Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Table of Contents
Burn the Witches: Private Outrage, Public Policy and Butterfly Effects 5
Helmet Laws vs. Adult Supervision: Re-Regulation & Finance Industry Futures 9
READINGS COLLECTIONS 20
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
The top chart shows how the cycles in population of the two
species interact over time. When the prey population gets too
large because there predator species is too small there is a
population explosion followed by a surge in predators. In other
words when the picking's get too easy the predators get more
aggressive. The problem of course, say in the second
component, is that if the population of prey falls below minimal
levels the population won't renew itself and the entire system
collapses. Hmm...making more sense now.
Page 2 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
Page 3 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
the training.
Ecological Stewardship
That is lay it out logically and efficiently and make sure it's effective. How would you rate the Finance
Industry given the disaster's we'll be suffering thru for years to come ? Given that the last decade's worth
of profits have been destroyed and the viability of many nameplate firms is gone we'd say an
ungentlemanly D- would be generous.
My friend Bob Sutton wrote a great book(The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and
Surviving One That Isn't ) last year which has resonated with a lot of folks. Given that what Drucker is
talking about is the socio-psychological aspects of the workplace environment Bob wouldn't have been
able to write that book if many deserved a gentleman's C. Yet the list of firms who create worker-friendly
environments also tends to be the list of firms who perform well. Given how notorious the Finance
Industry is for terrible workplace environments where it's dog eat dog and devil take the hindmost an F-
seems appropriate.
Page 4 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
And by this Drucker doesn't mean something namby-pamby like "Save the Whales". Instead he means
that Management are also members of the larger society and have a responsibility to see that it prospers,
not just the firm. Instead he focuses on those things that an enterprise or other institution can do. If you
work in a Hospital or University is the institution taking care of the legitimate interests of all it's
constituents and stakeholders? If you work for a private enterprise that enterprise still exists within a
social matrix - is it acting responsibly? Better by far to be proactive in solving problems before society as
a whole decides to solve them for you because your benefit is grossly exceeded by your damage.
One example he uses is Theodore Vail and the definition of ATT's purposes. Vail made absolutely sure that
instead of becoming a regulated business that the company was respectful of the general public interest. On this,
there being no grade lower than F-, we've probably reached the point where the Finance Industry is expelled from
school for bad behavior. And their reward is going to be a new regulatory regime imposed on them over their
protests. A sound awareness of the socionomic ecology would have had the Industry stepping forward early and
forcefully to develop workable and responsible regulatory behavior and institutions. Instead we've gone thru the
Tech Bust, Enron and WCOM and the near-death of Western Civilization in the last two years.
Drucker published this magnum opus in 1973. Sadly almost none of its concepts and prescriptions have seen the
light of day. As Ye Sow, So Shall Ye Reap!
And just in case you think we're making to strong a case or exaggerating it we offer up this refresh of the High-
frequency economic data we've used so many times before. Without going into detail we'll just say that a terrible
economic situation appears to have crossed over yet another tipping point into really serious problems.
The bottomline point here, to come full-circle, is that responsible, statesmanlike stewardship of the Company or
Institution will determine who indeed are the "Good Captains and Good Ships" you want to go storm sailing on !
Burn the Witches: Private Outrage, Public Policy and Butterfly Effects
http://llinlithgow.com/bizzX/2009/03/burn_the_witches_private_outra.html
First off if it's not clear we hope you took at least two
fundamental points away from the prior post:
Page 5 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
2) broken credit markets vs. monetary policy and credit "fixes" and
Of the three the most important at this juncture is the third. We say juncture because the Administration and the
Fed are taking almost all the right steps IOHO (btw all the smart punditocracy who're so smart should dig into the
details and come up with alternatives if they're so much more brilliant than the guys on the hot seats; as TR puts
it, "there's nothing like stepping into the ring's blood and dust yourself" or something to that effect!). All that said
we say juncture because the AIG bonus screwup is serving as a lightening rod for the fears, uncertainties and
massive distrust of our private sector leadership. Who in fact failed us miserably.
We spent a whole post (Predator Prey Symbiosis: Crisis, Leadership and Values) discussing why their behaviors
were immoral, reprehensible, severely damaging the public well-being and violated the essential foundations of
the social contract. All well and good. And the sensible pundits, e.g. Joe Nocera, et.al. of the NYT, who're trying to
inject a few notes of rationality into the "burn the witches" anger are doing their best. But nobody is getting the
whole picture right, again IOHO.
