TORONTO, ONTARIO - In the past few weeks, the mainstream media (what we used to call "the press" even though most didn't use printing presses) seems to have taken renewed attention in changes toward progressive policies in the business world. Two aspects of this supposed trend, both well-covered by the Christian Science Monitor, are the "B Corporation" and the "MBA Oath." Put all this together, and it might sound like North America business climate is headed for a new era of ethics, an ethics redefined beyond human interactions to integrity in interactions with the planet as well. However, I'm not expecting any of it to take hold--outside of very limited situations, there's no way to make money off being a "B Corporation" or living up to the "MBA Oath", and in the United States, if you can't make money off it, it probably isn't going to happen.
The "B Corporation" concept is particularly intriguing, as on the surface it seems to resolve the recognized problem that the modern corporation by law cannot make decisions based on anything other than shareholder return. If a corporation were to decide to do some environmental mitigation just because its CEO decided it was the right thing to do, if it impacted profit at all (as it would), he could be removed by the board for not living up to fiduciary responsibility--and this has happened. One analyst last week pointed out that Google probably didn't want to take legal action against Yahoo and Microsoft for their recent marketing agreement, but would be forced to legally--their own shareholders would sue them if they didn't at least try, in a case in which it probably would even be most profitable for Google to just keep improving and promoting their own products. "B Corporations" are supposed to resolve the issue by including in their charters that they will make decisions based not only on the interests of their shareholders but also their employees, business partners, and even the environment.
That sounds good, but the article points out that the concept is legally untested--shareholders may still sue a "B Corporation" for following its charter, or even having the charter in the first place, and conceivably win. Even if it stands up legally, the article points out that some of the few hundred companies with such a charter did it in part to help raise money. If "B Corporations" prove to be less profitable than traditional corporations, as seems likely, then there's the distinct possibility that such money will not be there in the future, and that investors will avoid "B Corporations" because they don't have a good enough return on investment. In a climate in which profitable radio stations are letting go employees because investors aren't getting a 15% return at the parent company, it seems incredible to believe that the same investors would tolerate a "B Corporation." At best, it seems like a possible arrangement for niche and quasi-public sectors.
The "MBA oath" offers a solution at the individual, rather than corporate level. In the wake of MBA's being blamed for everything from Enron to bundled mortgages to the actions of the Bush presidency, it was felt by some MBA candidates that some concrete action was needed to rehabilitate the meaning of the degree. Their solution was to pledge to "act with utmost integrity" and to "strive to create sustainable economic, social, and environmental prosperity worldwide." That sounds good, but as one critic put it, "Those who are morally strong don’t need the oath, those that are not won’t honor it." In the article, it is pointed out that some taking the pledge have been accused of doing it strictly to help them find a job in a difficult job market. I have a hard time seeing past those criticisms--for a supposed "accountability" measure there doesn't seem to be any consequence to violating the pledge, not losing one's degree or anything else. It seems to be the ultimate in the kind of substance-less promise that caused the MBA degree to get its current reputation in the first place. Then, there's the whole issue of profitability again--how does one make more money for a company by following the pledge? It doesn't seem possible.
I hate to be one to discourage any steps toward more holistic and broad thinking in the business world, but neither the "B Corporation" nor the "MBA Oath" seems to be an effective measure. To get real change, it will need to happen at a much more fundamental level in laws affecting all companies and individuals within them. That takes political will, and I don't see that happening when the United States Senate can't even reach consensus on a Supreme Court nominee. Some may think a new ethical era is starting, but I'm afraid that I just don't see any evidence.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Politics: There was a Garbage Strike?
A garbage truck re-appeared on Harshaw Avenue for the first time since the city worker's strike ended on 5-August-2009
TORONTO, ONTARIO - The city collected recyclables on my street for the first time in more than a month today as services resumed following the extended strike by city workers. While I certainly hauled more material to the curb than usual (three stuffed recycling bins for my building instead of two lightly filled ones), overall I join a chorus of people saying that the garbage strike just wasn't a big deal.
Unless one lived in an area affected by the extra traffic or the smell created by one of the more popular temporary garbage collection sites, there really wasn't much direct impact of the strike. The general public's consciousness about waste collection may be at an all time high, so they were already minimizing garbage and even recyclable creation in favor of re-using things, buying things with less packaging and so forth, and thus their home containers could go a long way without regular collection.
