What I learned: Do not go gentle into that good night

My exposure to the new open, social and participatory world has been eye-opening, thrilling and disconcerting.  This course, ILD 831, has exposed me to concepts, tools and means of communicating I wasn’t aware of or only heard about.  For example, I was introduced to Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC) and free online initiatives such as Saylor.org.  I was very aware of MIT’s open logistics courses, which I found very useful in the past.  But had never known of these courses as part of MOOC.

As an aside with respect to MOOC, I analyzed the tens of online courses (I have taken) and assessed their positives and negatives.  While the positives mostly concerned ease of access, the negatives included: 

·         No instructor feedback except for grading

·         No online collaboration

·         Adequate to only average online collaboration

·         Multiple systems to learn

While I had read Thomas Friedman’s The World is Flat, I gained much insight into what the book got right and what it might have oversold (see Richard Florida and The World is Spiky).

I reviewed SnagIt for the class, finding:

What Snagit does, Snagit does very well.  My favorite use for Snagit is grabbing, copying and pasting graphics of any source, resolution and shape into PowerPoint presentations.  I prepare data driven spreadsheets, charts, and other graphics from MS Excel, MS Access, MS Word, among other applications.  What I use Snagit for is to grab a part of any digital document and paste the resulting high-resolution image directly onto PowerPoint slides, all in 3-5 clicks of a mouse.

We then analyzed Friedman’s Triple Convergence, the coming together of three transformations at the same time, from the 1990’s through the mid 2000’s:

·         Friedman’s ten “flatteners” that he described as enabling the world community to come together, including flatteners such as uploading, outsourcing, offshoring, insourcing, in-forming, etc.

·         The way people interacted and did business, e.g. Friedman’s discussion of Southwest Airlines’ availing of the check-in process online.

·         The addition of billions of people in China, India, Russia and elsewhere filling the vacuum created by the flatteners and new processes

 

Our next topic concerned the changing nature of work.  What resonated most was Husband’s Wirearchy, which he described as “a dynamic two-way flow of power and authority, based on knowledge, trust, credibility and a focus on results, enabled by interconnected people and technology.”  He said that leaders must be “deeply aware of and mindful about the scope and reach of interconnected markets and flows of information”, and “be prepared to listen deeply, be responsible, be accountable and be transparent.”  The article was a great read because it provided reasonable guidelines not only for leaders, but also for managers, employees, and citizens. 

Next, we looked closely at the opportunities and challenges of networked workers.  What was interesting to me was that it still was primarily cultural bias – not technology constraints – that inhibited greater embracing of teleworking.  John A. Challenger, chief executive officer of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, said that companies that have widely adopted telecommuting are realizing significant savings in many areas but, most notably, real estate costs.  This is an obvious benefit.   But he warns:

Companies are embracing the latest portable tablets and laptops, social networking, video conferencing and many of the other technological advancements that make telecommuting increasingly viable. However, in many ways, companies are stuck in the old way of doing business, where people are expected to work from 9 to 5 and are judged more on the amount of ‘face time’ than on the quantity or quality of output.

I then researched and wrote on Cybercrimes.  What resonated with me is that even though cybercrimes are now taking front and center at news rooms across the country, many businesses still think they are immune to the problem and/or do not realize how much in jeopardy their digital business assets are (subject to threats such as viruses, worms, Trojan horses, logic bombs, etc.).

Finally, we then looked at Kevin Kelly’s keynote at Web Expo 2.0 (on March 29, 2011), Corning's A Day Made of Glass and Google's recent Google’s Glasses announcement.  I wrote a petulant diatribe against this bombardment of new means of passing and receiving data, but was quickly reminded that many whom experience change at first are resistant to it.  Amen.  I am still struck by Kelly’s mention of studies that concerned how small babies contort to interact with an Ipad.   For example, this from the Wall Street Journal:

"He's concentrating," says Sandra Calvert, a professor at Georgetown University. It's physiologically the same thing he does while deeply immersed in, say, Legos. Psychologists call it "flow experience."

There is a subtle difference: The child decides when a building is finished; an app determines when the task is completed correctly. Researchers say it's unclear whether this difference has any impact on a child.

My leadership will change for the better as I get more comfortable with the new always connected, always transmitting, always receiving world.  My innate resistance may have more to do with my lot in life whereby I still chase the brass ring, but not as quickly or engaged as I used to be and with much greater recovery time!