The problem is that, as an essentially social species, we rely on trust between members of the same tribe to
function and for twenty years or more that trust has been increasingly abused. The net result is a poisoning of the
ecology on which we all rely. So here's the bottomline, so-to-speak; the anger is entirely justified even if counter-
productive. Until it's bled off or re-directed our risks of doing something self-damagingly stupid are going to
increase. In other words the single most important economic and financial datum to watch is whether this
firestorm blows out or turns into a populist conflagration and takes us with it. The latter we give a low probability
but an increasing risk. Unfortunately the former is also low - about all we can hope for is that the lid is kept on the
pressure cooker long enough to bleed off the over-pressure and give the substantive programs some time to
work.
Economic Policy
Page 6 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
capital base (infrastructure, new inventions and innovations, education, healthcare, etc.) could put us back on the
vanished Golden Path.
To re-prove that fundamental argument we've created a composite chart from one of Paul's essays that shows
how the economy was doing during the GD; the main point here is that a recovery was underway until the
triumphal return of economic orthodoxies (at least of the time) caused budget tightening and the return of Phase
II. Coupled with the really abysmal monetary policies of the time...well we'd really not want to try and dig our way
out of this by starting WWIV, the strategy we defaulted to last time we were in a mess this serious ! Here's one
more sad and dangerous set of facts for you on the international front. The rest of the world is actually in worse
trouble now than the US. And is by and large facing more discombobulated policy responses, Europe in
particular. In fact the only two countries where the leadership is stepping up to the plate are China and the US.
Europe looks set to dis-coordinate itself into a disaster and Japan is in worse shape. So either we make this work
or kaboom !
Monetary Situation
Page 7 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
UPDATEs: One of the truly startling things (cf. the excerpt on the revival of Ayn Rand's popularity) is the
combination of near criminal malfeasance, utter social and political tone-deafness and willingness to sacrifice the
public trust (with the attendant violation of implicit fiduciary responsibilities and breaking the Social Contract) that
Financial executives specifically and many executives in general are still committed to (committed...now there's a
word !). The world is changing, the peasants are about to burn down the castle and they appear to be still
planning the next dinner party. Check out this post from
• Bob Sutton: Oblivious Rich Assholes
• Seth Godin:The myth of big salaries (it's all marketing)
• Tim Walker: “It’s going to take some patience.”
Page 8 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
Of this set of initiatives what's most important - the economics, the financial technicalities, the politics or the
popular reaction? Actually all of them !! What's still missing is a context to help organize, categorize and organize
our thinking about these myriad complexities so we're going to take our best shot at explaining what's going on.
And make no mistake - these are enormous changes, mostly for the better IOHO, long over-due and the Finance
Industry and it's role will never be the same again. The last three decades of business models, strategies and
profit/performance relationships are gone forever! We ended the last post with the accompanying cartoon to
capture the popular reactions to date and so we start there. Now lets dig into the strategic context.
Page 9 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
The realities are lots of folks continued, continue and will continue to act irresponsibly and the costs are not
restricted just to them but impact the general public. There's the general principle - when the costs to society
greatly exceed the cost to private individuals regulation is our only recourse.
Page 10 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
reaches the cellular level where a complex and inter-connected set of metabolic and bio-chemical reactions keeps
you going. Credit has been called the lifeblood of the economy and, in some senses, that's almost literally true.
It's pervasive, systemic and systematic involving inter-actions at the most minute and granular levels on up to
grand flows of macro-systems. To tell that story we've composited a graphic that traces thru the flows of the
circulatory system as a model and metaphor.
Back in 1995 the Aum Shinrikyou cult put Sarin gas into the
Tokyo subway systems to purify things and bring on the new
world, since they were an elect and spiritual elite who had
deeper insights into the mysteries of the Universe. Now
there are many good people in the Finance Industry but the
leadership, perverse incentives and lack of controls
combined with the "deeper grasp of the mysteries" of
financial engineering led the Finance Industry as a whole to
effectively mimic the cult's actions. Only instead of 5,000
people who were affected locally we had six billion who are
affected globally.
For nearly three decades the Industry has argued that it was
capable of self-responsible adult supervision, that is it
wouldn't drive recklessly, didn't need to wear helmets and
was performing both a privately profitable and public good service. That turns outs out to be entirely false to fact.
And, judging by the shell-shocked lack of leadership in response to these disasters the industry isn't stepping up
to the plate to help re-formulate the proper "helmet laws" so society is going to do it for them. Which is truly
unfortunate on many levels and in several ways. First off we truly do need a finance industry to help mobilize and
allocate capital; much of human progress is built on the gradual evolution of capital markets, at least indirectly.
And there's still going to be huge profit potentials for well-constructed, designed and operated financial institutions
as a result. The question really becomes which ones.
