Diana Gould, Mrs Thatcher and the sinking of the Belgrado

The life and achievements of Mrs Thatcher are being re-examined in the minutest detail. One piece of unfinished business is the ultimate fate of the Falkland Islands over which she went into battle

News of the death of Margaret Thatcher [8th April 2013] confirmed her iconic status, and the aptness of the title of the recent film about her The Iron Lady. The posthumous comments of those who knew her brought back my own fragmented memories. These include her substantial political achievements from humble origins; her wresting of power to become a formidable global figure noted for her robustness and straight speaking; her contribution addressing economic weaknesses (‘the British disease’) at home, her tireless efforts fighting to retain the status of her country abroad, and her deep suspicions over Europe’s regional direction of change.

A leader for our times?

Even today, I find my executive students mostly admiring of her no-nonsense confrontational leadership style. Admiration seems to grow, the further you go from the UK. Japan, China [with muted reservations in Hong Kong], India, and The United States would provide examples of different cultures recognizing her unique leadership characteristics.

“Where there is discord…”

Her first speech as Prime Minister on the steps of Downing Street has been replayed many times in the last twenty four hours. It was allowed to speak for itself. Her choice of quotation from St Francis seemed as inappropriate from her as it might have been appropriate from the New Pope: “Where there is discord let there be harmony…” For me, the speech captures a shadow-side of Mrs Thatcher and her mask of command, and an insensitivity to the ironic. At her death she remained a deeply divisive figure in the UK.

Missing in dispatches

In nearly one thousand posts mostly on leadership issues, I have hardly written about Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. From time to time I collected notes intending to assemble them into a broader examination. Here is one from an article in The Independent

It was 1983 and the run-up to the general election. In the Nationwide studio at BBC TV Centre, Sue Lawley was hosting a live phone-in with Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who was confidently looking forward to a second term of office for the Conservatives.

Then Diana Gould, a 58-year-old geography teacher from Cirencester, Gloucestershire, came on the air. Her disembodied voice asked: “Mrs Thatcher, why, when the Belgrano, the Argentinian battleship, was outside the exclusion zone and actually sailing away from the Falklands, why did you give the orders to sink it?”

Thatcher replied: “But it was not sailing away from the Falklands. It was in an area which was a danger to our ships.”

Revealing a geography teacher’s precision, Gould persisted. “It was on a bearing of 280 and it was already west of the Falklands, so I cannot see how you can say it was not sailing away from the Falklands.

“When it was sunk,” said Thatcher, “It was a danger to our ships.”

“No,” said Gould firmly, “You just said at the beginning of your answer that it was not sailing away from the Falklands, and I am asking you to correct that statement.”

Rattled, Thatcher blustered about the exclusion zone, but Gould came back with the “north of West” bearing and would not let it drop until Gould was faded out. She became an overnight heroine: the woman who stood up to Thatcher, virtually accusing her of a war crime.

Thatcher was furious, and relations between government and the BBC were soured through the 1980s.

Unsung Melodies: This week’s events I didn’t write about

This week I would have liked to have blogged about Barack Obama’s second inauguration; David Cameron’s long-awaited speech on Europe; blacklisting of employees; Lance Armstrong’s interview with Oprah Winfrey; and iPads for Apes

President Obama’s inauguration

The UK, like the rest of the world, followed the inauguration. An estimated 40 million people watched [see the figures for Armstrong and Whitney, below]. A video of the 18 minute speech is available.

Initial reactions seem to be that the president will take steps to counter what he sees as obstruction to his policies by political opponents in the Senate. The speech signals this intention specifically on actions to preserve the environment, supporting human rights, and strengthening gun controls.

Prime Minster David Cameron’s European Speech

Meanwhile, over in Europe, Prime Minister Cameron makes what is considered his most committing political speech of his term in office. [23rd January 2012] His party’s stance on Europe will be built around a pre-election pledge for a post-election “in or out” referendum on membership of the European Community. The strategy appears to be a move to counter the rise of the anti-Europe UKIP party in the polls, and as a means of reducing trouble with his own anti-Europe MPs. He plans to renegotiate before the next general election [in 2015] to obtain changes in the EC and its arrangements with the UK. If successful. these will permit him to support a “stay in” vote in the subsequent referendum. A video of this speech is also available [via the BBC website]

Blacklisting of employees in the UK

This story is one which I believe will recur over the next few months, as a matter of corporate social responsibilities. Attention has been drawn to bullying and possibly illegal means through which organizations prevent employees from speaking out concerning their working conditions. The sanctions include the blacklisting of uncooperative employees from future employment. The examples suggest the practice has been widespread in some industries such as construction where part-time and supply work is common.

Lance and Oprah

The hero to zero story of Lance Armstrong played out as a full-blown televised confessional between Armstrong and Oprah Winfrey. It was watched by 28 million people worldwide. The charismatic figure considered the greatest cyclist of his generation once acquired cult status. Eventually he was revealed as a drug cheat who dragged his sport into disrepute. I like to describe leadership in terms of dilemmas. In chess terms, Armstrong moved not because he could or because he wanted to, but because he was forced to by a build up of stories against him.

