Paul Wallbank – Brilliant Communications

Author: Paul Wallbank

Here’s where the fees go
Becoming a partner of Goldman Sachs is a path to riches and is admission into the highest elites of the Western World’s corporatist society.

The Guardian looks at the process of becoming a Goldman Sachs partner from joining the company as an ‘analyst’ or ‘associate’ through to achieving the highest partner level.

What’s notable about the story are the layers of management and their grandiose titles; the position of “vice-president” being a case in point where it is the next step up for associates and analysts rather than the seat of power such a title suggests.

The sheer number of these vice-presidents and Managing Directors, estimated in the hundreds by the Guardian, is another notable point. The fact there are nearly 500 partner positions in the firm indicates just how fat the fees must be to pay these people.

If Goldman Sachs and their clients were private companies their fees and remuneration would be their own business. Since the Global Financial Crisis, Goldman Sachs and its too-big-to-fail competitors now are explicitly underwritten by the world’s taxpayers.

That should make us all concerned at just how much our grandchildren are going to have to pay for the generous lifestyles of today’s banking elites.

Similar posts:
November 10, 2012
Beware the business trolls
“A psychopath will enter everyone’s lives at one time. When yours arrives, your job is to get them out of your life as quickly as possible.”

That little gem was handed down to me before the internet gave everyone a global megaphone to entertain themselves with. Today it’s likely a dozen psychopaths a week could enter your life through the web or social media.

One of the manifestations of this ability for anyone to post to the web regardless of merit or sanity has given rise to the phenomenon of “trolling”, of which there has been much recent media attention.

At its most basic, trolling is about getting attention. The troll hopes to get a reaction from something outrageous they’ve said or done. In that respect they aren’t too different to radio talk back hosts or SmartCompany editors.

Business has its own types of trolls: the ‘squeaky wheel’ who hopes that by making a complete pain of themselves you’ll succumb to their unreasonable demands; the perennial tyre kicker who wastes your sales staff’s time; or the late payer who enjoys toying with you and your accounts people but has no intention of ever paying the bill.

The effects of these business trolls can be just as debilitating as an online troll, with the added bonus that they distract you and your employees from getting work done.

Sometimes the business owner makes the mistake of taking things personally. This often happens when a bad debtor upsets us so much we make it our life mission to get what we deserve to be paid.

Hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars later we surrender and accept we were never really going to get that relatively trivial sum.

The worst of all the business trolls is the recreational debtor. These business psychopaths take delight in ringing up debts they have no intention of paying and then treating your attempts to get the money back as a type of game where they will thoroughly mess with your mind.

These are the people to get out of your life as quickly as possible. It could be writing off the debt, giving them the refund or just kicking them out of the store.

So beware of the business trolls, they are as likely to appear in your outstandings file as on your Facebook page.

Similar posts:
November 9, 2012
Australia in the Asian Century – Chapter 9: Deeper and broader relationships
This post is one of the series of articles on the Australia in the Asian Century report.

Australia in the Asian Century’s final chapter looks at how Australia can deepen relationships with its Asian neighbours. The chapter is full of fine ideas which don’t quite match the reality of government policies and spending.

Early in the chapter the white paper proposes increasing the number of Australian diplomats in Asia along with opening a new embassy in Ulan Baator, a Jakarta based ambassador to ASEAN and consulates in Shenyang , Phuket and eastern Indonesia.

Fine words, however Australia’s diplomatic corps has been shrinking for the last twenty years so staffing these facilities will require a withdrawal from other regions. The white paper doesn’t identify which countries Australia’s representation would be cut from and the consequences of that.

More importantly, it doesn’t identify how Foreign Affairs and Trade staff will be skilled up to man these facilities, instead we get another worthy ambition.
National objective 22. Australia will have the necessary capabilities to promote Australian interests and maintain Australia’s influence.
- Australia’s diplomatic network will have a larger footprint across Asia.
Again, one would surely expect that Australia would already have the necessary capabilities to promote its national interest and maintain influence. Is the white paper suggesting we don’t?

Which leads us to the next national objective;

National objective 23. Australia will have stronger and more comprehensive relationships with countries across the region, especially with key regional nations—China, India, Indonesia, Japan and South Korea.

If we accept the assumption which underlies the entire paper, that Asia is going to continue to grow both economically and in influence then this will happen regardless of what governments do. It’s a meaningless and silly statement which once again ignores most of Asia and simplifies the dynamics.

