, DAISY, GIVE ME YOUR ANSWER, DO'

By the time most of you read this, the Super Bowl will be over (I am writing it a just a few hours before kick-off). I have no predictions to make...other than being 100% sure my spousal unit will not be watching. She hates football. Hasn't watch in years -- even the Roman numerals annoy her. So I rented her a DVD...Stanley Kulbrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey".   

AND FINALLY...  

If you want to see a great concept for a video, go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39jtNUGgmd4  It is called "100 X 100" and celebrates IBM's 100th anniversary in 2011.

(The views expressed in this document are solely those of the author, who is responsible for any errors or omissions. Cher appears courtesey of Screen Gems. Watson appears courtesey of the IBM Corporation. Herman Munster appears courtesey of CBS. Fergie Jenkins appears courtesey of Triumph Books. And Karen Shigeishi-Waite appears against her expressed wishes. Does anyone need a Valentine's Day dinner reservation?)  

--
Robert E. Waite
Managing Partner
Waite + Co.
25 Grange Avenue
Toronto, ON M5T 1C6
1-416-944-0116
www.waiteandcompany.com