Starting a business is one thing. Trying to turn the ship of state around and head it in a new direction is something else. Here are some thoughts that you can pick apart to apply them, hopefully, to your situation.

Have a great idea for a “new” product or service, or maybe a really neat innovation on an already existing product or service? That’s fantastic! That’s what our country is built on – innovation, improvement, change, moving forward. First, you might want to take that idea and “flesh it out a bit” to make sure it’s practical. Can it be built or delivered in a manner that will make it profitable.

Next, do exhaustive market studies. You can get some help on this and it isn’t always that expensive. I work with several of the universities in my area providing mentoring for the MBA and Entrepreneurship students. Most of the universities have programs where for a nominal fee, a business can hire a group of students to put together a marketing plan or even a full up business plan. The hidden superb value in these efforts is the research that gets done to produce them.

This part of due diligence is where many entrepreneurs fail. They love their idea and they cannot conceive of why the whole world wouldn’t also love it. “Build it and they will come,” is their mantra. WRONG! And while we know that intellectually, our emotional side wants to continue on down the path, convinced that everyone will love our idea. Tell me again why so many start-ups fail in the first five years? Could it be that their product or service wasn’t really needed/wanted? Hummmm.

Next on the list after REAL DATA tell us that the product is viable, is to think about the way in which you will assemble the organization. If you are planning on being a sole-provider (consultant, professional service provider) then you can very likely get started. You may still not want to skip this step, because in the dark hours when you are wondering why you aren’t still in that cushy W2 job, you will want to look back at what the Fundamental Organizing Principles (FOPs) for your venture were back when you were so enthusiastic.

This is hard work, especially if you intend to build a reasonably big organization, say more than 40 people eventually. The bigger you envision your organization, the more critical it is for you to do the hard work of deciding what the FOPs (core values, company values, etc.). The reason this is hard is because you are laying down the “talk” that you will have to “walk.” Suppose your thought process takes you down the road that you believe the only reason for a business to exist is to serve customers – to solve their problem/need/want in an elegant and cost effective way. Of course, you also want to earn a living and make sure that those who you employ also enjoy a decent living.  Starting with the customer then, you would perhaps say that one of the FOPs is that “Customers First.” Without customers you don’t have any business. To take care of those customers, you must have employees that understand the balance between putting customers first and also making sure that the company survives too. Having the customer’s best interest at heart doesn’t mean that you neglect your own best interest – it simply means you’re focused on the customer first. So a second FOP might be that “associates” will hold each other accountable for providing great customer experiences while treating each other with dignity and respect in a safe environment focused on continuous improvement.

You get the point. This FOP establishment must be done honestly, from the heart and from the intellect both. If you truly believe that the only reason to be in business is to make yourself rich, then you will definitely build that kind of organization regardless of the other nice (manipulative!) words you use. Further, you will hire people who will not act the way you want unless you are brutally honest that the whole purpose is to make yourself rich, and maybe them along the way. On the other hand, if you honestly believe in building a company that is based on providing a valuable product or service while at the same time making a decent living for everyone involved, then you will attract that kind of person. That is you will, IF you can authentically state what your company’s FOPs are and the prospective employee/associate believes that in fact you are being authentic.

Once you have established the FOPs for your organization, know how to authentically present them to the world, you will be amazed at how the values, beliefs, actions and results will follow. You will also be amazed at how those FOPs will help you through the inevitable hard times. All of this may sound pretty “soft” to you. Yet, I would offer the challenge of doing the research to see how companies “make it” these days. Edwards Life Sciences, Google, Facebook, IBM, Keurig, you name your favorite company. They undoubtedly have an intentional culture based on whatever they call FOPs. And then think about the company you like to “hate.” You have at least one, I’m sure. That company “doesn’t get it.” And the “it” they don’t get is what? Likely it is that they don’t understand (your view of) customer service. They are inwardly focused. It’s all about them and they only care about YOU if it’s in their best interest to care about you. Otherwise . . . .

In this economy, which I believe is going to be with us for quite a while, many business leaders are asking a fundamental question, “If I weren’t in this business now, would I start it? What would it look like? And then they start the hard process of turning the company around. To me, that is very much like starting the company over in a lot of ways. Many of the same steps apply. That “turnaround” will likely include changing the culture and that is really going to be a challenge! Don’t miss any of the steps, make sure you go back to the basic FOPs that got you started in the first place.