Oftentimes, I haven't even filled up my primary garbage bag when the every-other-week garbage collection day comes, and I end up filling up the bag with all my other receptacles and take that single bag out to the building's single large bin. During the strike, I just waited until the bag was actually full and took it to the bin, and watched as the bin gradually filled for a change. I generally carry what little waste I create at lunch home and put it in my own garbage--during the garbage strike, I had to do that whether I wanted to or not with the public receptacles sealed off. So, there was not much change in procedure for me.
The bottom line seems to be that lack of garbage collection just doesn't seem to be enough of an inconvenience for enough people to be a powerful weapon for unions to use against the city politically anymore. Instead of demanding that the government resolve a strike, residents just shrug and adapt.
As for the question of whether the city caved to union demands in this recent dispute, I found this statement released today by city councilman Gord Perks to do a decent job of accurately characterizing the situation. While Perks is often an ally of Mayor David Miller, he doesn't include much spin in this statement. Conservative statements criticizing Miller seem to be mostly full of spin, and in some cases downright diatribes against unions as well as Miller's handling of the strike, which don't strike me as productive. Unions aren't going to go away, no matter how much the conservatives might like them to do so.
It is time for the city to get back to normal, and I guess that includes petty politics.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Economics: Government-Run Companies
TORONTO, ONTARIO - Recently, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman pointed out that for all the people whining about a government takeover of health care in the United States, his experiences with two government-run organizations, the United States Post Office (USPS) and his state's Department of Motor Vehicles, were actually quite positive compared with interactions with private-sector companies. Nate Silver, as he often does, backs up this opinion with data from Yelp that shows that, in Brooklyn at least, the USPS gets better experience ratings than FedEx/Kinko's, though both trail United Parcel Service (er, UPS) significantly. Putting aside the fact that President Obama (if not some of the Democrats in Congress) actually doesn't want government running health care, just financing it, the argument is an interesting one. I am biased by living in Canada, where most bureaucracies (private and public) seem to work more efficiently, but there seems ample reason to believe that government-run organizations do not inherently provide poor service.
The USPS offers an interesting case study. I've had my share of fighting with the USPS, most notably for poor delivery (sometimes three weeks late) of the then-daily Christian Science Monitor while I was in college. I remember when, twenty years ago, it could take weeks for a letter to cross the United Sates. However, that isn't the reality anymore. I've been shocked at how quickly first-class mail is delivered, including during the peak period of December, in recent years. I've mailed things from Boston that arrived in Seattle two days later. Furthermore, mail delivery is now quite consistent--it's very rare for a letter to take more than a week in any situation--and my counter experiences with the USPS in the past few years have all been positive. I don't care how they've done it--apparently much of the improved delivery comes from outsourcing long-distance deliveries to competitors like FedEx and UPS--the bottom line is that I actually favor the USPS over its private competitors for any shipment that isn't large and doesn't require tracking, as the USPS is usually cheaper and just as fast. While my experiences are anecdotal, Nate Silver's look at Yelp seems to statistically back up my observations.
I often point to Revenue Canada as an example of a government agency that does things well from a customer service perspective, especially compared with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the United States. Granted, I've never been audited by either organization or had a major dispute with either, but in terms of day-to-day interactions, Revenue Canada wins hands down. Revenue Canada's forms may be long, but they are quite clear with instructions that are comprehensible for an educated person. I have found the IRS instructions fine for simple situations--such as for people that can fill out the 1040EZ form--but on more complicated situations, they can be extremely hard to understand. When I've tried to call the IRS to ask a question, I've waded through a menu system, waited on hold for nearly an hour, and then gotten what proved to be an incorrect answer, since they revised my tax (in my favor) exactly where I had the question. When I've called Revenue Canada, I got through to a person within five minutes and gotten extremely thorough and correct answers. When the experience is over, Revenue Canada sends a letter thanking you for paying your taxes. I've never received such a letter from the IRS. Of course, the IRS is fighting an anti-tax bias in the US that simply isn't as large in Canada, but that seems to me to a reason to pay more attention to the customer experience, not less.