Then, 2) operates efficiently and effectively by making work productive and the worker achieving. In other words
by making sure that work is logically designed but also recognizing that people are social animals and to be
effective one has to account for the non-economic dimensions of the business as a social institution.
Page 11 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
Finally, 3) act in a socially responsible manner to ensure that society is doing well (or as we put in an earlier post
make sure that the prey populations are sustainable and self-renewing).
Social responsibility requires two things - first when the activities of your business impact the broader society
move to reduce the harm. For example when you create a pollutant act to clean it up before society forces you to
do it. Second, identify broader social problems that are connected to your business and act proactively to
eliminate them before they become so bad that society has to. The classic example is the Auto companies and
Healthcare, which they've known is a competitive problem for six decades yet failed to pursue the social remedies
of regulatory and insurance overhauls required.
The Finance Industry would never be the same again after testing their engineering skills to destruction. But after
the social damage they've done society cannot allow them to self-supervise. Something they should have been
addressing for the last thirty years; there have been plenty of warning signals. Instead they chose to pursue the
path of lobbying for greater and greater freedom which led to greater and greater risk-taking. Pursuing the
analogy it's as if the Aum cult kept making more sarin.
The question is what happens now ? We'll take that up in another post but here's a hint: get out in front and help
shape things or get run over by the Juggernaut. Two more: you won't like the alternatives AND if it gets out of
control nobody will win.
Page 12 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
not contribute value to that society it will be changed - one way or another. That makes it a fundamental
management responsibility of any business to be
aware of broader socio-political trends and problems
and to act proactively to intercept or correct them. If
nothing else by anticipating problems and acting to
support broader policy responses to problems
beyond the industry's immediate ability to cope with.
Judging from the remarks of the new Citi CEO the
Finance Industry gives new meaning to the phrase
tone-deaf. Now that some of the details are leaking
out we've found out that in the President's recent
meeting with key CEOs he basically said, "we're the
last thing between you and the pitchforks". We're
tempted to put up the "Can You Hear the People
Sing" graphic and URL again but hopefully the point
is still relatively fresh in your minds, as it appears
not to be in the minds of the industry.
As we've worked our way thru an analysis and assessment of the broader impacts and consequences of the
finance industry we've ended up depending quite a bit on Peter Drucker's insights on the major performance
criteria for business value creation. The graphic at right is a summary of one interpretation combined with our
earlier framework of the major sectors of the industry. But let's start by quoting Drucker (p. 369, "Management:
Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices"):
"Essentially being a member of a leadership group is what traditionally has been meant by the
term "professional". ...as a member of leadership group a manager stands under the demands of
professional ethics - the demands of an ethic of responsibility. [A professional] is public in the
sense that the welfare of his client sets limits to his deeds and words. And Primum no nocere,
"not knowingly to do harm," is the basic rule of professional ethics. There are important areas
where managers still do not realize they have to impose on themselves the responsibilities of the
professional ethic. The manager who fails to think through and work for the appropriate solution
to an impact of his business because it makes him "unpopular in the club" knowingly does harm.
That this is stupid has been said. That this always in the end hurts the business or industry more
than a little temporary "unpleasantness" would have hurt has been said too. But it is also gross
violation of professional ethics".
We trust Prof. Drucker's points are crystalline ? Just to compress and paraphrase them the actions of the industry
are harmful, counter-productive and are going to lead to a massive social backlash that's entirely justified by the
facts of the situation and the necessities of society. Remember if you do not create value society has NO reason
to tolerate you. If in fact you destroy value and massively harm society it cannot even afford to tolerate you. In the
graphic we've tried to depict the relative performance on the Drucker Principles of each of the major lines of
Page 13 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
business with the caveat that there is no multiple-red color to properly represent the behavior of the securities
related business and the damage caused.
2. A focus on customer service, putting the customer's interests ahead of the firm's, will create
value and ultimately a differentiating competitive advantage.
4. Innovation in new value-creating services and capabilities needs to be the driving strategic
mantra of the new industry.
5. Survival, recovery and effective innovation need to be based on effective and principled
management systems.
Page 14 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
Which leads to some strawmen suggestions for financial innovations just to get the ball rolling:
1. Hedge-like funds for small investors to be able to cope with a low-return, topsy-turvey world.
2. Non-opportunistic (i.e. non-exploitative and with non-exorbitant interest rate) consumer finance and
credit cards.
3. Securitized business finance based on deep understandings of fundamentals AND loanee re-payment
capabilities. For example trade finance could be greatly expanded and help out the growth of the global
economy.
