<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: warnings from history &#8211; pr and the new sciences</title>
	<atom:link href="http://whiteboard.pendrywhite.biz/2009/09/03/warnings-from-history-pr-and-the-new-sciences/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://whiteboard.pendrywhite.biz/2009/09/03/warnings-from-history-pr-and-the-new-sciences/</link>
	<description>What we think is noteworthy and going on in marketing and communication</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Aug 2010 09:16:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Pendry</title>
		<link>http://whiteboard.pendrywhite.biz/2009/09/03/warnings-from-history-pr-and-the-new-sciences/comment-page-1/#comment-29</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Pendry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:28:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whiteboard.pendrywhite.biz/?p=70#comment-29</guid>
		<description>A very good point. The posting was looking at more typical businesses rather than at the exceptional but powerful large-scale corporations created by globalisation. Your (Michael&#039;s) argument is reminiscent of the critique of fat cat managers by the shareholder interest in the 1960s and 1970s that eventually led to the financial revolution whereby shareholder value (allegedly) or finance capitalism triumphed over managerial capitalism.

Unfortunately, this created a new type of &#039;fat cat&#039; exemplified by the Wall Street dealmaker and the mobile highly paid CEO for hire. The wheel has turned full circle in thirty years - the reformers have become the establishment and socially and economically inefficient except at feathering their own nests, protected by a weak political class.

Perhaps what Michael describes is best exemplified by Davos Culture where the great and the good hob-nob in an atmosphere where they can develop the illusion to themselves that they can control world events through &#039;dialogue&#039;. In fact, the politicians get a superficial understanding of business enough to confuse management skills with the skills needed to run a country - and businesses develop the language that can cloak their special interests in social responsibility.

Am I being cynical? I think not. &#039;Davos mentality&#039; may have contributed significantly both to the economic crisis, if only by promoting the sin of complacency, and to the crisis on the pro-market centre-left by over-privileging the role of the private sector in solving what are essentially public interest problems.

In retrospect, perhaps Whiteboard might have done better to have drawn a clearer line between all elite business and politicians who live in a world disconnected from reality and the rest of business and public service which struggles with harsh reality every day.