An analogy I came up with some time ago had to do with a small convoy of vehicles we had formed to take several employees to a meeting. There were four or five cars (the details are now a bit foggy) in our little parade and we did not have an awful lot of leeway time wise. One of my colleagues was in the lead and he knew where we were going. I had decided to “bring up the rear” of the convoy since I too knew where we were going and if there was any stragglers, I would be able to help them along.

Anyone who has driven the highways in Southern California (or any other urban area) knows how difficult it is to keep five cars together. People do not want to let you keep a safe distance from the car in front of you. They seem to believe they have an inalienable right to be in the lane they want to be in regardless of who might already be there. And in California, “drive to the right except to pass” is a quaint saying followed by no one as far as I can tell. So even though we resolved to “stay together,” I knew it would be a challenge.

We managed though, and some of it is because I was able to anticipate the necessary lane changes and, as the last vehicle in line, I could move over to the necessary lane and leave room for the vehicle in front of me to move over, and then the one in front of that vehicle could move over, etc. It was not as easy as it would be today with cell phone communication. I can see exactly how we could enhance and formalize all this so it would work to make sure we stayed together.

First, we’d make sure all vehicles had a map and directions of where we were going. Then we would make sure we all had our cell phones (hands free of course). Second, we would discuss the route in detail to be clear on which of many possible routes we intended to take. Third, the lead car would let the last car in line know if there were any unanticipated lane changes due to accidents, construction, etc. They would not initiate lane changes but instead let the last car move into the correct lane and make room for the cars in front in succession. Of course we’d all agree to use our directional signals so that the vehicles behind and in front can anticipate our moves and be ready to safely execute their own changes.

We know from sad experience that if the lead car changes lanes first, it is often difficult or impossible for the cars that are following to also move to that lane because there are already impatient drivers in that lane and they are not about to let you in. I’ve been told that this is often the way funeral processions are organized by the funeral director when they need to be on a highway. It all makes sense to me, and I know first hand that it works even here in California.

I think the analogy holds for our businesses as well. There are times when the leader has to be out front “leading the charge” so to speak. We have to be early adopters of many things in order to get the company to follow up – perhaps it’s a cultural change that is necessary so the leader has to model the new behaviors. I’ve often thought that we citizens respond harshly to our politicians when they are “out in front of us” on issues. It doesn’t matter which side of the liberal/conservative divide you are on, there are times when those we elect to lead us have to actually lead from the front – getting out there and being the eloquent speaker for what they believe is right.

At other times, and perhaps more often than we think, our leaders need to clear the lane for us from behind. They don’t need to be out in front leading the charge where everyone can see them. Instead, they might develop legislation that clears the way for civil rights, or new tax codes, or new diplomatic initiatives, etc. And the same is true of our business leaders. As Lao Tzu is credited with saying, “A leader is most effective when people barely know he exists. When his work is done, his aim fulfilled, his troops will feel they did it themselves.”

If we start looking at our leadership responsibilities as clearing the lanes so our people can safely arrive at the appointed destination, on time and with the right payload, then we will be able to see how it is easier for everyone if we lead from behind. The leader who uses this approach must be able to develop faith in those who are “on the front lines.” They have to feed back accurate accounts of what is happening up front so that we know how to help out. We have to be content letting others “take the lead” and be the first to arrive. We have to be willing to have the boring “same view” since we aren’t the ones out front seeing the new terrain.

How are you at leading from behind? Do you see how this analogy might apply to your business and leadership style? Are you willing to “ask questions” rather than give directions?

It seems to me that we are heading down some rocky roads when it comes to advertising and how to “reach” the consumer.

• Google is giving its own sites priority in their search results (evil!)
• Facebook “inadvertently” (right) sent individual identities to advertisers
• Advertising companies are “screaming” at Microsoft for putting in “do not track” function in Internet Explorer 9 – which tells everyone they should have it
• The government is looking at regulating who can track what – that aught to be useful (NOT)
• Print companies are scrambling to figure out how to “monetize going digital”
• Advertising clients are moving budget dollars from traditional to digital advertising including e-books

My theory on this is that consumers are quite tired of having advertisements “pushed” on them. They know where to get what they are looking for and an Ad is not to be trusted any way. While I speak only for myself, I’m not convinced that I’m all that different than other consumers when I say that I don’t trust ads (I almost never click on the paid ads of a search), I’d rather find the information I want when I want it, and I don’t want it in my books, papers or articles. I will ignore most of what even looks like an ad and may even decide that the ad was intrusive and avoid the seller even if I am looking to purchase something.