6. Localization of financial services where branch offices and staff truly return to being local in their
knowledge and connections. This could be coupled with a "franchising" approach to combine the
economies of scale of large institutions along with superb local knowledge.
7. Merchant banking for small companies in the best, "ye olde English" sense of informed investment in
serious business opportunities. For example in green energy, bio-tech, etc.
8. Operations-based investing based on business fundamentals for the Private Equity sector.
9. Macro-monitoring and advisory services to help with budgeting, capital planning, expense control and
general business planning.
Now if you’re wondering why we threw out this list of possible new business opportunities it’s not because we’re
experts in Finance. But neither are the suggestions entirely without thought. Each would be a major new business
that would create value for its customers and profits for its owners and founders.
In other words it’s not necessary to make profits by paying people bonuses to load on surcharges on
overdrafts, pump up interest rates on credit cards or persuade people who can’t afford it to buy
mortgages they can never repay.
The industry could do well by doing good and earn its money the old fashioned way – by earning it.
So far we haven't seen any. Let's hope that that's just our lack of
information access and not the reality. Otherwise a vital and
important industry will do itself and us irreparable harm!
Page 15 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
Nothing like good timing. As we were putting up this post it turns out Lloyd Blankfein was giving a truly stunning
speech in Washington that finally acknowledges the public responsibilities of the Finance Industry, in detail.
(http://www.c-span.org/Watch/watch.aspx?MediaId=HP-A-17196 )
In particular he supports almost point by point the major elements of the Geithner Plan as well as the call for
greated worldwide regulatory over-sight coming from the G-20 meeting. His speech got widespread, rapid and,
dare on say, shocked coverage from a wide range of the commentariats. You can find some of this in the
readings as well as a a valuable assessment from Steve Perlstein of the WaPo highlighting the need for
fundamental cultural change. Our collective bottomline is that we consider all the points we've been making in this
post and it's predecessors to have been supported by perhaps the leading executive in the Industry !
There is, btw, an enormous collection of readings after the break that we highly recommend you at least skim.
Judging from the readership stats that hasn't been the case but there's quite a collection surveying the evidence
behind the points we're making !
UPDATE2: Just ran across a fabulous oped from the WSJ on Wall St. cultural breakdowns that both fits nicely
with our overall theme and serves as the perfect counter-point to Blankfein's Mea Culpa.
The point being this - external and internal structural changes are vital but …
For a lot of reasons this is a post we'd very much prefer to not
write but feel we have to because of the crisis, the deep-
seated structural changes that it will be required and the
major re-thinkings of corporate culture that are mandatory for
survivorship. The difference between winners and losers in
this maelstrom will not just be logical examinations or
disciplined execution but will require executives to adopt new
behaviors. The question is will they?
Page 16 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
On that answer rests the future of economic health and social development. The stakes couldn't be more serious.
Our answer was absolutely not. In 2000 it became there are too many exceptions but the rule was still in favor of
the Roman virtues. Now ? Well, unfortunately time will tell. And based on how the Finance Industry's culture is
reacting the signs aren't that encouraging. On the other hand there are clear examples of leaders who have
stepped up the plate, faced the challenges and positioned their companies for the future. From HPQ to WMT to
P&G to MickeyD's.
Page 17 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
But Finance...ah Finance ! It went from 1% to 2% to 3% of GDP in three decades. Now tell me what value-add for
the economy and society as a whole was created here? In general Finance is a critical industry but has it been so
innovative and value-creating that it's profits should have gone up 100% every decade? And in particular in this
last one? The evidence would seem to indicate not. Structurally, if for no other reasons, we'd see a future for the
Industry were profits return to the more justifiable 1% figure.
Business Performance
The first is creation of a true whole that is larger than the sum of the its parts, a productive entity that
turns out more than the sum of the resources put into it. The manager must simultaneously ask two double-
barreled questions: What better business performance is needed and what does this require of what activities ?
And: what better performance are activities capable of and what improvement in the business results will they
make possible ?"
Page 18 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
"The second major specific task of the manager is to harmonize in every decision and action the
requirements of the immediate and long-range future. He cannot sacrifice either without endangering the
enterprise".
"As a leader it is essential to be generous with the community while being frugal with
oneself. As for the rest, the petty matters, do not be concerned with them.
When you give people tasks, probe them deeply to see if they are sincere. When you
choose your words, take the most serious. Leaders are naturally honored when their
words are taken seriously; the community is naturally impressed when people are chosen
for their sincerity.
When you are honorable, the community obeys even if you are not stern; when the
community is impressed, things get done even if no orders are given. The wise and the
stupid each naturally convey their minds, small and great each exert their effort.