Apps for Apes

Here’s a story which is fun and with animal rights implications. Apes like iPads. (Don’t we all?). The story was widely reported

The ‘Apps for Apes’ project came into being [in a Milwaukee zoo] because orangutans need constant stimulation – otherwise they become bored or depressed. Previous experiments have proved that the animals have an innate ability to use touchscreens.

‘The original idea came literally when Steve Jobs gave his opening presentation introducing the iPad,’ said conservationist Richard Zimmerman.

MBA student note

You may find a story for a leadership blog within these five items. Try to focus on a specific theme, and bring out its leadership implications around a critical incident.

Fiscal Cliffs and Monty Python Politics

It may not add to anyone’s good humour, if I conclude LWD blogs for 2012 with thoughts from a book entitled “It’s Even Worse than it Looks”

Don’t end the year downbeat, I promised myself. It’s a new dawn. And all that stuff. I turned to the book I have been reading “It’s even worse than it looks” by Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein.

These gentlemen did not offer me much cheer. Their earlier work had the uplifting title The Broken Branch: How Congress is Failing America and How to Get it Back on Track. Their main thesis in both books is that the American Political System is in a near-terminal mess. The brilliant system of checks and balances to preserve individual freedoms has become a means of arriving at lose/lose decisions for the people of America and even for politicians struggling to wrest personal or party gains regardless of longer term consequences.

Brinkmanship?

Mann and Ornstein are political theorists with powerful access to the corridors of power in Washington. It’s ’Even Worse than it Looks” examines the January 2011 congressional struggle which attempted to reach an agreement to deal with the US debt. The brinkmanship revealed the two factors which are believed by the authors to lie at the heart of the matter: Increasingly adversarial stances between democratic and republican politicians, and a system which results in blocking of the proposals by the majority party. Such an argument has a disturbing ring of truth in 2011, and is even predictive of what seems to be arriving in January 2012, now dressed up in terms of a metaphoric Fiscal Cliff.

Another crisis?

If this is not a crisis for the American economy what is it? One possibility is that we are witnessing another outbreak of limited leadership vision If so, it has not gone unnoticed by the electorate. As the 2011 infighting continued, a poll cited by Mann and Ornstein showed confidence in politicians had slumped to an all-time low of 9%.

In other words, there is too much posturing posing as leadership. There are still plenty of folk out there convinced that “It’s all their fault”, but that sort of conviction is part of the problem. Mann and Ornstein suggest remedies including increasing the proportion of the electorate participating in politics at the most basic level through voting. They also would address gerrymandering of various kinds, and favour some form of proportional representation. The proposals seem more tentative that those for getting America back on track (their earlier book).

Always look on the bright side

The debate will continue. Some may take comfort in the view that it is all Mickey Mouse politics which will eventually be resolved as damaged global economies gradually become less turbulent. In the meanwhile, in the gloriously ironic strains of a tune and words from Monty Python, we might as well Always look on the bright side of life, de dum, de dum, de dumpty dum, de dum.

And a happy new year to you all out there.

2013 Postscript

The negotiations went according to plan, if you believe the insider account from Politico.

Dilemmas of leadership at the NHS

Leaders in the UK’s National Health Service are facing a new (but curiously old) set of challenges, as another Government initiative is introduced to set up international profit-making hospital services

Tudor Rickards & Susan Moger

Officials from the Department of Health and UK Trade and Industry will launch the joint scheme this autumn, [2012] which will aim to build links between hospitals wishing to expand, and foreign governments which want access to British health services.

Hospitals including Great Ormond Street, the Royal Marsden and Guy’s and St Thomas’ could create new branches. The proposal draws on initiatives occurring in America, including Baltimore’s John Hopkins, Hospital.

Health Minister Anne Milton is quoted as saying:

“This is good news for NHS patients who will get better services at their local hospital as a result of the work the NHS is doing abroad and the extra investment that will generate. This is also good news for the economy, which will benefit from the extra jobs and revenue created by our highly successful life sciences industries as they trade more across the globe.

The NHS has a world-class reputation, and this exciting development will make the most of that to deliver real benefits for both patients and taxpayers”.

Unsurprisingly, the announcement [21st August, 2012] attracted criticisms

Katherine Murphy, chief executive of the Patients Association, said:

“The guiding principle of the NHS must be to ensure that outcomes and care for patients come before profits. At a time of huge upheaval in the health service, when waiting times are rising and trusts are being asked to make £20 billion of efficiency savings, this is another concerning distraction. The priority of the Government, hospital trusts and clinicians should be NHS patients.”

New and curiously old dilemmas

The dilemmas for NHS leaders are in some ways new, for example in the sense that the implementation of such a scheme will involve addressing problems of untested technologies impacting on clinical, informational, and managerial actions.

In other ways the dilemmas are curiously old. There have been a series of ‘revolutions’ announced by successive Governments to reform, update, transform, the NHS. The shocks and repeated initiatives led one distinguished commentator, Professor Andrew Pettigrew, to refer to the process as one of “churning not changing”.

It would hardly be surprising if some hospital leaders will see the plan as a further temporary burden to be shouldered, or one further storm to be weathered, rather than an opportunity to be seized.

