Perspectives · Competence

The Stakeholder in the Stakeholder; Overcoming Adversity

According to ISO 21500, Guidance on Project Management, a stakeholder is a person, group or organization that has interests in, or can affect, be affected by, or perceive itself to be affected by, any aspect of the project. It is commonly taught that stakeholders are identified, analyzed and managed.  Manage however is a curious word.  Using the word manage implies a certain degree of hierarchical control. Engage is a better term. In this post, I want to focus on something that is critical to project success, engaging with upset stakeholders. In my years of managing projects, volunteering for organizations, starting businesses, being a husband and a father, I have learned that there are things to avoid at all costs unless building a wall between you and success is your goal . I am going to provide some tips but before I do, I want to emphasize that inside every stakeholder are several other stakeholders fighting for position. Huh? When you engage a stakeholder, you aren’t just getting the personality that has interest in your project.  You are getting their personal baggage also. Your project is not on their mind 24/7.  They are also someone’s son or daughter, or maybe someone’s parent or spouse. They might be a hard core sports fan, artist or hold any number of interests all which can influence their emotions and state of mind. A great project manager understands that turning off personal noise isn’t always possible all the time and if you have a stakeholder who has a problem or is irritable, there may be more to the story.  Taking this into account, can save a lot of headache. At the same time, you as a stakeholder have the same challenges and need to be cognizant of how you communicate. Here are some tips for engaging irritable stakeholders (share this with the team in case you are the irritable one)

Involve a second party

If the person you have an issue with makes you feel threatened, don’t go in alone.  Take a colleague or work with the project sponsor to determine the best approach. Also, if you are an imposing figure, follow the same advice.

Don’t fight fire with fire

If someone comes at you irrationally, don’t throw it back in their face.   Your natural reaction is to fight back as your adrenaline levels have increased.  Take some time to calm yourself down and understand your tendencies.  Do you hold grudges?  Are you upset easily?  What triggers you?  Knowing what sets you off can be a great way to prepare for an interaction with an upset stakeholder.  If you are the one who is upset, think about the best approach and don't react in a manner that will cause more harm as a result.

Take emotion out of it

Sometimes, the reason the stakeholder is irritable has nothing to do with you.  Coming to this realization can greatly influence the outcome.  Is the person dealing with issues in their personal life?  Is another issue at work forcing the anger out on you? Research has shown that when individuals learn that they are not the reason for a stakeholder to get angry, the situation is far less upsetting to them. If it is you who is upset, what is the real reason?

Figure out what is really going on

Get to the root of the issue.  Using the Six Sigma 5 Why’s is a great approach.  The keys to getting a better understanding is to take emotion out of the equation and employ active listening techniques and keeping an open mind.  Don't automatically assume the worst.   Is it a misunderstanding?

Get to a solution

If you don’t want this taking over your emotions for an extended period of time, figure out a way to solve the issue, but don’t get defensive!  Figure out a solution that leads to a valuable outcome and if need be, apologize.  “Hey sorry I blasted you with an angry text message. I had a bad day.” Or “I am sorry for attacking you at the team meeting, I have a lot on my mind and directed it towards you.” Everyone deals with adversity differently, understanding your tendencies and those of your stakeholders will help to position you towards greater success and satisfaction.

Perspectives · Benefits Management

Keep on scammin’ on: The evil brilliance, success and recurrence of The Playbook

Leading student in business propaganda, Australian social scientist Alex Carey persuasively argues that the 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance:

• the growth of democracy;
• the growth of corporate power;
• the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy.

Noam Chomsky, World Orders: Old and New

It is no secret that we continue to be played and deceived by industries, corporations, associations, and political parties in ways that benefit only their interests. At the same time, this deception is causing proven and quantifiable harm to their customers, the rest of society and the planet.  This practice became a formalized and documented discipline in the mid-twentieth century with the creation and development of The Playbook.  This post will highlight the evil brilliance, success and recurrence of The Playbook as well as the evolution of this insidious practice, and bring awareness to effective techniques and strategies to deal with its pervasive deception and manipulation. The impetus for this post came from a great book and documentary entitled Merchants of Doubt.    

The Creation of The Playbook

In December 1952, Reader’s Digest printed a scathing article entitled “Cancer by the Carton” which had a profound impact on the tobacco industry.  Following its publication, cigarette sales plummeted. This marked the industry’s first decline of the century, the only exception being The Great Depression.  A year later, the CEOs of the country’s major tobacco companies organized a secret meeting in New York City. The objective of the gathering was to counter the damage created by the studies and subsequent media storm linking smoking to lung cancer. Their solution was to recruit public relations counsel, Hill and Knowlton.  What the team realized was that they could not deny evidence, but they could create and leverage doubt in order to delay legislative, regulatory, and legal actions that were threatening to erode profits. Soon after was the introduction of The Playbook, otherwise known as “Bad Science: A Resource Book.”  The Playbook was a detailed how-to “handbook for fact fighters, providing example after example of successful strategies for undermining science, and a list of experts with scientific credentials available to comment on any issue about which a think tank or corporation needed a negative sound bite” (Oreskes & Conway, p. 6, 2010). In this battle, the two competing camps could be labelled science and legal.  Scientists employ the scientific method, whose very nature demands that they keep an open mind and re-evaluate their conclusions and hypotheses when new data is presented.  The legal perspective represents the industry and its allies, who have a preferred position which they present to defend the position of their client. They come from a “take no prisoners” vantage point and use legal loopholes and manipulation to present their client in the most favourable light possible. It is interesting to note that in most industry campaigns, employing The Playbook was never really about science or facts.  It was in actuality a political debate about the role of government, and the threat that governmental control of the economy posed to free enterprise and a liberal democracy. These strategies and tactics kept the cigarette industry protected from reality for over 50 years.