This is more than ten thousand times better than those who hold on by authoritarian
power and those who cannot help following them, oppressed by compulsion"
That was written over 1200 years ago, yet it still seems more than relevant today. By these measures who would
you judge is leading well and how not ? On those answers rest your decisions.
We just added a whole slew of other readings excerpts using the Finance Industry, sadly, as our whipping boy.
What triggered this recent massive rally in the markets was the belief that the Markets and the Finance Industry
were beginning to self-repair and see some daylight. Only it turns out that a) they were engaged in deeply
deceptive reporting (we'd use other words but why bother) and b) that really is a giant freight train loaded with
explosives, not daylight. All of the banks are experiencing huge increases in defaults and losses in their main
lines of business. And doing their best to continue misleading the investing public. On every test of leadership,
public faith and confidence and good business practice we have to judge the last six weeks an abysmal failure.
Both Wuzu and Drucker would be sadly and terribly disappointed...not least because this is both stupid and
Page 19 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
unnecessary self-inflicted damage. But check out the readings for yourselves. Start with Jim Jubak's vidclip and
move on to the slew of stories dissecting the disaster.
READINGS COLLECTIONS
What Red Ink? Wall Street Paid Hefty Bonuses Despite crippling losses, multibillion-dollar bailouts and the
passing of some of the most prominent names in the business, employees at financial companies in New York,
the now-diminished world capital of capital, collected an estimated $18.4 billion in bonuses for the year. That was
the sixth-largest haul on record, according to a report released Wednesday by the New York State comptroller.
While the payouts paled next to the riches of recent years, Wall Street workers still took home about as much as
they did in 2004, when the Dow Jones industrial average was flying above 10,000, on its way to a record high.
Some bankers took home millions last year even as their employers lost billions. The comptroller’s estimate, a
closely watched guidepost of the annual December-January bonus season, is based largely on personal income
tax collections. It excludes stock option awards that could push the figures even higher. The state comptroller,
Thomas P. DiNapoli, said it was unclear if banks had used taxpayer money for the bonuses, a possibility that
strikes corporate governance experts, and indeed many ordinary Americans, as outrageous. He urged the Obama
administration to examine the issue closely. Bonus Payout Graphic
Obama Calls Wall Street Bonuses ‘Shameful’ President Obama branded Wall Street bankers “shameful” on
Thursday for giving themselves nearly $20 billion in bonuses as the economy was deteriorating and the
government was spending billions to bail out some of the nation’s most prominent financial institutions. “There will
be time for them to make profits, and there will be time for them to get bonuses,” Mr. Obama said during an
appearance in the Oval Office with Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner. “Now’s not that time. And that’s a
message that I intend to send directly to them, I expect Secretary Geithner to send to them.” It was a pointed — if
calculated — flash of anger from the president, who frequently railed against excesses in executive
compensation on the campaign trail. He struck his populist tone as he confronted the possibility of having to ask
Congress for additional large sums of money, beyond the $700 billion already authorized, to prop up the financial
system, even as he pushes Congress to move quickly on a separate economic stimulus package that could cost
taxpayers as much as $900 billion. This week alone, American companies reported as many as 65,000 job cuts,
and public anger is rising over reports of profligate spending by banks and investment firms that are receiving
help from the $700 billion bailout fund. About half of that money is still available, but the new administration has
yet to announce how it will use it, and many analysts think it will take far more to stabilize the banking system.
Should Mr. Obama have to go to Congress to seek more money for the bailout fund to avert the failure of more
banks, he would most likely encounter opposition within both parties and demands for tighter restrictions on pay
for executives of institutions that receive government assistance. Mr. Geithner has already signaled a willingness
to impose stricter compensation limits as part of a revamped approach to dealing with the banking crisis, but with
his strong words on Thursday, Mr. Obama seemed intent on reassuring Congress and the public that he would
step up the pressure on bankers before granting them additional assistance. Mr. Obama was reacting to a report
by the New York State comptroller that found financial executives had received an estimated $18.4 billion in
bonuses for 2008, less than for the previous several years but the same level of bonuses as they received in
2004, when times were flush. “That is the height of irresponsibility,” Mr. Obama said. “It is shameful. And
part of what we’re going to need is for the folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some
restraint and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility.”
Talking Business: It’s Not the Bonus Money. It’s the Principle. When you get right down to it, the purchase of
a new plane or an office renovation is pretty meaningless for companies as large as Citigroup or Bank of America.