Reading my cohort’s blogs was very instructive.  I was amazed each week reading the different viewpoints and insights on the same topic.  I look forward to engaging with the cohort this week as we wrap the eight weeks.  Going forward, I should attack my inhibitions to this new technology and need for constant engagement and data … Excerpted from  Dylan Thomas:

Do not go gentle into that good night,

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;

Rage, rage against the dying of the light…

Speaking of Leadership: W

Grace.

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/25/w-outclasses-barack-and-bill-without-even-trying/

Boss v. Leader

I like the look and message of this graphic.  While it is sterotypical, it does send a good message about leading from the front when possible.

Speaking of Leadership: Hugh Freeze, Ole Miss Head Football Coach

Watch this video and watch how you motivate a team the right way: Not to play out of hate for the other team (in this case, rival Mississippi State), but to play for each team member's love for one another.

Time as a metaphor

Yale computer scientist and futurist David Galernter has long been speaking of the future of the Internet as more related to time than space.  From his article:

Until now, the web has been space-based, like a magazine stand; we use spatial terms such as “second from the top on the far left” to identify a particular magazine. A diary, on the other hand, is time-based: One dimension of space has been borrowed to represent time, so we use temporal terms like “Thursday’s entry” or “everything from last spring” to identify entries.

Time as a metaphor may seem obvious now. Especially because it’s natural for us to see our lives as stories, organized by time.

Yet it took us more than 20 years in computing to get here. The field has finally moved from conserving resources ingeniously to squandering them creatively. In this new environment, we can focus on the best way — instead of the cheapest, most conservative way — for the internet to work.
 

 

Emerging trends: May I recommend the "DUCK"!

Watching Kevin Kelly’s keynote at Web Expo 2.0 (on March 29, 2011), Corning's A Day Made of Glass and Google's recent Google’s Glasses announcement, several thoughts came to me about the future.  These thoughts had more to do with my applying a 1970-2010 understanding of technology and human nature.  In no particular curmudgeon order: 

·         All of the “future” things that Kelly spoke about – screening, interacting, sharing, flowing, accessing, generating, and “paying for attention” – would positively drive me to distraction.  What a cluttered world of unwanted “data” foisted on the “consumer” of this data.

·         The Corning presentation had a dazzling show of potential uses for glass - All-weather surface glass, Work surface display, Electronics-ready glass, Large-pane display glass, Flexible display glass & 3D TV glass.  But my immediate thought was: OMG, when somebody invents a medium less “made of sand” , Corning will enter buggy-whip land overnight.

·         I cannot say a single kind thing about the Google Glasses.  My kids are late 20’s.  They most enjoy things like hiking and a sip of wine.  Running through life with data hitting you everywhere you look?  I cannot imagine a product I would want less.

·         Millions of young people, I’m certain, find the above nuisances as cool and must-have, which means my take on these presentations is of very little value to those for whom these presentations are intended.  Or, said another way, these presentations were not made for my type.  They were made for your futurists with skin still left in the game (to realize these trends).

·         I was moved by the concept of streams of data, and tagging streams to grab what of the stream you wanted.  I have been saying for several years that the next big thing is going to be the development of a big “filter” used to opt out of much of what is being blasted at you (see Corning and Google above).

·         I think the ideas have merit, but not in the ways people will actually use these items.  Here’s why:  people don’t have a need for constant data.  The ads present a kid walking around interacting at every turn.  I believe this new technology will be valuable when people want it.  See Kelly’s Accessing and Generating concepts mentioned above.

·         Either did not get or understand Kelly’s last item, “paying for attention”.  I did not see how that item was on the level of the other six action verbs.

·         The presentations were made like fashion ads are made – for a New York based elite audience.

·         I was struck by Kelly’s mention of the study of baby use of the iPad.   This type study made perfect sense to me as it relates to how humans interact.  In my youth, we were given a cookie and told we could get five more if we waited…how times have changed.  

 

The implications for leadership are many as they relate to the onset of new technology.  Leaders should weight protecting what they have v. what they will lose in opportunity costs.  In global logistics, there is a concept called economic destruction, which naturally occurs when new trade partners are inserted into a fixed environment.  The weak must perish, the strong survive, and your business better be on the right side of that existential equation.

Similar in concept to economic destruction is technology convergence.  According to the Hay Group, “…four tech areas are converging fast, promising the sharpest technology shifts in history. Nano, bio, information and cognitive (NBIC) technologies are already transforming areas like medicine, energy and production.”    Meaning, ignore disruptive technologies at your peril.