I’ve concluded that most people (certainly not all people) do not like and will avoid information that is pushed on them. If that’s true, then all the frantic action by the retailers, marketers and advertisers to find new ways to generate ad dollars or sell products are going down the wrong path; it may well backfire. Instead, they might want to expend energy to make sure that the consumer of your product or service can find you quickly and easily.

Here’s the evidence I see for consumers “fighting back.”

• The success of the “do not call list” to stop the intrusions
• The liberal use of “fast forward” to get rid of the ads in recorded media
• The increased use of smart phones to scan product bar codes and download competitive pricing for your product
• Consumer pressure on Microsoft to go ahead with “Do Not Track” despite the crying advertisers who are predicting the usual doom and gloom. Do you trust them?
• Reliance on colleague testimonials rather than ads – and anger over employees acting like they are consumers providing testimonials

Slowly, I am moving away from the printed word. I no longer take a newspaper, instead I have my own digital news source that gives me what I want and ONLY what  want. I have started listening to the “Word for Word Audio Edition of the Economist”  instead of reading the paper version. My books are now on Kindle or Google e-readers more often than not (except for the occasional gift and the occasional publisher sending a new book for review). I even read books and news on my smart phone now (never thought I would).

So I get why those who pay for advertising and those who do the advertising are in a panic. I understand why they are feeling desperate. And, I think their responses are off the mark. What would life be without the advertising? Can’t imagine it? Nor can I. It won’t happen. What will happen is you won’t have to push the ad on me. You will have to instead work hard to make sure that I can find you and the solid, accurate and useful information you provide will be ad enough. You just have to make sure that your bar code is readily available so I can scan it and get the information I want about your product – otherwise I’ll purchase someone else’s product.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: “No one likes to be sold. Most people do like to buy.” So the question is, how do you make it incredibly easy and rewarding for me to buy? Can I find you? Do you have good solid information or just a bunch of fluff? I don’t think things are all that much different between B2B and B2C these days. So what are you doing to make sure you’re staying out in front on this? There is no “new normal.” There never really has been a “normal.” Everything is changing, including the way we get our messages out to the folks who want to buy our products and services.

That’s what’s so powerful about getting everyone, the whole company, to fall in love with the noble goal or vision of the company – everyone stays focused to the exclusion of almost everything else. And that’s why the leader won’t let his team fall in love with opinions, ideas or world views because it will not likely help fulfill the vision if our minds are closed to new possibilities. We will see only what we want to see to support our view, opinion or idea.

There in lies the problem. How do you efficiently and with respect get people to let go of their most cherished ideas? In some respects, you don’t have to do that. Belief in the goal of the company will do that for you. In some cases, you may have to move individuals and the tribe to a new mountain top so that their view of the world changes. That is what David Logan means when he talks about Tribal Leadership and how leaders know and understand the language of the tribe where they are presently, and how to move them through the stages of tribal development. The fifth stage of development is characterized, as Logan suggests, by a mood of “innocent wonderment.” In other words, people are not hung up on one idea or world view. They don’t know that things can’t be done. They let their experiences remain in the past and are open to new possibilities and can create their own and the tribe’s future.

I don’t know about you, but I can admit that I love some of my ideas, it’s hard not to. Lot’s of people I know are sure that their view is the right view and that if only others would make the effort to understand, they too would love their ideas and view of “reality.” So what are you doing to challenge and question your own answers and those of your tribe? What stage are you and your tribe in at this point? Are you growing, moving, finding other ways to view reality?

But, like it or not, we are forced to play by the new rules – and they are not all benign. Ask Shirley Sherrod how she likes Andrew Brietbart’s brand of transparency. There’s a Brietbart out there waiting to Sherrod you. Are you watching? Even if it isn’t an ideologue who is two bricks short of a load with an agenda trying to do you in, it can be painful to have your shortcomings pointed out for you instead of by you. BP, not that it isn’t in enough trouble already, has had to deal with a whole bunch of stuff shoved into the light of day by enterprising bloggers. The difficulty is, many (most?) of us who blog (myself included) aren’t journalist nor do we attempt to be. We have opinions and have found a way to express them in writing without having to deal with publishers and printers. That’s great news and it’s dangerous. Who is vetting the information being put out in the blog-o-sphere?