It’s not unheard of for executives to spend $1 million or more on remodeling when they get the corner office. It’s
pocket change. And companies can usually make a halfway decent business case to justify a new airplane. (It
Page 20 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
goes longer distances than older planes, can take more executives to meetings, allows the top brass to be more
efficient and productive, etc., etc.) The question of whether bailout money was used to pay for these perks — as
alleged by The New York Post, which broke the Citi airplane story — is, at best, ambiguous. Indeed, breaking the
airplane contract and sending the jet back to the manufacturer will probably cost the bank more than keeping the
plane. None of that matters. You could make the same argument about the auto executives who flew on
corporate jets when they came to Washington to ask Congress for help: surely, it was a better use of their time to
fly rather than drive from Detroit, as they did the second time around, after being spanked for taking the jets. That
didn’t matter either. What matters is the symbolism. At a time when the country is in such trouble — and
executives are asking for bailouts — anything that smacks of plutocracy is going to arouse justifiable populist
anger. “This has been building for 20 years,” said Richard C. Ferlauto, director of corporate governance for the
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. “Regular working people haven’t gotten
ahead in the economy. They understand that tremendous wealth has been created, and they say, ‘Where’s
mine?’ ” He continued: “These guys seem to be living in another universe. So the symbolism of the umbrella
stand and the private jet is powerful.” The umbrella stand, of course, was a reference to the $15,000 umbrella
stand that the former Tyco chief executive Dennis Kozlowski bought with company funds — and that is part of the
reason he is now behind bars. But there is something else as well. Most people still don’t fully understand what,
exactly, Wall Street did that caused so much trouble for the country and the financial system. I spoke this week to
David M. Smick, author of a scathing book about Wall Street, “The World Is Curved: Hidden Dangers to the
Global Economy.” In indignant tones, he talked to me about the sophisticated off-balance-sheet vehicles the
banks used to hide risk and game the system, and the “mortgage-backed securities they were shoving out the
door.” He concluded, “I find their behavior just appalling.”
Why the Merrill Bonuses Are a Watershed MomentIn the midst of the Vietnam War, an Air Force major told war
correspondent Peter Arnett that it was necessary to destroy the town of Ben Tre in order to save it. The twisted
logic came to encapsulate the insanity of the entire decade-long fiasco. We've now reached a Ben Tre moment in
the financial crisis, thanks to Wall Street's fat-cat bonuses, especially those at Merrill Lynch. New York attorney
general Andrew Cuomo is investigating why Merrill issued $3.6 billion in bonuses to executives last year - even
though the firm lost nearly $28 billion and had to be taken over by Bank of America, with taxpayer assistance. And
now the Wall Street Journal has identified some of the top recipients, including 11 executives who received more
than $10 million each, in the same year that Merrill barely escaped a total flameout. But to the rest of us, it's
absurd that anybody should earn a multimillion paycheck when their firm is flat-lining. "RBS and ABN Amro are
both bankrupt, yet the banker who put that deal together walks off with $30 million," former Federal Reserve
Chairman Paul Volcker said at a recent conference in New York. "There's something the matter with that system."
It's obviously worse still when a firm paying billions in bonuses turns around and leans on middle-class taxpayers
for assistance.
Finally, outrage over huge bonuses Just a mere $18.4 billion in Wall Street bonuses, and suddenly the entire
country is like Kansas in the 1890s, raising hell instead of corn, screaming for revenge on money power that has
done us so wrong while rewarding itself so generously. The outburst of populist rage is particularly alarming when
we consider how easily such sentiments were managed just a short while ago. Americans have known about
mounting inequality and king-sized Wall Street bonuses for years. But we also had an entire genre of journalism
dedicated to brushing the problem off. Now the populist shoe is on the other foot, though, and it's the liberals' turn
to hail the wisdom of the crowd. Maybe, in its fury at the millions doled out to bankers who drove their institutions
into the ground, the public understands something about moral hazard that the Treasury Department doesn't.
Maybe, in its rage for fairness, the public is on to something that the banking industry's remaining defenders need
to acknowledge. It is merely this: Wall Street's compensation system isn't just aesthetically displeasing to liberal
snobs. It is the very heart of the problem. According to Bill Black, a professor of economics and law at the
University of Missouri-Kansas City and an authority on dysfunctional financial systems, "It is the compensation
system that has proved to be the weak point in everything critical that went wrong, that has produced a global
catastrophe." At each stage of the disaster, Black said -- loan officers, real-estate appraisers, accountants, bond
ratings agencies -- it was pay-for-performance systems that "sent them wrong." The need for new compensation
rules is most urgent at failed banks. This is not merely because it would make for good PR but because lavish
Page 21 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
executive bonuses sometimes create an incentive to hide losses, to take crazy risks and even, according to
Black, to "loot the place through seemingly normal corporate mechanisms." This is why, he continued, it is
"essential to redesign and limit executive compensation when regulating failed or failing banks." Our leaders may
not know it yet, but this showdown between rival populisms is, in fact, a battle over political legitimacy. Is Wall
Street the rightful master of our economic fate? Or should we choose a broader form of sovereignty? Let the
conservatives' hosannas turn to sneers. The market god has failed.