The Evolution of The Playbook Strategies for Deception

The strategies from The Playbook, though bold, were relatively simple and progressed gradually:

• Fight science or the facts to manufacture doubt.
  • Argue that the facts are not known.
  • Argue that more research is required.
  • Question the science that is damaging your brand, or position it as “junk” science.
  • Position that there is no scientific consensus; that there is doubt or uncertainty in the scientific community.
  • Position that the scientists who make the unpopular statements against the industry are making political and not scientific statements.
  • Work towards gaining users’ trust through the use of authority figures – find (and financially reward) scientists and resources that are perceived to be credible and independent who deliver research and perspectives that instil doubt.
  • Attack the credible scientists.
• Play up the misleading “health benefits” of using a product.
• Shift the blame to someone or some other industry.
• Identify potential threats so you can neutralize them.
• Identify shills to become independent third party allies.
• Create controversy.
• Focus on the negative impacts of the science communities and governments perceived attack on personal freedom.
• Emphasize personal responsibility in making decisions, not regulatory overhead.
• Make self-regulatory pledges.
• Lobby with massive resources to stifle government action.
• Foster a “take no prisoners” approach to debate.

 

https://youtu.be/cJIW5yVk__w

The Playbook Advocates

Strategies from The Playbook tend to be employed by industries that are under threat of losing profits. This is initiated when scientific evidence proves that their product causes significant harm to the public, society or planet in some shape or form.  The following industries have employed strategies outlined in The Playbook:

Industry	Harm they caused, and hid from, society
DDT Pesticides	Poisonous (affects bees and pollination)
Asbestos	Poisonous insulation
Sugar	Health issues, weight gain, diabetes
High Fructose Corn Syrup	Health issues, weight gain, diabetes
Fossil Fuels (Coal & Oil)	Environmental (greenhouse effect, global warming, ozone layer, acid rain)
Flame Retardants	Poisonous, health issues, ineffective fire prevention
Tanning Beds	Cancer
Fast Food	Health issues, weight gain, diabetes
Soda	Health issues, weight gain, diabetes
Guns	Misuse of guns exacerbated by a lack of gun control laws
Bisphenol A (BPA)	Health issues, poisonous

 

Strategies to Combat The Playbook that Provide a Glimmer of Hope

The silver lining is that once the truth has been revealed, it can never be concealed again. We witnessed this with tobacco, flame-retardant furniture, asbestos, DDT pesticides and BPA to name a few.  Fortunately, reality always seems to sneak through and delay tactics can be stopped dead in their tracks by legislation, law suits or a shift in public awareness as people come to realize and accept the facts.  In the end, nations do behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives. What can we do?  Stay informed, listen to multiple perspectives and listen to the scientists.  Be aware that your “tribe” may be making assumptions that are not sound, for the exclusive benefit of others and at a cost to you. The Merchants of Doubt – College Study Guide is a useful reference to understand how to deal with these debates.

Appendix A: Precis of Big Tobacco Playbook Strategies

The trigger: The 1952 Reader’s Digest article was the primary vehicle for the tobacco industry’s creation and usage of The Playbook. On January 4, 1954, the tobacco industry released its first position called The Frank Statement.  This was a milestone advertisement coordinated by the major American tobacco companies. It was featured in over 400 newspapers targeted at an estimated 43 million people throughout the United States. It disputed reports that smoking cigarettes could cause lung cancer and other dangerous health effects, and promised to faithfully conduct research and work with the health industry to mitigate any issues.  This was the first step in the charade to run a concerted, half-century-long campaign designed to mislead Americans (and the world) about the catastrophic effects of smoking and to avoid public policy that might damage profit. What followed were a series of initiatives where tobacco companies worked together to convince the public that there was “no sound scientific basis for the charges” and that the recent reports were simply “sensational accusations” made by publicity-seeking scientists hoping to attract more funds for their research. Industry documents later unearthed the repeated duplicity of its terrified executives, under the gun of enormous financial pressures. The industry developed strategies to influence public opinion, legislation, litigation, and the conduct of science because they wanted desperately to prevent, or at least delay, shifts in public opinion that would unleash a barrage of legislative, regulatory, and legal actions that could destroy sales and profits. The key was to ensure that the tobacco industry had access to subject matter experts who appeared independent and provided reasonable doubt and passion to defend the industry’s position.  They also had to establish independent scientific research institutes to analyze the real data and science behind the perceived liberal scare tactics. They said there was no definitive evidence proving that smoking causes lung cancer. The studies being released were junk science, orchestrated by advocates “out to get” the tobacco industry. Next, they denied that second-hand smoke was killing people. They even denied that nicotine was addictive. The industry was unremittingly dishonest and manipulative.  The table below provides some concrete examples extracted from documents sent to Stanton Glantz. In 1994, Glantz received an anonymous package containing thousands of pages of internal documents from Brown & Williamson, exposing the dishonesty behind the tobacco industry.