The Australia Network

One of the great wastes of the Howard years was the dismembering of Radio Australia which was a cheap and effective way of projecting ‘soft power’ across the region. I personally came across this as a backpacker in China where many manual workers in the hard seat carriages practiced their Australian accented English that they’d learned on Radio Australia’s programs.

This was shut down by one of the spiteful, stupid and poorly thought out decisions that were the hallmark of the Howard government.

Replacing this was a new Australia network that replaced the previous awful overseas television service which had been a niche product on Asian cable TV channels – I had it on my Thai cable subscription when I lived in Bangkok. It was rarely watched.

The Australia Network hasn’t been a great success and that is largely due to the funding – the 2011-21 contract was costed at $221 million in the budget papers.

A break out box in the white paper boasts about the Australia Channel and its “mandate to encourage awareness of Australia, promote cross-cultural communication and build regional partnerships.”

Listed is the funding for some other services – Al Jazeera, $359 million in 2009; CCTV, $280 million in 2009 and NHK World/Radio, $226 million in 2008.

With the Australia Network receiving less than a tenth of this funding, it’s no surprise the station looks amateurish and irrelevant. Once again we see the difference between government words and government deeds.

Which brings us to the final two national objectives;

National objective 24. Australia will have deeper and broader people to people links with Asian nations, across the entire community.

National objective 25. Australia will have stronger, deeper and broader cultural links with Asian nations.

Again these are more motherhood statements and barely worth considering. The section itself skates over some of Australia’s most important assets – the cultural diversity and immigrant communities.

That the final chapter spends just a few pages on this aspect probably sums up the entire project – simple, full of motherhood statements and missing the critical strengths and threats to Australia’s, and Asia’s growth.

Overall the paper is a disappointment that tells us little we didn’t already know while stating some big ambitions which successive governments have shown they aren’t capable of delivering.

The message for those building Australia’s 21st Century links with Asia is not to wait for government but to get on and do it.

Similar posts:
November 8, 2012
Should we trust our kids to Apple?
If you watch a group of students waiting for the school bus one notable thing that stands out is how they struggle with the slab of books stuffed into their backpacks.

Just taking the health and safety concerns of effects of several kilos of textbooks on young spines makes the idea of giving students tablet computers attractive. But are we risking locking our schools into the walled gardens and corporate policies of Apple, Amazon and the ebook publishers?

Apple certainly see education as being the key area with their product keynote two weeks ago being peppered with references to how great the iPad and iPad Mini are for schools, students and educators.

In an anti-Apple rant – something becoming common among tech journalists fed up of being rudely treated by Apple’s PR people – Current magazine’s Patrick Avenell describes one PR executive’s interview for a media relations job at Apple’s Australian office.

“It was the most bizarre job interview I’ve ever had,” this executive said. “I was asked what my perception of Apple was, and I said all the usual stuff like ‘innovative, design focused, forefront of technology’, and I was told that was completely wrong — It was all about education and learning.”

That focus on education hasn’t been missed by schools as dozens of private schools are issuing tablet computers to replace student laptops and state schools have started experimenting with them. My local public school’s Parents & Citizens group has funded some as a pilot for their students.

Most of these tablet computers are iPads and the much of the take up is driven by the gushing media coverage of Apple’s devices. Often schools aren’t considering alternatives to the iPad or whether tablet computers are appropriate at all.

Audrey Watters at Hack Education has a very critique of the media’s role in promoting iPads and her points about Digital Rights Management and product lifecycles are pertinent.

The product lifecycle aspect is something that should concern parents and school administrators – these are not cheap purchases with tablet computers costing between $250 and $700 each and few of them will stand up to more than two years of constant use, particularly when being thrown around in school bags.

Should a tablet last two years, it will probably be superseded at the end of that time, which is a good illustration of the risks of being locked into a walled garden.

On top of the ongoing replacement costs of tablet computers, the cost of licensing ebooks threatens to be higher than traditional books as each student’s tablet requires its own license for each book rather than the school owning a set and giving copies out to the class studying the text each year.

The ebook also kills second hand books book market and gives text book companies a nice recurring income which is why educational publishers like Pearson and McGraw-Hill are so enthusiastic about putting their titles onto tablet computers.

Anybody who tries to circumvent the control of Apple or any other tablet manufacturer risks being stripped of their devices as a lady in Norway found when Amazon’s computer decided she had done something wrong.