Animal Instincts: Main Street Seeks Revenge on Wall Street ... The outrage expressed by many so-called Main
Street folks over the proposed Wall Street bailout is based on more than a sense of injustice. It's about revenge, a
basic animal instinct shared by humans, chimpanzees and even blue-footed boobies. And Washington politicians
would be wise to listen up and stick some get-back-at-'em clauses into the bailout bill if they hope to get the
support of the average American, says one behavioral economist who studies these things. In phone calls made
by constituents to politicians, as well as e-mails to news organizations and other media, the public has expressed
a preference for a package that helps consumers and homeowners without assisting fat cats on Wall Street. In
fact, a Pew Research Center survey conducted Sept. 27 through Sept. 29 found that nearly 70 percent of
Americans say they feel angry about the government's plan, and half admit they are scared. President Bush and
other leaders who support the bailout warn, however, that if financial institutions are not propped up quickly and
significantly with public money, the average American will pay the price. Bring it on, many people seem to be
saying. Dan Ariely would agree. "People are willing to lose money to get those people [on Wall Street] to suffer"
because the corporate financial leaders have violated a social contract, says Ariely, a behavioral economist at
Duke University. "We need to include revenge in the bill."
Alan Mulally: The Outsider at Ford But the man who chose Mulally, Chairman William Clay Ford Jr., says his
CEO's progress in shaking up a calcified culture has thus far kept Ford independent and away from the U.S.
Treasury's loan window. Under Mulally, decision-making is more transparent, once-fractious divisions are working
together, and cars of better quality are moving faster from design studio to showroom. John Casesa, whose
Casesa Shapiro consulting firm advises the industry, is impressed, too. "The speed with which Mulally has
transformed Ford into a more nimble and healthy operation has been one of the more impressive jobs I've seen,"
he says. "It probably would have been game over for Ford already but for the changes he has brought." No one
understood the travails of running the automaker better than Henry Ford's great-grandson. The company was
bureaucratic and hostile to new ideas. And below the C-suite, it hadn't yet sunk in that Ford was fighting for its life.
The chairman also knew his company had a history of "organ rejection," or spurning outsiders. He had watched
executives from outside arrive at Ford only to be isolated and even hazed. He resolved to give Mulally all the help
and advice he needed. Mulally's biggest challenge, Ford said, would be breaking down silos, specifically the
operating regions around the world -- Europe, Asia, South America, and Australia -- that were more interested in
defending their turf than working together. It was a culture, Ford explained, where one's career had come to
mean more than the company.
A Tragedy of Errors, and an Accounting The jet crashed nose down in the University City neighborhood of San
Diego, hitting two homes and damaging three. Four people, all members of a Korean immigrant family, were
killed—36-year-old Youngmi Lee; her daughters, Grace, 15 months, and Rachel, 2 months, and her 60-year-old
mother, Seokim Kim. Lee's husband, a grocer named Dong Yun Yoon, was at work. The day after he'd lost his
family, he humbled and awed San Diego by publicly forgiving the pilot—"I know he did everything he could"—and
speaking of his faith—"I know God is taking care of my family." His grace and generosity were staggering, but
there was growing local anger at the military. Why was the disabled plane over land? The Marines launched an
investigation—of themselves. This Wednesday the results were announced. They could not have been tougher,
or more damning. The crash, said Maj. Gen. Randolph Alles, the assistant wing commander for the Third Marine
Page 22 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
Aircraft Wing, was "clearly avoidable," the result of "a chain of wrong decisions." Mechanics had known since July
of a glitch in the jet's fuel-transfer system; the Hornet should have been removed from service and fixed, and was
not. The young pilot failed to read the safety checklist. He relied on guidance from Marines at Miramar who did
not have complete knowledge or understanding of his situation. He should have been ordered to land at North
Island. He took an unusual approach to Miramar, taking a long left loop instead of a shorter turn to the right, which
ate up time and fuel. Twelve Marines were disciplined; four senior officers, including the squadron commander,
were removed from duty. Their military careers are, essentially, over. The pilot is grounded while a board reviews
his future. This wasn't damage control, it was taking honest responsibility. And as such, in any modern American
institution, it was stunning. The day after the report I heard from a young Naval aviator in predeployment training
north of San Diego. He flies a Super Hornet, sister ship to the plane that went down. He said the Marine
investigation "kept me up last night" because of how it contrasted with "the buck-passing we see" in the
government and on Wall Street. He and his squadron were in range of San Diego television stations when they
carried the report's conclusions live. He'd never seen "our entire wardroom crowded around a television" before.