When it comes to your company (or you as an individual) you should be monitoring the internet for mentions of you, your company, your industry and even your competitors. Make sure what you are doing, saying and writing will not damage your credibility when it is published – when, not if it is published. Assume everything – including confidential e-mails and memorandum - will be published. Assume customers/clients who are unhappy are blogging about you, posting YouTube videos and Twittering their thumbs off – because they are and just haven’t gotten to you yet.

“It’s unfair,” you say, “They don’t understand the pressure we’re under. They don’t understand we’re trying to do the right thing.” Maybe, or maybe they get what it is that they want better than you and so you aren’t delivering the goods. They may be wildly unreasonable. But they’re still blogging. So we can whine about the new rules of the game or we can figure out how to use them to play better and to win. Can you get that your better competitors are doing just that?

So take a look at all the business news lately. I know there are good stories out there, but they aren’t

High road? Low road? Expedient road? Profit only road?

being printed. Instead, what’s on the page, in print and floating in the cloud are stories of corporate misdeeds and missteps. Dell apparently knew about bad product and shipped it anyway. BP apparently ignored a whole series of warning signs about the Gulf oil well. Breitbart knew full well he was distorting the news to make his own twisted point and the only positive thing that might come out of this is that Shirley Sherrod will now be known for the good work she has been doing and the world will know not to pay any attention to Breitbart. It doesn’t always work out this way, and it might not work out well for you.

So the bottom line lesson for me in all this is to make sure that we, as business leaders, build and shape cultures in our organizations that are open, transparent and do what’s right for all concerned, not just one group or one person. Even the small private business started by an entrepreneur has an obligation to take proper care of the customers, creditors, employees, suppliers and other stakeholders who help make the company successful. In fact, it seems to me that we have a better chance to do the right thing, to run a forward thinking company and to stay true to the values and Noble Goals we had when we started the company if we stay private. Being a public entity seems to be one sure way to stray from our values.

So what are you doing to monitor the cloud these days? Have you done all you can do to make your company transparent to the stakeholders? Have you built a culture where everyone knows the organizing principles and values of the company? Do they know how to make “the right” decision according to those values and principles? Do your employees know how to cut expenses and not corners?

My prime target is AT&T and without going into a long tirade, I’ll just say that I’ve not personallyexperienced more deplorable customer service at the hands of a company. I’m adding another one now though, Intuit. After deciding that the “gentle warning” on their website that the latest software was best for Windows 7, I paid my money and downloaded the QB 2010 software. That’s when it all began.

Yes, but you keep dropping my calls! Why is that my problem?

First, the software wouldn’t install. The error message claimed that it couldn’t create a directory in the public folders on my CFO’s machine. I figured this was my problem and so it was. After I straightened out the permissions (a bit frustrating with lots of “rebooting”), the software installed. And then I decided that it was smart to register the product since the splash screen warning, in bold red, stated that I only had 30 days to register the product or it wouldn’t function. That tweaked me a bit since I’d just paid about $175 for this upgrade. But, it isn’t unusual for the larger software guys to want you to “activate/authenticate” the software to be sure it’s a legitimate copy. So I swallowed hard and clicked on “Register Now.”

But I've already given you that information. It is in my profile you just looked up.

Once on the registration page, I began a slow boil. There were way too many questions. And they have nothing to do with validating my copy of the software. Many, maybe most of the fields were required. It was obvious they are gathering information to market to me. How many employees do I have, what’s my mailing address, phone number, etc. By the time I got done I was pretty pissed off. And then the sledgehammer in the nose. “Your almost done. Call the 800 number if you’re in the US . . . . I went ballistic.

I could not believe my eyes. First, after paying for the software, then after filling in a ridiculous registration form requiring information that can’t possibly be needed for validation of legitimate software, these clueless people are forcing me to make a phone call to get an activation number. The poor woman on the other end of the phone when I calmed down enough to call didn’t have any difficulty determining that she had an irate customer on the line.