Leaders must stay current.  Peter Barron Stark said that learning is an ongoing professional commitment.  From a 2009 blog:

Eartha Kit once said, “I am learning all the time. The tombstone will be my diploma.” This quote says it all. Great leaders are great learners. The world and the economy are changing in ways that make most people say, “I have never seen times as challenging as these.” As we have said before, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” The time is now for saying, “Whether it is perfect, not broke, completely broken, partially broken or completely broken, we need to change the way we do things to be even more innovative, efficient, and in tune with the needs of our customers.”

Stark went on to list six types of “futurist” leader he found during his consulting career (excerpted below):

Self-Directed Learners - Leaders intent on staying current with the latest technologies and organizational trends know that now, more than ever, they must be responsible for their own learning.

Receptive Learners - Great leaders have a fascination with people and display an openness to learning from anyone they encounter, whether the person be someone who shines shoes or heads up a company.

Great Listeners - Being open to learning from anyone requires another skill, the skill of listening.

Excited Learners - Leaders who are committed to continuous learning are great role models for those around them.

Good Teachers - Leaders committed to lifelong learning are good teachers.

Popular Learners - Finally, we have noted that when leaders display excitement about learning and a commitment to being a continuous learner, they may experience greater job security.

Speaking of Leadership: U.S. and asymmetric warfare

From a Princeton history of warfare wiki:

"Asymmetric warfare" can describe a conflict in which the resources of two belligerents differ in essence and in the struggle, interact and attempt to exploit each other's characteristic weaknesses. Such struggles often involve strategies and tactics of unconventional warfare, the "weaker" combatants attempting to use strategy to offset deficiencies in quantity or quality.^[1] Such strategies may not necessarily be militarized.

Was this the U.S.'s first use of the tactic?  From Bill Bennetts's site:  "The audacious raid did little physical damage, but it stunned the Japanese. News of Jimmy Doolittle’s “thirty seconds over Tokyo” electrified Americans and helped turn the tide of the war in the Pacific."

Speaking of Leadership: Or lack thereof, Exhibit 1 - The State of California

I'm not overly political one way or the other, but I am a fiscal hawk for two reasons.  First I have an econ degree and understand macroeconomics enough to see a train wreck when it is coming (the national debt, over-spending, etc.).  And, second, my two cherubs are being set up to pay the bills we are racking up now.

Here's a blog post on California's current mess:

Highest taxes (gasoline, sales and top bracket of income taxes)

Lowest bond rating

Highest poverty rate (at 23.5%, the home of 1/3 of those in poverty in U.S.)

Highest unemployment rate (tied with Mississippi and Nevada at 9.6%)

Highest energy costs

Worst state to do business (as judged by Chief Executive magazine 8 years running)

Most cities going bankrupt

Prison system so poorly run it has been taken over by a federal judge

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/04/how-many-ways-can-california-be-stupid.php

Cybercrimes, part 2

Related to my last post, I began to think of the confluence of ciber crime and terrorism.  Turns out, there are a few good sources, concerning which being in the IT business I'm going to have to read, linked below:

Studies have shown that to find the source of terrorism, follow the money (or easy money).

Gragido, W., Molina, D., Pirc, J., & Selby, N. (2012). Blackhatonomics: An Inside Look at the Economics of Cybercrime. Syngress.

 

 

The Naval War College Review, Spring 2013, reviewed Steven Bucci's The Confluence of Cyber Crime and Terrorism.  Looks like a must read.

SNIPPET: "Today the world faces a wide array of cyber threats. The majority of these threats are aimed at the Western democracies and the Western-leaning countries of other regions.

The reason for this is simple: They are ripe targets. These countries are either highly dependent, almost completely in some cases, on cyber means for nearly every significant societal interaction or are racing toward that goal. They seek the speed, accuracy, efficiency, and ease that a "wired" system of systems brings and all the benefits that accrue to such a situation.

The danger we face is that there are many individuals, groups, and states that desire to exploit those same systems for their own purposes. There is a new threat on the horizon that must be recognized and addressed."