They watched "with bated breath." At the end they were impressed with the public nature of the criticism, and its
candor: "There are still elements within the government that take personal responsibility seriously." He
found himself wondering if the Marines had been "too hard on themselves." "But they are, after all,
Marines."
Is 'Octomom' America's Future? A moment last Monday, just after noon, in Manhattan. It's slightly overcast, not
cold, a good day for walking. I'm in the 90s on Fifth heading south, enjoying the broad avenue, the trees, the wide
cobblestone walkway that rings Central Park. Suddenly I realize: Something's odd here. Something's strange. It's
quiet. I can hear each car go by. The traffic's not an indistinct roar. The sidewalks aren't full, as they normally are.
It's like a holiday, but it's not, it's the middle of a business day in February. I thought back to two weeks before
when a friend and I zoomed down Park Avenue at evening rush hour in what should have been bumper-to-
bumper traffic. This is New York five months into hard times. One senses it, for the first time: a shift in energy.
Something new has taken hold, a new air of peace, perhaps, or tentativeness. The old hustle and bustle, the wild
and daily assertion of dynamism, is calmed. A major reason people are blue about the future is not the stores, not
the Treasury secretary, not everyone digging in. It is those things, but it's more than that, and deeper. It's Sully
and Suleman, the pilot and "Octomom," the two great stories that are twinned with the era. Sully, the airline
captain who saved 155 lives by landing that plane just right—level wings, nose up, tail down, plant that baby, get
everyone out, get them counted, and then, at night, wonder what you could have done better. You know the
reaction of the people of our country to Chesley B. Sullenberger III: They shake their heads, and tears come to
their eyes. He is cool, modest, competent, tough in the good way. He's the only one who doesn't applaud Sully.
He was just doing his job. This is why people are so moved: We're still making Sullys. We're still making those
mythic Americans, those steely-eyed rocket men. Like Alan Shepard in the Mercury rocket: "Come on and light
this candle." But Sully, 58, Air Force Academy '73, was shaped and formed by the old America, and educated in
an ethos in which a certain style of manhood—of personhood—was held high. What we fear we're making more
of these days is Nadya Suleman. The dizzy, selfish, self-dramatizing 33-year-old mother who had six small
children and then a week ago eight more because, well, she always wanted a big family. "Suley" doubletalks with
the best of them, she doubletalks with profound ease. She is like Blago without the charm. She had needs and
took proactive steps to meet them, and those who don't approve are limited, which must be sad for them. She
leaves anchorwomen slack-jawed: How do you rough up a woman who's still lactating? She seems aware of their
predicament. CBS Sixty Minutes Interview
On Public Virtue Those who study the rise and fall of civilizations learn that no shortcoming has been as surely
fatal to republics as a dearth of public virtue, the unwillingness of those who govern to place the value of their
society above personal interest. Yet today we read outcries from conscientious congressmen disenchanted with
the proceedings of their legislative body and totally disgusted with the logjamming effect of their peers' selfish and
artful distancing of themselves from critical spending cutbacks, much-needed belt-tightening legislation without
which the long-term existence of our Republic itself is endangered. Probably no character trait was so universally
identified by our Founding Fathers as essential to the long-run success of the American experiment as selfless
public virtue. In those days of decision, almost all of them were quick with pleas for its encouragement and
institutionalism. For instance, John Adams, in a letter to his friend Mercy Warren, author and sister of
revolutionary leader James Otis, wrote: "Public virtue cannot exist in a Nation without private, and public Virtue is
the only Foundation of Republics. There must be a positive Passion for the public good, the public Interest,
Honour, Power and Glory, established in the Minds of the People, or there can be no Republican Government,
Page 23 of 24
Profit, Performance and Social Responsibilities
nor any real liberty." The connection between liberty and public obligation probably occurred naturally to those
who founded the United States. Many of them were exceptionally well read in political history and theory. The
founders' debates were salted with easy references to Locke, Hume, Machiavelli, and Montesquieu, as well as the
ancients: Aristotle, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, and that second-century Greek who was the great historian of the
early Roman republic, Polybius. That Roman Republic and its ethos, particularly during its first three hundred
years, were a national model for our founders' dreams.
Page 24 of 24