What the industry knew and when	What industry said and when
1958 - Heavy smoking contributes to lung cancer (A1-B1-F5)	1984 - It is not known whether cigarettes cause cancer
1963 - disturbed at study's implications re cardiovascular disorders (B1-B1-F5)	1984 - No causal relationship between cigarette smoking and heart disease
1963 - We are in the business of selling nicotine, an addictive drug (C1-B1-F5)	1994 – All the major tobacco companies told Congress that nicotine was not addictive

 

REFERENCES

Bad Science: A Resource Book, 26 March 1993, BN: 2074143969, Legacy Tobacco Documents Library.  https://industrydocuments.library.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/#id=qmcj0065 Barnes, R., & Mufson, S. (2015). Supreme Court freezes Obama plan to limit carbon emissions. Washington Post. Retrieved February 10, 2016, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-freezes-obama-plan-to-limit-carbon-emissions/2016/02/09/ac9dfad8-cf85-11e5-abc9-ea152f0b9561_story.html Bell, L. (2012). That Scientific Global Warming Consensus...Not! Retrieved February 14, 2016, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/07/17/that-scientific-global-warming-consensus-not/#32e39d0c1690 Brenan, Megan & Saad, Lydia (March 28, 2018). Global Warming Concern Steady Despite Some Partisan Shifts. Gallup. https://news.gallup.com/poll/231530/global-warming-concern-steady-despite-partisan-shifts.aspx Brownell, K. D., & Warner, K. E. (2009). The perils of ignoring history: Big Tobacco played dirty and millions died. How similar is Big Food? The Milbank Quarterly, 87(1), 259–94. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00555.x. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2879177/ Carrington, D. (2014). “Climategate” had only fleeting effect on global warming scepticism. Retrieved February 15, 2016, from http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/may/20/climategate-longterm-level-climate-change-scepticism Case, D. (2009). The Real Story Behind Bisphenol A. Retrieved February 15, 2016, from http://www.fastcompany.com/1139298/real-story-behind-bisphenol Chomsky, N. (2011). Noam Chomsky: How Climate Change Became a “Liberal Hoax.” Retrieved February 11, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJUA4cm0Rck Dorfman, L., Cheyne, A., Friedman, L. C., Wadud, A., & Gottlieb, M. (2012). Soda and tobacco industry corporate social responsibility campaigns: how do they compare? PLoS Medicine, 9(6), e1001241. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001241.  http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001241 Goodman, J. (n.d.). Tobacco in History and Culture. Retrieved February 11, 2016, from https://csts.ua.edu/files/2015/08/Tobacco-Encyclopedia-ABES-chapter-on-anti-smoking-movement-from-1950.pdf Gottesdiener, L. (2012). 10 Brilliant Quotes by Noam Chomsky on How Media Really Operates in America - Chomsky’s observations about propaganda and corporate media are always useful to keep in mind. Retrieved February 10, 2016, from http://www.alternet.org/media/10-brilliant-quotes-noam-chomsky-how-media-really-operates-america Grandia, K. (2011). The 30,000 Global Warming Petition Is Easily-Debunked Propaganda. Retrieved February 14, 2016, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-grandia/the-30000-global-warming_b_243092.html LIPTAK, A., & DAVENPORT, C. (2015). Supreme Court Deals Blow to Obama’s Efforts to Regulate Coal Emissions. New York Times. Retrieved February 10, 2016, from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/10/us/politics/supreme-court-blocks-obama-epa-coal-emissions-regulations.html?emc=edit_na_20160209&nlid=71380912&ref=headline Michaels, D. (2008). Doubt is Their Product: How Industrys Assault on Science Threatens Your Health. Retrieved February 14, 2016, from http://www.amazon.com/Doubt-Their-Product-Industrys-Threatens-ebook/dp/B0058C6FI6/ref=mt_kindle?_encoding=UTF8&me= Moyers, B. (2014). The Relentless Attack on Climate Scientist Ben Santer. Retrieved February 12, 2016, from http://billmoyers.com/2014/05/16/the-relentless-attack-of-climate-scientist-ben-santer/ Mukherjee, S. (2013). How Big Tobacco’s Marketing Tactics Continue To Encourage Americans' Unhealthy Habits. Retrieved February 11, 2016, from http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/04/08/1836191/big-tobacco-tactics-playbook/ No Author (April 18, 2015). “Follow the money”: the finances of global warming, vaccines, and GMOs. The Logic of Science. https://thelogicofscience.com/2015/04/18/follow-the-money-the-finances-of-global-warming-vaccines-and-gmos/ Norr, Roy. "Cancer by the Carton." Reader's Digest (December 1952): 7-8. https://industrydocuments.library.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/#id=qfpn0146 Norr, Roy ed. Norr Newsletter about Smoking and Health 1, no. 1- vol; 6, no. 3 (1955-1961). Available at the New York Academy of Medicine Library. Norris, J. (2013). Make Them Eat Cake. Retrieved February 15, 2016, from http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/09/03/make-them-eat-cake/ Nuccitelli, D. (2015). Fossil fuel industry caught taking a page out of the tobacco playbook. Retrieved February 11, 2016, from http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/mar/02/fossil-fuel-industry-caught-taking-a-page-out-of-the-tobacco-playbook Oreskes, Naomi; Conway, Erik M. (2010). Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming. Bloomsbury Publishing. Kindle Edition. http://www.amazon.com/Merchants-Doubt-Handful-Scientists-Obscured/dp/1608193942/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1455072048&sr=8-1&keywords=Merchants+of+Doubt%3A+How+a+Handful+of+Scientists+Obscured+the+Truth+on+Issues+from+Tobacco+Smoke+to+Global+Warming Oreskes, N. (2004). Beyond the ivory tower. The scientific consensus on climate change. Science (New York, N.Y.), 306(5702), 1686. doi:10.1126/science.1103618. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.full Poynter Institute. (2014). Merchants of Doubt - College Study Guide. Retrieved February 10, 2016, from http://www.takepart.com/sites/default/files/2014-03-06 Merchants of Doubt - College Study Guide.pdf Readfearn, G. (2014). Australia’s renewables adviser scrapes the bottom of the climate denialist barrel. Retrieved February 14, 2016, from http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2014/feb/24/climate-change-dick-warburton-sceptic-australia-renewable-energy-target-review Readers Digest (December 1952). Cancer by the Carton. Tobacco Institute Records. Unknown. https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/qfpn0146 Seccombe, M. (2015). Tobacco industry playbook used to kill renewables. Retrieved February 10, 2016, from https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2015/06/27/tobacco-industry-playbook-used-kill-renewables/14353272002054 Szabo, L., & Hoyer, M. (2013). Similar paths for tobacco, gun lobby? Retrieved February 14, 2016, from http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/31/nra-guns-tobacco-research/1859385/# Tobacco Industry Research Committee. (1954). A Frank Statement to Cigarette Smokers. Retrieved February 12, 2016, from http://www.tobaccoinstitute.com/PDF/TIMN0040888.PDF. http://www.tobaccoinstitute.com/PDF/TIMN0040888.PDF Wilson, D., & Roberts, J. (2012). Special Report: How Washington went soft on childhood obesity. Retrieved February 15, 2016, from http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-foodlobby-idUSBRE83Q0ED20120427