SNIPPET: "Terrorism enabled by cyber criminals is our most likely major cyber threat. It must be met with all our assets."

http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Confluence_of_Cyber_Crime_and_Terror.html?id=tv9YQwAACAAJ

 

 

Cybercrimes

History of Computer Crimes

When writing about computer crime, one must ask, “Where to start”?  Since the beginning of digital 0s and1s, computer crime has been prevalent.  Kaybay (2012), in his seminal Computer Security Handbook, details the different way criminals have wreaked havoc.  In the early 1960’s and 1970’s, there were multiple instances of direct damage against computer centers caused by saboteurs.  There were credit card frauds, identity thefts, logic bombs, phone phreaking, data diddling, and extortion.  Then, the crooks started to get sophisticated.  In the 1970’s-1990’s, crimes caused by Trojan horses, worms, viruses, spam, and denial of services events caused $ Billions in damages. 

Types of Computer Crime

Computer crimes primarily involve the misuse of computer logic.  Crimes against hardware and physical security are relatively non-existent.  The real criminal focus were on logical security breaches and programmed threats.  Spafford, Heaphy and Ferbrache (1986) divided logical security breaches into the following major categories (excerpted below):   

Privacy and confidentiality

Integrity , which assures that data and programs are not modified without proper authority

Unimpaired service

Consistency, which ensures that the data and behavior we see today will be the same tomorrow

Controlling access to resources

Programmed threats, also called malicious software, also pose a significant threat to computer security, and also cause $Billions in damages. Spafford (1992) lists the main types of programmed threats (excerpted below):

Viruses, which are inserted into other computer programs
Worms, which can move from machine to machine across networks, and may have parts of themselves running on different machines
Trojan horses, which appear to be one sort of program, but actually are doing damage behind the scenes
Logic bombs, which check for particular conditions and then execute when those conditions arise, and
Bacteria or Rabbits, which multiply rapidly and fill up the computer's memory

In addition to logical security breaches and programmed threats, there are “hackers”, who sneak into a computer system without permission to compromise internal data. 

McAfee (2010), the security software giant, developed a list of the latest, most insidious computer crimes working their way around cyberspace. A survey of the top 5 crimes involving the most people over the last decade include:

Scare-ware, which is the the sale of fake antivirus softare
Phishing scams, which involves the tricking of users into giving up personal information (in 2009 alone, over ½ of a million sites were detected); via targeted emails, fake friend requests, spam, and social networking.
Phony websites, which involves fake sites that look real (phony banking sites, auction sites, and e-commerce
Online dating scams, involving viruses such as the “I Love You” virus, whereby the crook creates a personal relationship in order to ask for cash, merchandise or other favors
Nigerian scams, which involves advance fees

Are these scams and malware only a tip of the iceberg?

Who is winning?

FBI security guru Shawn Henry (now with a private security firm) said in the Wall Street Journal (see Barrett, 2012) that companies need to make drastic changes in the way computer systems are used to minimize damage to national security and the economy.  He says that too many companies fail to recognize the extent of the risk – financially & legally – and cost of operating vulnerable networks.  “"I don't see how we ever come out of this without changes in technology or changes in behavior, because with the status quo, it's an unsustainable model. Unsustainable in that you never get ahead, never become secure, never have a reasonable expectation of privacy or security,'' Henry said. "In many cases, the skills of the adversaries are so substantial that they just leap right over the fence, and you don't ever hear an alarm go off.  Companies need to be hunting inside the perimeter of their network.”  What should leadership do to combat cybercrimes?  Henry stated the obvious: "If leadership doesn't say, 'This is important, let's sit down and come up with a plan right now in our organization; let's have a strategy,' then it's never going to happen…”

 

References

Barrett, D. (2012, March 28). U.S. Outgunned in Hacker War. The Wall Street Journal.

Kabay, M. (2012). History of Computer Crime. In Computer security handbook, 5th edition, 2, 27. Wiley.

McAfee. (2010). A good decade for cybercrime: McAfee's look back at ten years of cypercrime. Santa Clara, CA: McAfee, Inc.

Spafford, E. (1992). Are computer hacker break-ins ethical? Journal of Systems and Software, 17, 41-47.

Spafford, E., Heaphy, K., & Ferbrache, D. (. (1989). Computer viruses: Dealing with electronic vandalism and programmed threats. Arlington, VA: ADAPSO (now ITAA).

Speaking of leadership: Margaret Thatcher, transformative conservative

The Iron Lady died today at the age of 87.  She was a transformative leader who woke England up when it needed it, along with Ronal Reagan (the U.S.) and Pope John Paul II (the world's Catholics).