I apologized to her for being angry and recognized that I knew this wasn’t her fault. I told her that the best thing for both of us was for her to simply give me the activation number so I could finish the installation and turn the machine back over to my CFO. She was pleasant and then started going through all the same information I just had put into that obnoxious registration form! Name, company name, address, phone number, how many employees, why did you upgrade, etc. I couldn’t contain myself. It took another 15 minutes but she finally gave me a six digit number to register my product.

What are these people thinking? Are they thinking? I don’t have any trouble with folks trying to do a good job marketing. Send out a survey. Don’t hold me hostage to registering my software. To make matters even worse, the software itself is a marketing tool. I’m blasted with obnoxious messages to buy products and services and have to hunt around to change settings to minimize this crap. They are gathering a lot of information, more or less forcing it out of the customer. That information is a liability. I can’t wait for them to be raked over the coals for mishandling this information. I’ll join the class action suit on this one (I usually trash them).

Here’s the bottom line. I am now investigating using another software package. It’s too bad. QB is used by lots of people and it’s convenient for my CPA. But I will not put up with being abused by an arrogant company without a clue as to how to treat a customer. If they want to validate the install, just send an e-mail to the registered user with the key. Don’t make me call someone and go through the same information all over again. So as soon as I can install other software, that’s what will happen. They’ve lost a customer.

As I was thinking about this, I realized that the story was the same with all the folks who describe their favorite company to “hate.” It’s all being treated poorly as a customer. How customers are treated is a direct function of how the leadership at the top of the corporation/organization set the culture. So the lesson here is to take a hard look at how we are treating customers – either “on purpose” or because we aren’t paying attention. How is your company doing? Are you listening to the needs your customers express and doing everything reasonable to be responsible to their needs? Are you taking customer satisfaction surveys? Even though you’ve had to cut back due to this poor economy, are you still focused on providing awesome customer experience?

So here’s my premise. It is a leader’s responsibility to provide a compelling vision of the real reason for the existence of the organization (whether for-profit, not-for-profit, private or public). S/he must make sure that the organization never substitutes the measurements for the reasons for existence. Here is where I suspect we will find that BP went wrong. I’m confident that we will find that BP leadership has been focused on minimizing cost, increasing efficiency and improving productivity. Employees are not stupid; they watch where management spends time and money and who gets rewarded. They don’t listen to the words spoken uncritically. They match the words to the actions and the actions win every time.

We need to do the debrief and find the causes of this failure at the BP Oil well (we all know there will be more than one). The details will be important. I know, even without those details, that the root cause will be that leadership failed – not the people doing the work. I know that because by definition, leadership has to take responsibility for the results. Providing for proper training, procedures, controls and an environment where the company and employees can flourish are all the responsibility of the organization’s leadership team.

Government likewise is responsible for providing for proper training, procedures, controls and an environment where the services provided match the public’s expectation. One has to wonder what transpired when it came to actually regulating this and other industries. It appears that a major loop-hole in the regulatory requirements for environmental impact studies in the Gulf Oil drilling operation. The last, most stringent impact study was waived not only for BP but for others drilling in the gulf as well. And not only by this administration, but by administrations going back to the first Bush presidency. The public has a false sense of security when they think about industry regulation. They expect that industries are actually being regulated when, arguably, they are not or at least not fully according to the expectations.

So the balance between the right amount of “fat” and a lean, high performing organization is always in tension. If we look at government as being part of the “staff” in our businesses, then continuing the analogy, we need to have some body fat to survive and thrive, but it’s healthiest to have as little as possible. The public has reason to be highly suspicious of a company’s intentions with respect to good corporate citizenship. There are few companies who are genuinely concerned about their impact on the neighborhood, city, state, country or globe. Therefore, the public has supported, perhaps even demanded regulation of most industries rather than a completely free capitalistic system.

What if business organizations were to consider minimizing regulation intervention in their operations by behaving well, making ethical decisions, authentically caring about their impact on the environment and developing a culture that included all stakeholders in the strategy and vision of the business. Sounds like hard work. Sounds like it could take “forever” and be very frustrating. Sounds like it might make life easier in the end. Instead, business leaders tend to think of government regulation as the enemy. I think it was Lincoln who responded to a woman who criticized him for inviting the leaders of the South to dinner at the Whitehouse. She allowed that they were his enemies and he should destroy them, not invite them to dinner. To which he replied by asking, “But Madame, do I not destroy the enemy when I make him my friend?” I’m not sure we will ever see the business and government agencies become friends, and we likely don’t want that since much that has happened is due to an overly close relationship between regulators and regulated. Still, I don’t see how viewing each other as the enemy helps either.