Perspectives · Perspectives

Our Passive Acceptance of Child Labour

The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis.

Dante Alighieri, Italian national epic poet (1265 – 1321)

A recent Harvard Business Review (HBR) post, Why Companies Are Blind to Child Labor, got my blood boiling, and reminded me of this quote warning us that our passive acceptance of child labour abuses by producers must be stopped.  Dante actually never wrote this specifically, though the reference it comes from is provided at the end of this blog.  Dante’s Inferno does describe a place for neutrals, though it is not in hell... it is just outside it.  In effect, the neutrals have been rejected by both heaven and hell.  This subtlety curiously represents our own personal, and frequently corporate, offensive passive acceptance of child labour.

Our Passive Acceptance of Child Labour

The HBR post was based on a recent report by Amnesty International entitled "THIS IS WHAT WE DIE FOR": HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO POWER THE GLOBAL TRADE IN COBALT.

"This report documents the hazardous conditions in which artisanal miners, including thousands of children, mine cobalt in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. It goes on to trace how this cobalt is used to power mobile phones, laptop computers, and other portable electronic devices. Using basic hand tools, miners dig out rocks from tunnels deep underground, and accidents are common. Despite the potentially fatal health effects of prolonged exposure to cobalt, adult and child miners work without even the most basic protective equipment. This report is the first comprehensive account of how cobalt enters the supply chain of many of the world’s leading brands."

  The Amnesty International report "uncovered a number of cases of child labor among suppliers linked to major technology companies, including Apple, Samsung, and Microsoft, as well as to several automotive manufactures, such as Volkswagen and Daimler AG... In conducting the report, Amnesty International reached out to the implicated companies to ask about child labor in their supply chains and received a common response: Apple and Microsoft said they are unable to verify whether their products use cobalt from the DRC. Daimler said the same, claiming it is unable to verify such information 'due to the high complexity of automotive supply chains.'  Samsung SDI, which supplies batteries to both Samsung and Apple, also said determining whether its cobalt is mined in the DRC is impossible." Seriously?  In today's day and age, with the systems and informatics available, you cannot determine whether you source from child labour abusers?  That screams of being accepting of child labour.  I would be more than willing to pay more for products that do not employ child labour.  I imagine if one gave consumers the same choice, the vast majority would do so as well.  This would also help the company's brand image, as opposed to the excuse that investigating these claims is too difficult.   Cobb’s Paradox refers to a curious observation that:

We know why projects fail. We know how to prevent their failure. So why do they still fail? What are the problems / issues?

An interesting response is that we all know what the problems and solutions are... Traditionally the “medicine” prescribed by those who “understand the problem” has generally been rejected by the “patient” as being “too strong”.  So is the medicine actually too strong for these "leading" corporations?

The Nonsensical Challenge

The "complexity" and "challenges" described by these leading firms appear is hypocritical considering their corporate expertise, and is blatantly offensive.  The model is not that complicated as outlined below: The following potential DRC Cobalt supply chain from publicly available information was researched by Amnesty International and once again does not demonstrate a terribly complicated system that cannot be transparently audited... unless "we" consciously choose to ignore it or except it is not worth the "investment".

Examples of Corporate Acceptance of Child Labour

The following corporations were identified as having potential relationships in the DRC Cobalt supply chain: A simplified representation is outlined below of the major corporations implicated: Apparently though these companies have been called out, the situation is still too complex for them to resolve.  Perhaps these producers feel that we as consumers do not care enough about this to take a stand, and that most of their competitors are not making an issue of it either. It is important to reinforce though that this form of child labour represents the worst forms as defined by Article 3 of ILO Convention No. 182.  Specifically section (d) work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.  Once again:

Using basic hand tools, miners dig out rocks from tunnels deep underground, and accidents are common. Despite the potentially fatal health effects of prolonged exposure to cobalt, adult and child miners work without even the most basic protective equipment.