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/04/margaret-thatcher-transformative-conservative.php

UPDATE:  She had the gravitas to get away with the below picture:

Pros and cons of 24/7 connectivity & teleworking

Being a young baby boomer (mid 50’s), I have been ushered into the world of 24/7 connectivity & teleworking in some ways, screaming and kicking.  As a professional project manager (PMP) I was trained to go to work and count belly-buttons.  Now, my team is in several states and I count their proverbial belly-buttons by a daily 0900 “tele-huddle”.

I have experience being “on” months at a time during military mobilizations to war zones, and can attest first hand that all people need quality “off” time.  After a period of extended “on” time, whether mobilized or tethered to a constantly-ringing Blackberry, one will begin to lose motivation, focus and drive without quality “down” time. 

 

For purposes of this blog, I am coupling 24/7 connectivity to teleworking for the simple reason that one cannot live at work all the time.  So, being connected 24/7 must include a teleworking reality, whether formally recognized or expected by one’s company or not.

The survey of pros of 24/7 connectivity/teleworking include:

·         Having the technology and employment option to work occasionally at home allows workers to simultaneously meet business and family needs, a major perk
·         Reduces the need for “offshoring” of jobs and encourages works to live, work and shop locally
·         Per survey by Lister and Harnish, teleworking:

o   Positively impacts transportation demand management, energy conservation, and greenhouse gas emissions, and un- and under-employment

o   Increases productivity

o   Saves money (savings would total over $900 billion a year, enough to reduce our Persian Gulf oil imports by 46%), and interestingly

o   Allows for ‘reasonable accommodation’ per the Americans with Disabilities Act (over 300K people regularly work from home)

·         According to Networkworld.com, “The distinction between being able to work from anywhere vs. occasionally telecommuting is important to job candidates who face long commutes and have to balance personal and family commitments.”
·         Alice Hill, Managing Director of DICE, says in a blog post: "Telecommuting allows hiring managers to draw talent from outside their immediate labor pool, catching that tech professional whose skills and attitude fit, but proximity to the office is not ideal. We believe done well, the benefits of telecommuting outweigh the risks. With rising gas prices and a competitive job market, companies who want to be a part of the future, would be wise to leave inflexible work arrangements in the past."
·         Pedersen and Madden, of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, said recently in a report that “Companies that have embraced telecommuting have found that their remote workers are just as, if not more productive than traditional office workers. Analyses of Best Buy, British Telecom, Dow Chemical and many other employers have found that teleworkers are 35 percent to 45 percent more productive. American Express found that its teleworkers produced 43 percent more than their office-based counterparts."

Bottom line, according to John A. Challenger, chief executive officer of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, “…various studies have found that telecommuting employees are happier, more loyal, and have fewer unscheduled absences. All of these outcomes positively impact the bottom line. However, they represent just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to corporate finances. Companies that have widely adopted telecommuting are realizing significant savings in many areas but, most notably, real estate costs.” 

But Challenger warns that telecommuting has real acceptance barriers:  “Companies are embracing the latest portable tablets and laptops, social networking, video conferencing and many of the other technological advancements that make telecommuting increasingly viable. However, in many ways, companies are stuck in the old way of doing business, where people are expected to work from 9 to 5 and are judged more on the amount of ‘face time’ than on the quantity or quality of output.” 

Which leads us to the myriad cons of 24/7 connectivity & teleworking:

·         Per Lister and Harnish, “The biggest barrier to telecommuting, by a wide margin, is management fear and mistrust.”
·         According to Networkworld.com, acceptance has “…little to do with remote capabilities and more to do with culture.”  A few additional downsides include:

o   A majority of teleworkers aren't putting in a full day's work

o   Local managers make a difference to subordinate happiness and to an extent, productivity

o   Employees believe it is a ploy to get more work out of them

o   Managers proved unable to hold poor performers accountable

o   Work quality decreases

o   Employees feel disconnected without getting enough manager feedback

o   Virtual workers tend to be less honest (the amount of lying was shown to be higher when compared to face-to-face conversations

·         A Santa Clara University study discussed several balancing-act life-issues such as:  

o   Does the work day ever come to a close?

o   Can one be “offline or out of touch” and still be a responsible employee?

o   Are vacations possible? Can one ever afford to be sick?

o   How does one follow career aspirations and obtain financial stability, while taking family responsibilities seriously?

o   What is the responsibility of an employer to ensure that work and personal time boundaries are established so health and well-being are maintained?

o   What are the organizational cultural values that enable a business to foster sustainable work-life balance?

o   How can ICT [information and communication technology] be applied in business situations in a manner that promotes quality of life?