Another interesting comparison exists between VIA Rail Canada and Amtrak, both government-subsidized train operations competing with other travel modes. Generally speaking, VIA is known (even outside Canada) for having excellent customer service. Amtrak is at best known for uneven customer service. VIA may provide limited train service in some regions, but what trains it does run generally have good reputations in the areas where it operates. Amtrak may have a good reputation in certain corridors (California's Capitol Corridor between San Jose and Sacramento, and the Cascades Corridor between Eugene, Oregon and Vancouver, British Columbia come to mind), but I personally can't recommend most of their long-distance trains even to other railroad enthusiasts because the on-time performance has been so poor and it is too common to run into employees with terrible attitudes. What's the difference? It's not subsidy levels. It's mostly that VIA management chose to re-organize its staffing around the customer experience (some don't like how they imposed that on their unions), whereas Amtrak has maintained traditional railroad staff organization and furthermore has generally not made any attempt to enforce appropriate staff behavior. It's a classic difference in culture--one organization chose to address it and improve it, the other hasn't done it.
Of course, then there's the Canada Post. The customer service aspect of that organization is fine--the regular clerk at my local post office smiles when he sees me coming and remembers my shipping preferences--but their core service, mail delivery, is pathetic compared with its US counterpart. Where the USPS regularly delivers first-class mail across the country in just a couple days, it is not uncommon for Canada Post to take weeks. The CBC, when it had country-wide mail-in contest, had to be on a two-week cycle because one week wasn't enough for people to mail in their entries. Some years ago, I actually had a letter take two months to go from Boston to Toronto--and I'm pretty sure the delay wasn't south of the border. Many companies in the US refuse to send anything to Canada using the postal system, using private carriers instead. The list of anecdotal and real evidence could go on and on, and I don't know what the fundamental problem might be, as Swiss Post and even the USPS show that government-run postal services can work quite efficiently.
The lesson here seems to be that it's not whether something is government-run that determines whether it works well, but the culture of the organization. If an organization is motivated to provide good service through accountability for its actions, it usually does. Canadian governmental organizations stay accountable because the public expects good service from them, and throws out the government in charge if they don't. The USPS stays accountable through competition with private carriers like FedEx and UPS. Canada Post, on the other hand, is not held accountable, and it doesn't stack up so well.
It's fundamentally harder to hold a government organization accountable, as the market will not automatically cause them to fail and go away if they don't stack up. However, government agencies in Canada and even the USPS show that it is possible. If people in the United States demand good health care service, they will probably get it even if it is government-run--and indeed, that may explain the real problem with health care, escalating costs.
The USPS offers an interesting case study. I've had my share of fighting with the USPS, most notably for poor delivery (sometimes three weeks late) of the then-daily Christian Science Monitor while I was in college. I remember when, twenty years ago, it could take weeks for a letter to cross the United Sates. However, that isn't the reality anymore. I've been shocked at how quickly first-class mail is delivered, including during the peak period of December, in recent years. I've mailed things from Boston that arrived in Seattle two days later. Furthermore, mail delivery is now quite consistent--it's very rare for a letter to take more than a week in any situation--and my counter experiences with the USPS in the past few years have all been positive. I don't care how they've done it--apparently much of the improved delivery comes from outsourcing long-distance deliveries to competitors like FedEx and UPS--the bottom line is that I actually favor the USPS over its private competitors for any shipment that isn't large and doesn't require tracking, as the USPS is usually cheaper and just as fast. While my experiences are anecdotal, Nate Silver's look at Yelp seems to statistically back up my observations.
I often point to Revenue Canada as an example of a government agency that does things well from a customer service perspective, especially compared with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the United States. Granted, I've never been audited by either organization or had a major dispute with either, but in terms of day-to-day interactions, Revenue Canada wins hands down. Revenue Canada's forms may be long, but they are quite clear with instructions that are comprehensible for an educated person. I have found the IRS instructions fine for simple situations--such as for people that can fill out the 1040EZ form--but on more complicated situations, they can be extremely hard to understand. When I've tried to call the IRS to ask a question, I've waded through a menu system, waited on hold for nearly an hour, and then gotten what proved to be an incorrect answer, since they revised my tax (in my favor) exactly where I had the question. When I've called Revenue Canada, I got through to a person within five minutes and gotten extremely thorough and correct answers. When the experience is over, Revenue Canada sends a letter thanking you for paying your taxes. I've never received such a letter from the IRS. Of course, the IRS is fighting an anti-tax bias in the US that simply isn't as large in Canada, but that seems to me to a reason to pay more attention to the customer experience, not less.
