A Three-Party System

Yeah, these signs say a lot about our two-party system of government. 

“Republican: Because everyone can’t be on welfare.”


“Democrat: Because everyone can’t be greedy.”


Sort of the age old story of competing interests. 


Certainly also a good dose of Fear vs. Greed. 


And where the rich get richer and the poor get welfare.


It’s good to have the 2 extremes of the political thinking spectrum, because it shows us perhaps where the middle is. 


Neither extreme is good, but rather it’s a balancing act. 


We can’t have more than 50% of the wealth owned by the top 1% of the people. 


And we can’t have everyone on entitlements where no one is working, innovating, and producing. 


Yes of course, some people will have more than others and some people will need help. 


There needs to be motivation to “get ahead” and there must be a social safety net for when bad things happen. 


This is life.


But the to extent that we can have the most people in respectable jobs earning a reasonable (true living) wage and that there is equitable prosperity to go around for everyone–this is ideal.


Really 2-parties is not enough, because extremes tend to get more extreme–this is the momentum of polarization and politicization until the extremes tear us apart. 


Instead we need a strong centrist party (or parties)–that can not only play to, but also execute the middle of the road approach. 


It’s not all or nothing, but rather compromise to a logical and reasonable solution on every issue. 


No, we don’t want to get rid of ICE, and we don’t want open borders. 


No we don’t want entitlements that bankrupt the nation, and we don’t want people down on their luck going needy. 


No, we don’t want women who have been raped or incested or otherwise can’t raise their children being forced to have them, and we don’t want babies being murdered in the late stages of pregnancy. 


No we don’t want to blow up the planet, and we don’t want our enemies besting us. 


We don’t want pollution in our air, water, and streets, and we don’t want to strangle the economy with endless and mindless regulation. 


And on and on. 


It’s high time to move to the center where common sense reigns.


It overdue to have a legitimate 3+ party system that talks real solutions to the people. 😉


(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Advertisements

Manage The Crisis and Don’t Exploit It

Crisis.jpeg

So I heard an interesting thought on crisis management:

“Never let a good crisis go to waste!”


Isn’t that frequently how politicians and lobbyists use the crisis, rather than deal with it. 


In certain cases, some have even been known to actually create the crisis for their ends!


Whether it’s some politicians calling for strict gun control when there is a mass shooting (perhaps infringing on other reasonable 2nd amendment rights) or it’s right to life advocates demanding an end to funding for planned parenthood when some bad people are caught selling fetal body parts and so on and so on.


Maybe these things are the right thing to do–in which case, a very bad event can end up being an impetus for much needed change and thus, can facilitate in transforming society and from that perspective, be a good thing!


But is the change really and necessarily the right thing to do…or is the crisis de jure just an excuse to get what some people wanted all  along.


– Use (exploit) the crisis.


– Maximize the momentum from the crisis.


– Leverage the emotions from the crisis.


– Promptly turn the tables on the issue.


– Leave all compromise and negotiation aside, and seize the moment.


The lesson here is not to just react, because a sudden and impulsive decision may end up being an overreaction and cause negative unintended consequences down the road.


The pendulum tends to shift and swing widely in both directions–neither extreme is good.


Instead well thought policy, use of common sense, maintaining reasonableness, looking at all sides, and a general middle of the road approach usually yields the best results for the most people.


Crisis management should be just that–managing the crisis; the policy should be fully reasoned both before and after. 😉


(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Getting To Yes

Customer Service.jpeg

I thought this was a good and important customer service principle:

“Don’t make me go through NO
To get to YES.”


When it comes to customer service, the default for reasonable requests from good customers should always be YES!


We can either make the experience miserable for the customer and leave them fuming, never coming back, and bad-mouthing us or we can make it fair, easy, accommodating, and a WOW experience!


Why not build your customer base and reputation for excellence rather than erode it? 


(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Agile Processes As An Enabler

Bridge Up

So something that I’ve learned is that processes can be an enabler or a hinderance to progress depending on how it’s used.


On one hand, without a standardized and clear process where people know what they are supposed to do and when, we are likely to end up with a lot of chaos and not much getting done for the customer or organization.  


This is especially the case where tasks are complex and numerous people are involved requiring there to be solid coordination of team members, sync of activities, and clear communications.  


On the other hand, rigid processes that are so prescriptive that no one will get out of step for any rhyme or reason can be counter-productive, since this can hinder productivity, time to resolution, and customer service. 


For example, we all understand the importance of a help desk ticketing system in IT to document issues and deploy resources for resolution and measure performance. However, when customers, especially VIPs are in a bind and need help ASAP, it may not make sense to tell them to go open up a ticket first and foremost, instead of helping them to quickly get back online, and even opening the ticket for them and in parallel or as we get to it afterwards. 


Process should be an enabler and not obstacle to progress. Process should be followed under normal circumstances, but rigidly adhering to processes without adapting to conditions on the ground risks being out of step with the needs of the organization and a customer service model. 


(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)