This is not the casual child work that could be considered ethically appropriate (Mitchell, 2013).  I would strongly recommend reading the World Vision Australia  (2012) paper Unlucky for some: 13 myths about child labour. to aid in any discussion around the ethically acceptable situations for child labour.

What can these corporations do?

It is not as if this is an overly complex issue to resolve.  There is clear guidance as outlined below, and there are SA8000 auditors available as one example of a leading approach to dealing with this issue.

"The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights set out the responsibility of companies to respect international human rights in their global operations, including in their supply chains. This requires, amongst other things, that companies carry out human rights due diligence 'to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address their impacts on human rights.'

A practical guide for how such due diligence should be carried out for supply chains has been provided by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Its Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas (OECD Guidance) lays out a five-step process for all companies involved in the mineral supply chain to follow. Companies that purchase cobalt, or components containing the mineral, have no excuse for not conducting such due diligence steps."

 

What can we do?

As offended as I am personally by this, this practice is not uncommon.  One issue is the awareness of the ongoing existence of child labour and what organizational options there are. We have these discussions while we facilitate PSM3 sustainability awareness sessions with companies and ask questions such as if they support child and slave labour by purchasing from suppliers who employ child and slave labour?  All the companies answer in the negative, but there is seldom a formal policy or a requirement in contracts to ensure that child or slave labour is not employed in the supply chain, because no one can guarantee it and it is too complicated to enforce.  In the end, as highlighted in the HBR post, the problem tends to be wilful ignorance.  This approach is taken in order to “avoid potentially costly consequences, such as having to launch internal investigations.  This wilful ignorance does not mean that companies won’t correct wrongdoings when they become obvious; they just may not seek them out when such cases are hidden.”  It is not impossible, though. GPM Global recently conducted an assessment in Australia for a manufacturing organization that sourced from China. They frequently conduct on-site audits of their suppliers and can confidently say that their suppliers’ facilities are clinically clean, workers are treated well and compensated, and there are no issues of slave or child labour, or questionable labour practices.  So this risk can be mitigated at a nominal cost.  

Conclusion

This is something that we all can become involved in.  Make your concerns known.  Purchase from ethical corporations. If you are a purchaser for an organization ensure that the organization has a policy on child and slave labour, and ask your suppliers to confirm that they do not employ child or slave labour in their supply chain.  

Appendices

Definition of Child Labour - ILO Conventions and Recommendations

The term “child labour” is often defined as work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential and their dignity, and that is harmful to physical and mental development. It refers to work that:

• is mentally, physically, socially or morally dangerous and harmful to children; and
• interferes with their schooling by:
• depriving them of the opportunity to attend school;
• obliging them to leave school prematurely; or
• requiring them to attempt to combine school attendance with excessively long and heavy work.

  Whilst child labour takes many different forms, a priority is to eliminate without delay the worst forms of child labour as defined by Article 3 of ILO Convention No. 182: (a) all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict; (b) the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances; (c) the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs as defined in the relevant international treaties; (d) work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children. Labour that jeopardises the physical, mental or moral well-being of a child, either because of its nature or because of the conditions in which it is carried out, is known as “hazardous work”.   http://www.ilo.org/ipec/facts/lang--en/index.htm

Dante's Inferno, canto iii

“Master, what is it that I hear? Who are those people so defeated by their pain?” And he to me: “This miserable way is taken by the sorry souls of those who lived without disgrace and without praise. They now commingle with the coward angels, the company of those who were not rebels nor faithful to their God, but stood apart. The heavens, that their beauty not be lessened, have cast them out, nor will deep Hell receive them - even the wicked cannot glory in them.” And I: “What is it, master, that oppresses these souls, compelling them to wail so loud?” He answered: “I shall tell you in few words. Those who are here can place no hope in death, and their blind life is so abject that they are envious of every other fate. The world will let no fame of theirs endure; both justice and compassion must disdain them; let us not talk of them, but look and pass.” –Dante Alighieri, Inferno, canto iii (ca. 1317)(C. Langdon transl. 1918) (Horton, 2010)  

REFERENCES

Amnesty International. (2016). Child labour behind smart phone and electric car batteries. Retrieved February 8, 2016, from https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/01/Child-labour-behind-smart-phone-and-electric-car-batteries/ Amnesty International. (2016). “This is what We Die for”: Human Rights Abuses in the Democratic Republic of the Congo Power the Global Trade in Cobalt. Retrieved February 8, 2016, from https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/afr62/3183/2016/en/ Barnett, R. & Espinosa-Vega, M. (2005) "Barriers to Capital Accumulation and the Incidence of Child Labor", Working Paper, International Monetary Fund, p.l, as noted in World Vision (2014) "Creating markets for child-friendly growth: Addressing child labour through G20 procurement". Basu, K. & Van, P.H. (1998) "The Economics of Child Labor", American Economic Review, Vol.88, pp.412-427, as noted in World Vision (2014) "Creating markets for child-friendly growth: Addressing child labour through G20 procurement". Goto, H. (2011), "Social Norms, Inequality and Child Labor", The Journal of Socio-Economics, Volume 40, Issue 6, pp.806-814, as noted in World Vision (2014) "Creating markets for child-friendly growth: Addressing child labour through G20 procurement". Horton, S. (2010). Dante – The Curse on Those Who Do Nothing in the Face of Evil. Retrieved February 8, 2016, from http://harpers.org/blog/2010/10/dante-the-curse-on-those-who-do-nothing-in-the-face-of-evil International Labour Organisation (ILO) (2013) "Marking progress against child labour". Retrieved February 3, 2016, from http://www.ilo.org/ipec/lnformationresources/WCMS_221513/lang--en/index.htm International Trade Union Confederation (2010) "Union View", No.18, p.8, as noted in World Vision (2014) "Creating markets for child-friendly growth: Addressing child labour through G20 procurement". Mitchell, L. (2013). Why Child Labor Isn’t Always Bad. Retrieved February 9, 2016, from http://www.ethicsdaily.com/why-child-labor-isnt-always-bad-cms-21240 United Nations General Assembly (20 November 1989) "Text of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child", UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Article 32(1), as noted in World Vision (2014) "Creating markets for child-friendly growth: Addressing child labour through G20 procurement". World Economic Forum (2013) "The Human Capital Report", p.l, as noted in World Vision (2014) "Creating markets for child-friendly growth: Addressing child labour through G20 procurement". World Vision Australia. (2012). Unlucky for some: 13 myths about child labour. Retrieved February 8, 2016, from https://www.worldvision.com.au/docs/default-source/school-resources/myths-about-child-labour.pdf Zane, D., Irwin, J., & Reczek, R. W. (2016). Why Companies Are Blind to Child Labor. Retrieved February 8, 2016, from https://hbr.org/2016/01/why-companies-are-blind-to-child-labor