Another interesting comparison exists between VIA Rail Canada and Amtrak, both government-subsidized train operations competing with other travel modes. Generally speaking, VIA is known (even outside Canada) for having excellent customer service. Amtrak is at best known for uneven customer service. VIA may provide limited train service in some regions, but what trains it does run generally have good reputations in the areas where it operates. Amtrak may have a good reputation in certain corridors (California's Capitol Corridor between San Jose and Sacramento, and the Cascades Corridor between Eugene, Oregon and Vancouver, British Columbia come to mind), but I personally can't recommend most of their long-distance trains even to other railroad enthusiasts because the on-time performance has been so poor and it is too common to run into employees with terrible attitudes. What's the difference? It's not subsidy levels. It's mostly that VIA management chose to re-organize its staffing around the customer experience (some don't like how they imposed that on their unions), whereas Amtrak has maintained traditional railroad staff organization and furthermore has generally not made any attempt to enforce appropriate staff behavior. It's a classic difference in culture--one organization chose to address it and improve it, the other hasn't done it.
Of course, then there's the Canada Post. The customer service aspect of that organization is fine--the regular clerk at my local post office smiles when he sees me coming and remembers my shipping preferences--but their core service, mail delivery, is pathetic compared with its US counterpart. Where the USPS regularly delivers first-class mail across the country in just a couple days, it is not uncommon for Canada Post to take weeks. The CBC, when it had country-wide mail-in contest, had to be on a two-week cycle because one week wasn't enough for people to mail in their entries. Some years ago, I actually had a letter take two months to go from Boston to Toronto--and I'm pretty sure the delay wasn't south of the border. Many companies in the US refuse to send anything to Canada using the postal system, using private carriers instead. The list of anecdotal and real evidence could go on and on, and I don't know what the fundamental problem might be, as Swiss Post and even the USPS show that government-run postal services can work quite efficiently.
The lesson here seems to be that it's not whether something is government-run that determines whether it works well, but the culture of the organization. If an organization is motivated to provide good service through accountability for its actions, it usually does. Canadian governmental organizations stay accountable because the public expects good service from them, and throws out the government in charge if they don't. The USPS stays accountable through competition with private carriers like FedEx and UPS. Canada Post, on the other hand, is not held accountable, and it doesn't stack up so well.
It's fundamentally harder to hold a government organization accountable, as the market will not automatically cause them to fail and go away if they don't stack up. However, government agencies in Canada and even the USPS show that it is possible. If people in the United States demand good health care service, they will probably get it even if it is government-run--and indeed, that may explain the real problem with health care, escalating costs.
Monday, August 3, 2009
Culture: Why Caribana
A closely-spaced set of kings and queens participated in the Caribana Parade under the watchful eye of the CN Tower in Toronto, Ontario on 1-August-2009
TORONTO, ONTARIO - Based on my personality profile and personal history, it wouldn't be expected that I would show up at the Caribana Parade each year. I normally avoid loud, throbbing music rather than seeking it out, I've never been to the Caribbean nor do I have any close friends with ties there, and I generally don't attend events where people are scantily scad.
A butterfly queen was an especially appropriate theme on a day when Monarch butterflies were noted along Lake Ontario, 1-August-2009
So, why do I head down to the shores of Lake Ontario to watch the bulk of the parade each summer? The visual beauty of many of the "king" and "queen" costumes, some of which extend 10 m into the air, clearly are an attraction. Every year, there are new themes to these costumes to enjoy, and the challenge of photographing them around the enormous crowds always adds interest to the day.
A variety of different headdresses were on display as performers slowly made their way down Lake Shore Boulevard West in the Caribana Parade on 1-August-2009
Yet, there's more to it than just watching the parade. For one, parade is rather a misnomer. I've called the Caribana Parade a "moving party" instead of a parade. A disciplined parade with the number of entries in the Caribana Parade that started at 10:00 in the morning would reach the end of the parade route by 14:00. I didn't stick around for the end this year, but nominally, the parade doesn't end until 18:00, and last year it didn't actually end until after 20:00. The trucks and dancers move very slowly along the parade route, stopping for any reason and performing over and over again. As a result, the procession tends to bunch up with gaps of twenty minutes or more between bunches. This actually leads to a very nice rhythm for the observer, as there is time to sneak away and have a meal from one of the many wonderful vendors along the route or wait in line for a restroom between bunches. It is nice, relaxed entertainment.