Finally, in Undress For Success—The Naked Truth About Working From Home (John Wiley & Sons, March 2009), Telework Research Network (TRN) conducted a year-long study and captured the advantages of teleworking for communities, for companies and for employees.  Highlights from the study include:

Advantages of Telecommuting for the Community:

• Reduces our foreign oil dependence
• Slows global warming
• Bolsters pandemic and disaster preparedness
• Redistributes wealth
• Higher productivity among teleworkers will increase GDP
• Cost savings from telework will encourage home-shoring and bring back many of the jobs that have been lost to foreign labor

Advantages of Telecommuting for Companies

• Improves employee satisfaction
• Reduce attrition
• Reduces unscheduled absences
• Increases productivity
• Saves employers money
• Equalizes personalities and reduces potential for discrimination
• Cuts down on wasted meetings
• Increases employee empowerment
• Increases collaboration
• Provides new employment opportunities for the un and under-employed
• Expands the talent pool
• Slows the brain drain due to retiring Boomers
• Reduces staffing redundancies and offers quick scale-up and scale-down options
• Environmental Friendly Policies are Good For Companies
• Reduces traffic jams
• Prevents traffic accidents
• Take the pressure off our crumbling transportation infrastructure
• Insures continuity of operations in the event of a disaster
• Improves performance measurement systems
• Offers access to grants and financial incentives

Advantages of Telecommuting for Employees

• Saves employees money
• Increases leisure time
• Reduces stress, illness, and injury
• Teleworkers are exposed to fewer occupational and environmental hazards at home
• Teleworkers suffer fewer airborne illnesses because of lack of contact with sick co-workers
• Teleworkers report being able to make more time for exercise
• Anyone who has ever dieted knows it’s harder to stay the course when you dine out
• Teleworkers often eat healthier meals and are less inclined to consume fast food lunches

The Holdbacks to Teleworking

• Management mistrust
• It’s not for everyone, i.e social needs must be addressed
• Telecommuters must be self-directed
• Career fears from ‘out of sight out of mind’ mentality
• Co-worker jealousy
• Security issues
• IT infrastructure changes may be necessary

Speaking of Leadership: We need more green arrow!

Spoken as the frustrated Econ major I am, we need more green arrow...current labor force and labor participation rate indices continue to trend the wrong way (red arrows). There are now 90 Million people who can work that are not working, or trying to work.   See charts below.

Source: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-04-05/people-not-labor-force-soar-663000-90-million-labor-force-participation-rate-1979-le

Friedman: Education is flattening...

The New York Times' Tom Friedman again has an interesting article on flattening, this time on the flattening of education.  US education, not surprisingly to me, is lagging:

American students in the second quarter of socioeconomic advantage — mostly higher middle class — were significantly outperformed by 24 countries in math and by 15 countries in science, the study found. In the third quarter of socioeconomic advantage — mostly lower middle class — U.S. students were significantly outperformed by peers in 31 countries or regions in math and 25 in science.

But, Friedman is somewhat hopeful, i.e we have shown we can do it (keep up), we just don't do it enough:

The challenge is that changes in the world economy keep raising the bar for what our kids need to do to succeed. Our modest improvements are not keeping pace with this rising bar. Those who say we have failed are wrong. Those who say we are doing fine are wrong.” The truth is, America has world-beating K-12 schools. We just don’t have nearly enough.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/03/opinion/friedman-my-little-global-school.html?_r=0

ABC - Always be closing if you want the knife set!

Sometimes, sometimes, leadership requires a Type A butt-kickin'...One of the most reknown speeches in movies, not that I endorse the tactic.  Warning: Raw & offensive language.

Speaking of Leadership: How America Lost Its Four Great Generals

Is there a leadership vacuum created by the recent departures of four 4-star generals?  No question, in my mind.  This article provides a good recap of their accomplishments and the vacuum created by their leave.

... it is hard to imagine the Civil War having been won without Grant, Sherman, and Sheridan—or World War II without Marshall, Eisenhower, Patton, Bradley, Arnold, LeMay, Nimitz, Halsey, and all the other senior generals and admirals...it is hard to imagine the War on Terror having been waged without four-star commanders such as David Petraeus, Stanley McChrystal, John Allen, and James Mattis. They are among the most illustrious generals produced by the last decade of fighting. They are the stars of their generation.

Now, they are gone.