Perspectives · Benefits Management

The Value of Value Management

This post highlights the importance of incorporating value management into sustainable change delivery.  This blog post is part of a series that provides a foundation for understanding sustainable change delivery.

There is nothing so useless as doing efficiently that which should not be done at all.

Peter F. Drucker

Management of Value (MoV) was the most recent certificate I obtained from the UK Cabinet Office, mainly because it took me some time to "get it."  It took several sessions of Michael Dallas's patient explanations before I finally invested the time in reading the book and passing the exams.  Having now realized the value of value management, I believe this to be one of the most useful and practical resources in the AXELOS library. However, it is also one of the most challenging because it forces one to look at change initiatives from a completely different perspective.  Value management is deeply integrated with risk management, benefits management and business case management.  This post will provide some background to the concepts and outputs of value management.

The Value of Value Management

Building efficiently is no guarantee that the end product will be suited to its intended purpose. What is required is a shift in perspective so that the focus is not on what things are or on their output, but on what things do or on their function, which will result in an outcome. For example, a paper to the Royal Society of Engineers puts forward the suggestion that a typical ratio for building costs, when divided between construction costs, building operating costs and business operating costs, would be in the order of 1 to 5 to 200 (Dallas, Kindle Locations 334-335, 2007). This is illustrated below: Employing value management analyses early on will facilitate the making of informed decisions regarding the design, while good solutions arrived at during key initial phases will pay dividends throughout the asset’s lifecycle.  The importance of this is indicated below, showing that total asset life-cycle costing must be taken into account when considering the best time to deal with change. As highlighted below, changes are best dealt with at the very beginning of a change engagement that is based on sound analysis and which should include value management. By focusing on the actual function of what is required, better outcomes can be delivered that will provide superior asset lifecycle cost benefit results.

Definitions to provide Context

To help to provide context, the following definitions were obtained from the Management of Value guidance (The Cabinet Office, pp. 140-144, 2010): Value: The benefits delivered in proportion to the resources put into acquiring them. Value Management: A systematic method to define what value means for organizations, and to communicate it clearly to maximize value across portfolios, programmes, projects and operations. Function: What something does, expressed as an active verb and a measurable noun (as closely as possible). It may be tangible (e.g. bears weight) or intangible (e.g. operates intuitively). As outlined in the diagram below, there are three main areas where it is necessary to strike a balance:

1. Balancing the benefits and expenditure on resources used.
2. Balancing the benefits between stakeholders.
3. Balancing the use of resources.

Key Concepts

The foundational concepts of value management were initially developed by Larry Miles, an American working for General Electric in 1947. As Miles put it, “I was very concerned because it seemed that things cost so much more than they should have” (Cook, p. 74, 1984). Michael Dallas continues Miles’ story:

Production of certain components was constrained by shortages of the materials that traditionally had been used in their manufacture.

Miles was charged with finding ways to overcome the material shortages.  The approach he adopted was, at the time novel.

Instead of asking the question 'how can we find alternative sources of materials' he asked, 'what function does this component perform and how else can we perform that function'?

This approach opened the way for innovative designs that resulted in superior products that were cheaper to make.

Miles's focus on function (what things must do) was effectively a focus on the outcome of the manufacturing process rather than the process itself.

Fulfilling the essential functions of the product under investigation, with the use of minimum resources, remains at the heart of value management today. (Dallas, 2006)

 

How to Conduct a Value Analysis

At a high level, Value Management fits into organizational change delivery as outlined below.  There is a presumption that certain things, such as organizational goals and programme or project objectives that align with those goals, have been identified, and that you are able to start identifying the value drivers that will guide the design considerations and solutions. At a very simple project level, the following process is extremely helpful. What are the actual Value Management tools and techniques, and what are the outputs?  The Value Measuring Process (VAMP) is highlighted below: Function analysis is a key technique that focuses on analyzing what things do rather than what they are and avoids looking at ideas until functions are visibly mapped. Function analysis is focused on customer needs and wants.  The objectives of this analysis are:

1. To gain clarity of understanding of the project aims and to identify what needs to be done in order to achieve those aims.
2. To stimulate creativity in the search for different ways to perform the identified functions. (The Cabinet Office, p. 45, 2010)