One big lesson from the sad experience of the Gulf Oil Disaster for business leaders is that if we do not do the right thing we will be caught eventually and the results will be more regulation, more red-tape and more Public Relation fall out. BP may well not survive this disaster, and it’s one of their own making. Accidents happen. Yet it is not likely that the public will accept this particular incident as an accident, but rather they see it as negligence. To make matters worse, it appears that BP was less than forthcoming with information because they are looking out for themselves and taking a defensive posture toward future litigation. It won’t work. All that will happen is their reputation, which was not sterling before the accident, will certainly be further damaged by their actions or lack thereof.

For government, the fall out is not going to be any better. The people are not fooled by the self-righteous finger pointing by the members of the House and Senate who are whipping Industry leaders in public and accepting obscene amounts of money behind the public’s back. The trouble is, there are precious few secrets anymore. It will be very interesting to see how the public responds to the BP incident, the financial disaster that continues to plague the economy and the sickening sight of elected officials trying to redirect scrutiny of their actions or lack thereof by demonizing others.That won’t work either. Alas, I doubt that the government officials will learn the leadership lessons that the business leaders will, hopefully, learn.

BP Ad on Google

We live in the Internet age. What would you expect BP to do? The media is “all over them,” and painting them as a villain. BP is being portrayed as a company who purposely caused this accident, and perhaps we will find that some of the decisions they made have lead to the disaster. It makes no sense to believe they wanted this to happen. No matter what you think about that, BP is still critical in shutting down this well. It makes no sense to be treating them like criminals at this point. We all, including BP, need to figure out what happened to cause this accident. Right now, it appears to be a series of multiple failures.

Meanwhile, BP is not the only culprit here. My colleagues over at 2130 Partners have, as always, hit the nail on the head. With respect to this disaster, they ask “What can you own?” They ask us to accept our part in creating this reality. Admittedly, most of us are only indirectly responsible for the situation, however, we do all own some of this reality.

We’re all saying harsh things about BP. Can we consider that perhaps the leaders have recognized their failure and want to do the best they can? Can we consider that the BP organization cannot change on a dime and while there may still be a tendency toward secrecy and defensive attitude, they might actually be trying to be better? Can we consider giving them space to do well while at the same time holding them accountable? Can we give ourselves the space to realize our demand for energy drives this and many other processes?

As I write this post, the latest ideas are that with the “funnel” over the cleaned up riser pipe, much of the oil will be able to be collected. Then, as I understand it, the relief well will be drilled to intercept the present well below the failed blowout valve. Then they will attempt to effect a “bottom kill,” that is plug the well from the bottom instead of from the top as tried last week. All of this being done at a mile below the surface.

I don’t know if BP’s purchase of Ad Words is going to help them out or not. I’m sure it won’t help close the well down. Speaking for myself, I can say that I almost never pay attention to, let alone click on, paid Ad Words. I generally don’t trust Advertisements or Advertisers; they have an ax to grind, they have their own best interest at heart, not mine. So BP’s money is not well spent as far as I’m concerned. And don’t get me wrong on this, I do not think I’m going to end up thinking BP is a model corporation. No, instead, I’m pretty sure when all this is over we will be looking at a very large failure in Corporate Ethics. It’s just that I don’t think now is the time to focus on blame.

For the business owners and business leaders reading this blog, the question is how well are you and your organization doing to plan ahead for such a disaster? How will you manage in this internet age? You know your “sins” will not be hidden, right? You will be transparent, like it or not.

THE SITUATION
In Washington, DC, at a Metro Station, on a cold January morning in 2007, this man with a violin played six Bach pieces for about 45 minutes. During that time, approximately 2,000 people went through the station, most of them on their way to work.

After about 3 minutes:
A middle-aged man noticed that there was a musician playing. He slowed his pace and stopped for a few seconds, and then he hurried on to meet his schedule.

About 4 minutes later:
The violinist received his first dollar. A woman threw money in the hat and, without stopping, continued to walk.

At 6 minutes later:
A young man leaned against the wall to listen to him, then looked at his watch and started to walk again.