That was by no means the first time such a thing had happened, in 2009 Amazon removed George Orwell’s 1984 from the Kindle store which meant the title disappeared from their customers’ tablets.

Along with being obsessed with corporate intellectual property rights – there is a difference to the rights of authors – tech companies bring their own morality onto their products.

While some educators may share Facebook’s revulsion towards nipples and breastfeeding, having titles deleted mid term because of a DRM snafu or change in corporate policy is not something that leads to good outcomes, or wise expenditure of scarce funds.

It may be that tablet computers are the right choice for schools and iPads are the right models to deliver the ebooks, but like all technology choices there are real maintenance and lifecycle costs along with management risks which may not seem obvious at first.

At a time when schools are being constrained by budget cuts, it would be a tragedy to waste billions and lock a generation of educators into one or two company’s technology platforms and licensing structures.

We need to consider these costs and risks very carefully before we choose to lock students into the corporate worlds of Apple, Amazon or Google.

Similar posts:
- No Related Posts
November 8, 2012
Australia in the Asian Century – Chapter 8: Building sustainable security in the region
This post is one of the series of articles on the Australia in the Asian Century report.

The eighth chapter of Australia in the Asian Century looks at the security picture of the region, this is one of the bigger chapters and like some of the others it’s as notable for what it leaves out as for what it says.

National objective 20. Australian policies will contribute to Asia’s development as a region of sustainable security in which habits of cooperation are the norm.

That’s nice, worthy and has been undoubtedly true for most previous Australian governments. Except of course when Australian Prime Ministers join the prevailing colonial power in wars like Iraq, Afghanistan, Malaya, Korea, Vietnam or kicking around the German territories in World War I.

Chapter Eight partly dives into territory already covered in Chapter Three, this time though the analysis does discuss the United States’ role in more detail and makes the observation that US military spending dwarfs that of any other Asian nation – interestingly this is one of the few times Russia gets a mention in the entire report.

Encouragingly, the paper doesn’t confine the concept of ‘security’ just to military matters and takes a broader view of issues such as guaranteeing access to resources, food and water. There is some discussion of climate change and on regional responses to natural disasters such as tsunamis and earthquakes.

One notable omission is that of refugees. Given that most of the asylum seekers arriving by boat are Asian – currently coming from Afghanistan and Sri Lanka – and almost all pass through other Asian countries, it would be expected this issue would get some exploration. Sadly it doesn’t and once again skirting over an important issue detracts from the paper’s substance.

As befits Australia’s most important relationships in Asia, there is a lot of discussion of the three way relationship between China, the United States and Australia with a detailed breakout box in section 8.4.

The discussion on Australia’s relations between China and the US makes an interesting statement;

In managing the intersections of Australia’s ties with the United States and China, we will need a clear sense of our national interests, a strong voice in both relationships and effective diplomacy.

Undoubtedly this statement is true, however successive Australian governments have conflated the interests of the United States with being the same as Australia’s. In recent times Australian leaders have followed the US lead even when it has been clear American policy conflicts with Australia’s Chinese relations.

Moving away from a reflex support of the United States is going to be one of the biggest challenges for Australian governments in the Asian Century and one hopes the process is as gradual and incident free as the white paper hopes.

National objective 21.The region will be more sustainable and human security will be strengthened with the development of resilient markets for basic needs such as energy, food and water.

National objective 21 is an interesting statement in itself – “resilient markets for basic needs such as energy, food and water” smacks of the 1980s privatisation and corporatism that has left Australia with duopoly industries and an excessive financialisation of those markets for basic needs.

It may well turn out to be the case that Asian countries choose not to follow that path, particularly those like the Philippines and Indonesia who have experienced the effects of crony capitalism in recent history.

Chapter 8 of Australia in the Asian Century finishes with a detailed look at the regional efforts aimed at building trust and co-operation on trans-national issues. Much is made of various international groups such as the G20 and the UN.

An interesting case study is that of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty with an examination of Japan’s and Australia’s work in that field. Sadly this is another area that’s let down by the actions of current and previous Australian governments in selling uranium to India.

The nuclear weapons stand off between India, Pakistan and China is another ‘elephant in the room’ issue that doesn’t really get the coverage it should in such a report.

Chapter 8 of Australia in the Asian Century is a very optimistic section of the report however it does hint at the path Australia could follow to being a credible, medium sized economy and influencer in the region. However one has to consider the actions of Australian leaders when asking if the nation is really interested in taking that path.

Similar posts:
November 7, 2012