The first task for the stakeholders is to define the statement of objectives and the next is to identify the value drivers. It is useful to consider the concept of Fair Process when working with all stakeholders.  There is an associated blog post that describes the importance of this in Silly Management Mistakes – the Importance of Fair Process. The next task is to work with stakeholders to identify the weightings so as to arrive at the Value Profile: The Cabinet Office offers the following as the principal uses of the value profile:

• For the organization, at strategic or portfolio level, articulating the organization's value priorities
• For a programme, providing the means of achieving consistency across the contributing projects
• For a project, articulating project objectives and the key project requirements in plain language
• Maximizing value consistent with an organization's value priorities
• Making decisions based on maximizing value
• Redistributing resources to where they add the greatest value
• Trading off use of resources in one area with another to maximize value. (The Cabinet Office, p. 50, 2010)

The next step is to agree on and then to assess the performance measures as this helps to provide a value index.  The key here is that everyone needs to agree on the relative importance of the weighting and the performance scale.  This provides an impartial value score that can help guide decision making. The Cabinet Office provides the following as principal uses of the value index:

• Providing a measure of how well objectives are being met, at organizational, programme or project levels and the level of effort required for a formal MoV study.
• Enabling the measurement of overall value, including monetary and non-monetary value drivers (but not showing whether the benefits represent value for money).
• Indicating the contribution of each value driver to the overall value index, thus showing where to concentrate effort to improve value.  (The Cabinet Office, p. 51, 2010)

On the basis of this analysis, and by integrating the expected cost of delivery, it is possible to assess the value for money for each value driver / function and to make appropriate decisions regarding investment choices. The Cabinet Office offers the following as the principal uses of the value for money ratio:

• Dividing individual value scores by the total cost of delivering each value driver provides a measure of value for money.
• Providing a value for money ratio for each value driver and for the project as a whole helps to focus value-improving effort on those parts that are delivering lowest value for money.
• Selecting options. (The Cabinet Office, p. 53, 2010)

More importantly though, this can be continuously evaluated at key check points throughout the engagement to confirm that value for money is still intact. Another perspective on how to conduct a value analysis study is outlined below:  

Conclusion

Below is an example of how an organization can consider implementing value management competency: If you are interested in moving forward with developing this competency, please consider some of the following Value Management training and certification options:

Accrediting Organization	Value Qualifications Available	Qualification Title
AXELOS	Management of Value	MoV Foundation and Practitioner
Institute of Value Management	IVM / European value management training and certification system	Certificated Value Analyst Professional in Value Management
Society of American Value Engineers	SAVE	Associated Value Specialist Certified Value Specialist

The list of references below will also guide you as you explore this field. Value management is a core competency in sustainable change delivery as it feeds and provides crucial decision intelligence for risk management, benefits management, business cases and asset lifecycle cost / benefit modelling for the change initiative.  Please take a lesson from me and don't wait as long to recognize the value of this competency to your business.

Series Objectives

This series is all about raising awareness of sustainable change delivery and the integral elements, disciplines and competencies associated with it.  In the graphic below, each of these elements is identified in terms of its role in empowering for sustainability.  These elements form the basis of the GPM® Global’s P5™ Standard for Sustainability in Project Management, the GPM® Global Training Programs, and the GPM® Global Portfolio, Program, & Project Sustainability Model (PSM3™) for organizational assessment.

 REFERENCES

Association for Project Management (2014). Interfacing Risk and Earned Value Management. APM. Association for Project Management. (2014). Project Risk Analysis and Management Guide, Second Edition. Retrieved September 21, 2015, from http://www.amazon.com/Project-Risk-Analysis-Management-Guide-ebook/dp/B00JJ0MSRK/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1442807872&sr=1-1&keywords=project+risk+analysis+and+management+guide Baker, Ronald J. (2010). Implementing Value Pricing: A Radical Business Model for Professional Firms (Wiley Professional Advisory Services). Wiley. Carboni, J., Gonzalez, M., & Hodgkinson, J. (2013) The GPM reference guide to sustainability in Project Management. Fort Wayne: GPM Global. http://www.greenprojectmanagement.org/the-gpm-reference-guide-to-sustainability-in-project-management Carboni, Joel (2014). The GPM P5™ Standard for Sustainability In Project Management. 1st ed. Fort Wayne: GPM Global. Cook, T. F. (1984). Welcome to Value Analysis and Value Engineering. In Save Conference Proceedings. Retrieved from http://www.value-eng.org/knowledge_bank/attachments/Welcome to VA & VE.pdf Dallas, M. F. (2008). Value and Risk Management: A Guide to Best Practice. Retrieved September 21, 2015, from http://www.amazon.com/Value-Risk-Management-Guide-Practice-ebook/dp/B0014TS2IS/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1442809546&sr=1-1&keywords=value+%26+risk+management+a+guide+to+best+practice Doerscher, Terry & Durbin, Pat. (2010). Taming Change with Portfolio Management: Unify Your Organization, Sharpen Your Strategy, and Create Measurable Value (Management Management Technique). Greenleaf Book Group LLC. Hubbard, Douglas W. (2014). How to Measure Anything: Finding the Value of Intangibles in Business, Third Edition. Wiley. http://www.amazon.com/How-Measure-Anything-Intangibles-Business/dp/1118539273/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1442806937&sr=8-1&keywords=How+to+Measure+Anything%3A+Finding+the+Value+of+Intangibles+in+Business Humphreys, K. (1991). Jelen’s Cost and Optimization Engineering, Third Edition. Retrieved September 21, 2015, from http://www.amazon.com/Optimization-Engineering-Humphreys-Kenneth-Hardcover/dp/B010WFHHB2/ref=sr_1_9?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1442859945&sr=1-9&keywords=jelen%27s+cost+and+optimization+engineering Kofman, Fred (2007). Conscious Business: How to Build Value through Values. Sounds True. Manas, Jerry (2014). The Resource Management and Capacity Planning Handbook: A Guide to Maximizing the Value of Your Limited People Resources. McGraw-Hill Education. SkyMark. (2016). Larry Miles and Value Engineering. Retrieved February 8, 2016, from http://www.skymark.com/resources/leaders/larrymiles.asp Stout, Lynn A. (2012). The Shareholder Value Myth: How Putting Shareholders First Harms Investors, Corporations, and the Public . Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Sullivan, W. G., Wicks, E. M., & Koelling, C. P. (2014). Engineering Economy, Sixteenth Edition. Retrieved September 21, 2015, from http://www.amazon.com/Engineering-Economy-16th-William-Sullivan/dp/0133439275/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1442861127&sr=1-1&keywords=engineering+economy The Cabinet Office. (2010). Management of Value (MoV). The Stationary Office.