At 10 minutes:
A 3-year old boy stopped, but his mother tugged him along hurriedly. The kid stopped to look at the violinist again, but the mother pushed hard and the child continued to walk, turning his head the whole time. This action was repeated by several other children, but every parent – without exception – forced their children to move on quickly.

At 45 minutes:
The musician played continuously. Only 6 people stopped and listened for a short while. About 20 gave money but continued to walk at their normal pace. The man collected a total of $32.

After 1 hour:
He finished playing and silence took over. No one noticed and no one applauded. There was no recognition at all. No one knew this, but the violinist was Joshua Bell, one of the greatest musicians in the world. He played one of the most intricate pieces ever written, with a violin worth $3.5 million dollars. Two days before, Joshua Bell sold-out a theater in Boston where the seats averaged $100 each to sit and listen to him play the same music.

This is a true story. Joshua Bell, playing incognito in the D.C. Metro Station, was organized by the Washington Post as part of a social experiment about perception, taste and people’s priorities.
This experiment raised several questions:

*In a common-place environment, at an inappropriate hour, do we perceive beauty?
*If so, do we stop to appreciate it?
*Do we recognize talent in an unexpected context?

One possible conclusion reached from this experiment could be this:
If we do not have a moment to stop and listen to one of the best musicians in the world, playing some of the finest music ever written, with one of the most beautiful instruments ever made, then —

How many other things are we missing as we rush through life?

What I think is that many of us in business are not really in touch with the people. The average person is seeing their “hard earned” wealth and ability to earn a living greatly diminished while the investment bankers are doing just fine. They see bankers not lending while their small business is starving for cash. They see that they can’t find jobs while labor unions strike at Boeing. Big government, big business and selfish unions are not on their list of favorite people these days and neither are people who make it too obvious that they are among the “elite.” Not surprising that a recent poll by Jan Norman over at the Orange County Register lists Politicians and Salespeople as the least trusted professionals.

Here’s what’s different now. First, if the politicians are reading things right, you have one strike against you in the court of public opinion if you have a business that’s doing well and you indulge in conspicuous consumption – I don’t think it matters if you are private, public, for-profit, not-for-profit, large or small, you had best show humility and gratefulness. Blaming others for making things a bit tougher isn’t going to help, and if you try and justify your position (I employ many people, if I do well, they do well. How will I pay their benefits? etc.), you will be seen as a whiner.

The second thing is that today you WILL be transparent whether you like it or not. Many if not most employees and customers are well connected through the internet. Remember the video that went viral about United breaking a customer’s guitar? It cost them big time. It won’t matter to me if you’re large or small, I now have a way to “pay you back” if you are rude, indifferent or give me poor service.

I caught a bit of the news recently and the witnessed spectacle of the executives of BP, Transocean and Halliburton all pointing fingers at each other. No one wanted to take responsibility, because of the legal implications I suppose. But the public will not bother with that, they’ll just see some very wealthy individuals ducking responsibility for a very bad environmental accident. Just like Enron, WorldCom, Wall Street Bankers, individual traders and Krogers, these guys don’t want to own up to the fact that they blew it. What’s worse is, they won’t be able to hide what they did wrong. We no longer control the media, and neither does the traditional big media.

So what does all this mean? To me what it means is that there’s a pretty good chance that the politicians are reading the electorate correctly and are trying to gain points for the upcoming election cycle. If that’s true, business people will not help themselves by also pointing the finger at others. Instead, we should be making sure we are not being casual about customer service, quality of product and service, delivering what we claim, cleaning up our advertising, making sure we are really adding value – all the basic stuff. If you are doing that, then good for you and keep it up, maybe even raise the bar now. If you aren’t really doing things the right way, you might want to think about what it will feel like when (not if) your customers/employees find out.

It doesn’t matter if we are right. It doesn’t matter if the present administration is making things harder for us or not. It doesn’t matter if customers are being “unreasonable.” It only matters that we continue to survive, thrive and continue to do good work. For that we need to own that right now at least big business, and perhaps all business, has fallen out of favor due to the greed, lack of ethics, lack of leadership and being totally tone deaf when it comes to what the electorate is seeing and feeling. Those same negative characteristics are being ascribed to the politicians themselves. Those same negative characteristics may be what makes them right about siding with the electorate “against” business. It doesn’t feel good. It doesn’t feel right. It doesn’t feel fair. But it is the way it is. So the question for businesses of all sizes may well be, “Do you want to be right or effective?”