(One note though on cultural difference. European non-financial business has, in general, been far better at being responsive to the public than European, but especially British, politicians. The situation would look very different in the US where corporate excesses are rightly compared negatively with the dialogue with the population at large encouraged by the Obama Administration. Whiteboard tends to see matters from a British perspective).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A very good point. The posting was looking at more typical businesses rather than at the exceptional but powerful large-scale corporations created by globalisation. Your (Michael&#8217;s) argument is reminiscent of the critique of fat cat managers by the shareholder interest in the 1960s and 1970s that eventually led to the financial revolution whereby shareholder value (allegedly) or finance capitalism triumphed over managerial capitalism.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, this created a new type of &#8216;fat cat&#8217; exemplified by the Wall Street dealmaker and the mobile highly paid CEO for hire. The wheel has turned full circle in thirty years &#8211; the reformers have become the establishment and socially and economically inefficient except at feathering their own nests, protected by a weak political class.</p>
<p>Perhaps what Michael describes is best exemplified by Davos Culture where the great and the good hob-nob in an atmosphere where they can develop the illusion to themselves that they can control world events through &#8216;dialogue&#8217;. In fact, the politicians get a superficial understanding of business enough to confuse management skills with the skills needed to run a country &#8211; and businesses develop the language that can cloak their special interests in social responsibility.</p>
<p>Am I being cynical? I think not. &#8216;Davos mentality&#8217; may have contributed significantly both to the economic crisis, if only by promoting the sin of complacency, and to the crisis on the pro-market centre-left by over-privileging the role of the private sector in solving what are essentially public interest problems.</p>
<p>In retrospect, perhaps Whiteboard might have done better to have drawn a clearer line between all elite business and politicians who live in a world disconnected from reality and the rest of business and public service which struggles with harsh reality every day.</p>
<p>(One note though on cultural difference. European non-financial business has, in general, been far better at being responsive to the public than European, but especially British, politicians. The situation would look very different in the US where corporate excesses are rightly compared negatively with the dialogue with the population at large encouraged by the Obama Administration. Whiteboard tends to see matters from a British perspective).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://whiteboard.pendrywhite.biz/2009/09/03/warnings-from-history-pr-and-the-new-sciences/comment-page-1/#comment-27</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2009 21:18:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whiteboard.pendrywhite.biz/?p=70#comment-27</guid>
		<description>Good comments. But is it not typical also for leader of corporations to gain and retain their power? Those CEOs live even less in a in a real world than politicians. They are flying their corporate jets, live only in 5* plus hotels, they are surrounded by a herd of assistants whose main interest is to gain and maintain their well paid jobs for which they need to secure their own political power. So their vital interest is to keep those CEOs as far from the real world as possible and of course, increase the power of those CEOs so that they can increase theirs. One should have to be a moral genius not to be affected by those go-getters, so quite soon these Presidents and CEOs start to really believe that they are something superior to the rest of the population. Politicians have to fight for their customers every 4 or 5 years, CEOs have to fight for their own customers every day. This seems to be OK at first glance. But who are the real customers for those CEOs and top managers? Those who buy the products on the market or those who pay their salaries and bonuses? The real customers are the investors,and therefore those CEOs and top managers give them what they ask for - the numbers. They simply provide the information which those investors want to see, and therefore we see so much fraud, &quot;creative book-keeping and accountancy&quot;, nice figures which are far from being real. And when this bubble explodes - we have the global economic and financial crisis. A politician has to talk to people every day, has anyone done a research how often has a governor of a US state spoken to the public as opposed to a president and CEO of a major US corporation? By speaking I mean not only to make statements prepared by their PR and communications teams, but really being in physical contact with the people. I have seen the President and CEO of a major US corporation demanding that he enters an unnamed European country without the necessary border control, his security people searching the premises of the prime-minister of that country on the eve of their meeting...That country is a highly civilized one and definitely far from being one of those war stricken areas. Simply, those guys believe that they are GODS. And they need more sophisticated methods for manipulating their environment even more than politicians. They need those methods to manipulate the politicians. They have much more money for it than the politicians, who, on top of that, are under public scrutiny for how they spend the public money. Who monitors those top corporate guys how they spend the money?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good comments. But is it not typical also for leader of corporations to gain and retain their power? Those CEOs live even less in a in a real world than politicians. They are flying their corporate jets, live only in 5* plus hotels, they are surrounded by a herd of assistants whose main interest is to gain and maintain their well paid jobs for which they need to secure their own political power. So their vital interest is to keep those CEOs as far from the real world as possible and of course, increase the power of those CEOs so that they can increase theirs. One should have to be a moral genius not to be affected by those go-getters, so quite soon these Presidents and CEOs start to really believe that they are something superior to the rest of the population. Politicians have to fight for their customers every 4 or 5 years, CEOs have to fight for their own customers every day. This seems to be OK at first glance. But who are the real customers for those CEOs and top managers? Those who buy the products on the market or those who pay their salaries and bonuses? The real customers are the investors,and therefore those CEOs and top managers give them what they ask for &#8211; the numbers. They simply provide the information which those investors want to see, and therefore we see so much fraud, &#8220;creative book-keeping and accountancy&#8221;, nice figures which are far from being real. And when this bubble explodes &#8211; we have the global economic and financial crisis. A politician has to talk to people every day, has anyone done a research how often has a governor of a US state spoken to the public as opposed to a president and CEO of a major US corporation? By speaking I mean not only to make statements prepared by their PR and communications teams, but really being in physical contact with the people. I have seen the President and CEO of a major US corporation demanding that he enters an unnamed European country without the necessary border control, his security people searching the premises of the prime-minister of that country on the eve of their meeting&#8230;That country is a highly civilized one and definitely far from being one of those war stricken areas. Simply, those guys believe that they are GODS. And they need more sophisticated methods for manipulating their environment even more than politicians. They need those methods to manipulate the politicians. They have much more money for it than the politicians, who, on top of that, are under public scrutiny for how they spend the public money. Who monitors those top corporate guys how they spend the money?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