Perspectives · Business Case

The GPM P5 Standard for Sustainability in Project Management. Who uses it and how?

Last month we surveyed 15,036 individuals who have downloaded the GPM P5 standard since it was released in 2014 and received 3,600 responses. It was conducted to find out how sustainability factors are incorporated into projects, by whom, where was the focus the most prominent, and most important, if the standard having a positive impact.

Breakdown of the responses by region:

• 44% Europe
• 39% The Americas
• 10% Asia Pacific
• 6% Africa
• 2% Middle East

Break down of respondents by focus:

• 33% project managers
• 19% academic focused
• 17% sustainability professionals
• 11% executives
• 8% training providers
• 6% portfolio or program managers
• 6% government officials

Breakdown of the respondents by years of project management experience:

• 42% have greater than 15 years
• 22% have 6 to 10 years
• 8% have 4 to 5 years
• 17% have 1 to 3 years

Key statistics (See Analysis Below):

1. 94% of the respondents stated that projects and project management are integral to sustainable development.
2. 76% of the respondents are using the standard in their projects.
3. 93% of the respondents who are using the standard in their projects have seen a tangible increase in project performance.
4. 96% of the respondents found the standard helpful
5. 75% of the executives stated that their organizations do sustainability reporting
6. 50% of the project managers stated that their organization does not do sustainability reporting

Analysis Based on the survey outcome the number of individuals who believe that projects and project management are key to sustainable development is almost a unanimous opinion. the data shows that adoption of sustainability in projects is at a slightly faster pace in Europe and the Americas as compared to the rest of the world. Project managers, academics and sustainability professionals comprise of the largest adopters and of them the more senior in experience are the early adopters. Those that have adopted the standard see an increase in overall project performance which is a strong indicator that (among adopters) the shift has begun to expand project performance standards beyond the standard time, cost, and scope measures. Of the respondents, that are project managers, half manage projects in organizations that do not publish sustainability reports which allows for opportunity to projects to be a driving force for materiality when reporting does begin. Of the executives who responded, the 75% percentage of which stated that their organization does sustainability reporting which is the same percentage of the S&P 500 that published corporate sustainability reports in 2015 according to the G&A Institute. To download P5 for yourself, click here! 

Infographic

Download the infographic! in PDF Format

Perspectives · Climate Change

Brandolini’s Law in Sustainability Discussions

Dealing With Nonsensical Sustainability Positions

I have recently experienced a number of profoundly confusing and somewhat bizarre positions and arguments on LinkedIn (and elsewhere). For example, absurd arguments against the requirement for greenhouse gas emission reductions, not providing a liveable wage or the right to employ slave and child labour. Though these entries are obviously more emotional than fact based, we can often feel a need to at least make some observation to help the dialogue without getting into a mud slinging contest. I was reading the difference between lying and, with apologies for using the word, bullsh!$. The liar must know the truth of the matter under discussion to better conceal it from the listener or the reader being deceived. The bullsh!$$er, however, is someone whose principal aim is to impress the listener and the reader with words that communicate an impression that something is being or has been done, words that are neither true nor false, so obscure the facts of the matter being discussed (Frankfurt, p. 61, 2005). These bizarre "conversations" could be mistaken for trolling, but in reality these nonsensical arguments and discussions are in reality bullsh!$ because of the emotional nature of the “argument” and an inability to consider other perspectives or facts. Now in most cases, the suggestion when dealing with internet trolls is… don’t feed the troll. That said... sometimes you feel like you have to take some kind of a stand...

If You Feel the Need to Interject, Use Brandolini’s Law

If one wants to make a statement or interject and be politically correct at the same time, just write “Brandolini’s law.”  This first appeared in 2013 and was coined by Alberto Brandolini, an Italian programmer, as the Bullshit Asymmetry Principle (also known as Brandolini’s law). It states:

"The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it" (Brandolini, 2013).

By simply writing the response "Brandolini’s law" to the discussion, possibly with the link, provides a unique response that if actually investigated will show that you do not agree with the narrative as it is being laid out.  The rest of us will also know that you think it is nonsensical. Please let us know if you have any other suggestions.

References

Image found at:

https://openparachute.wordpress.com/2015/09/03/discussing-science-on-social-media/

Brandolini, Alberto. (2013). "Brandolini’s law". Frankfurt, H. G. (2005). On Bullshit.