Bodies of all shapes, sizes, and genders were scantily scad during the Caribana Parade on 1-August-2009
I think what most impresses me about Caribana, though, is the fundamental egalitarian nature of the event. One doesn't have to be a model to participate. Males and females of all body types and varying degrees of fitness all dress for the occasion and head down the parade route, either on a truck or following along the pavement. As a DJ on one of the trucks put it this year, everybody is sexy.
A lion-themed king turned toward the spectators along the Caribana Parade route on 1-August-2009
The combination of all these elements makes for a very enjoyable event, and draws me to show up for at least a good portion of the parade each year.
My full set of pictures from Caribana are currently the featured album on my photo site.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Photos: Caribana Parade
A snake-themed king participated in the Caribana Parade in Toronto, Ontario on 1-August-2009
TORONTO, ONTARIO - This week's update to my photo site features the Caribana Parade. While I do not claim complete coverage this year, I did spend a few hours watching the moving party make its way slowly down Lake Shore Boulevard West in Toronto, Ontario on 1-August-2009. Especially creative kings and queens this year included scorpion, Native American, butterfly, and chariot themes.
Margin Notes: Caribana, Poutine Protein, Media
For the first time in recent years, the Jameson Avenue footbridge over Lake Shore Boulevard West was open during the Caribana Parade, resulting in views like this one on 1-August-2009
TORONTO, ONTARIO - While the city workers strike in Toronto finally ended this week, the effects will last for at least a few more days, as the Simcoe Day celebrations in Toronto during tomorrow's holiday remain canceled. Meanwhile, the Caribana Parade yesterday went on as usual. More coverage will be forthcoming, but an interesting side note was that the Jameson Avenue footbridge was open for the first time in recent years during the parade. Police on either side of the bridge lined people up on one side and then allowed alternating traffic over the bridge every five minutes or so. The arrangement seemed to work well, and I give credit to the Toronto Police for running things efficiently.
* * * * * *
Canada Geese stayed in the shade along Lake Ontario in Toronto, Ontario on 1-August-2009
The weather was not particularly hot during the Caribana Parade, but apparently the Canada Geese though it was too hot. A group of them were found congregating in the shade along the shores of Lake Ontario, just meters from the parade, yesterday. I'd never seen this before--I guess this was cooler than swimming in the lake.
* * * * * *
The concessions at the Caribana Parade are always a great collection of spicy foods; one thing that isn't often found at this event is that Quebecois staple, poutine. A couple weeks ago, a caller to the Dr. Joe Schwarcz radio show out of Montreal, which airs here in Toronto Sundays on CFRB, called to ask about a particular diet. The caller had a bit of an accent, and "Dr. Joe" thought he was asking about a "poutine diet." After about a minute of confusion, it finally came out that the caller was asking about a "protein diet"--a different concept to say the least.
* * * * * *
Radio personalities sometimes make little sense themselves, or are asked to do strange things. Madeleine Brand is currently filling in as a host on NPR's All Things Considered, anchoring from NPR's western studios in Culver City, California. Yet, while regular host Robert Siegel introduces himself as being in "Washington" (as in the District of Columbia), Brand introduces herself as being in "California." For a network normally quite concerned with consistency, it is very odd that one host claims to be in a city, and the other claims to be in a state--and the nation's most populous state, at that.
* * * * * *
The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, soon to be renamed the PBS News Hour, started experimenting with its upcoming format by having Jeffrey Brown read the headlines at the beginning of the program, instead of having Jim Lehrer read it after the top story. As I have been outspoken that the headlines should start the show, I was pleased to hear it--but they returned to the recent less desirable format on Friday. I guess I just need to have patience; change will arrive soon enough.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
Radio Pick: BBC Newshour
TORONTO, ONTARIO - This week's radio pick comes from the BBC. It has often been noted that news programming is under-represented in this feature because of its timely nature, but the BBC Newshour, long my favorite long-form news program, managed an exception this week. About twenty minutes into last Sunday's broadcast hosted by perennial favorite Julian Marshall, a feature on trying to downsize Flint, Michigan provided a timeless perspective on shrinking cities (made more poignant by the fact that I was in Flint at the time), and about forty minutes into the fifty-five minute broadcast, an amusing retrospective on Sarah Palin's political career set to Starship's "Sara" was aired.
Listen to the BBC Newshour "What Next for Sarah Palin?"
Listen to the BBC Newshour "What Next for Sarah Palin?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)