Investment from private patient profits

A deeper analysis can be found in The Independent. The proposed initiative attempts to anticipate some of the dilemmas. Investment will be allowed only if drawn from income received from private patients; and any profits made abroad would be channelled back to the UK.

Areas of the world identified as key to the success of the project include the Gulf, where British medical brands already have high recognition, and China, Brazil, Libya and India.

The marketing of the NHS ‘brand’

Media comment is describing and evaluating the intiative as an attempt to market the MBS brand. It has echoes of marketing UK plc. The enthusiasm for business school language is not without dangers. Effective implementation of innovation may require a strtegic evaluation of what the ‘brand’ will look like in th future.

An example from a related service sector is that of the universities who are discovering the challenges of establishing outposts in various international locations. The learning curve is steep and competition ferocious. The most successful UK example is the Open University, and that has one unique advantage. Its knowhow (brand?) is precisely of a kind which makes such international ventures attractive to its undergraduate students.

Earlier LWD posts of interest

Health policy

Creative leadership

Distributed leadership

Is Gina Rinehart Australia’s next Rupert Murdoch?

Australian officials have expressed concern that billionaire Gina Rinehart’s increased stake in Fairfax Media may compromise the organisation’s independence

According to the BBC:

Australian officials have expressed concern that billionaire Gina Rinehart’s increased stake in Fairfax Media may compromise its independence.

The mining magnate, who now has an 18.67% stake, has asked for three board seats and the right to make editorial decisions. Ms Rinehart, who oversees an iron-ore prospecting empire, is a vocal opponent of the government’s mining and carbon tax plans.

Gina Reinhart, recently labelled the world’s richest woman, is the heiress to an iron-ore prospecting empire.

Her current plans appear to involve acquiring three seats on the board of Fairfax Media, and the right to get involved in hiring and firing employees.

Unlike Rupert Murdoch, this is a tycoon who is intent on staying on her home turf in building her business empire. This may explain why she has largely avoided global attention for her leadership activities.

The Australian government may be following the Leveson inquiry into Media Government relations with more than a passing interest.

Succession planning

There seems little likelihood of smooth succession planning for the 58 year old business woman. She is locked in a bitter dispute with her siblings over alleged involvement with their trust hunds.

Image

Image is from the appeal by Fairfax Newspapers for Gina Rinehart to declare support for editorial independence

To be continued

Sir Philip Hampton shows ethical leadership or perhaps cautious pragmatism

Future Manyumba

Royal Bank of Scotland Chairman Sir Philip Hampton [right] turned down a £1.4 million bonus in January. Was it evidence of a ‘wind of change’ or a self-saving political statement?

On the 28th of Jan this year, Sir Philip Hampton announced that he would give up his £1.4 million bonus as Chairman of Royal Bank of Scotlan. Few people may disagree with his actions, accepting that the RBS team is doing a tough job. Indeed some would question why he should take such a personal sacrifice when his colleagues in the private sector are still getting astronomical bonuses by comparison.

Frontline leadership

The decision was symbolic in nature. His actions could prove to be a watershed moment in the history of the finance sector in the UK. Sir Philip Hampton has previously held successful positions with Sainsbury plc (chairman), Lloyds Banking group plc, BT group, British Gas and British Steel.

As the head of a bank which is 83% owned by tax payers, public opinion is something that bears a strong influence on decision making. What does it say when bank executives pay themselves huge bonuses when in essence the shareholders (tax payers in the case of RBS) are having to bear with the pains of the Government’s austerity measures?

Decision Dilemma

Sir Philip Hampton demonstrated restraint by example, demonstrating the subtle and pervasive powers of symbolic leadership. He faced the dilemma of either taking the money or suffering personal loss and alienation from fellow executives in the banking industry. Accepting the money at a time when the bank is cutting jobs (cost cutting measures) would have made him look hypocritical but giving it up risked demoralising other executives (within RBS) who ultimately may feel pressured to emulate him. I believe that his choice sent out a compelling ethical view point for business and industry.

The force of sacrifice

Within days of this action, the RBS CEO, Stephen Hester decided to emulate his chairman (some may say he was left with no choice). Within a week, executives of Network Rail also decided to forego their bonuses . Through his ethical symbolic actions, Sir Philip Hampton may have started a chain reaction which is going to transform the banking and private businesses landscape. The momentum is building with politicians and business community now calling for a public debate about the morality of executives’ bonus scheme during tough times.

Challenging times – Adapt or Die

A leader does not necessarily have to ‘stay the course’ just because it is his/her natural style but has to have the flexibility to adapt to the changing times.

Hero or Villain?

It is difficult to see the actions of one man changing the bonus culture of banks in the short term. However, his actions have shown participative and visionary leadership likely to have momentous influence in the long term. He has chosen to make his actions congruent with his beliefs. Now he can stand up and talk about the need to cut bonuses of bankers with moral authority.

Acknowledgements

Future Manyumba, a LWD subscriber, is originally from Zimbabwe, and is a Process Engineer with training and experience in hard rock mining in Southern Africa (gold, nickel and copper). His interests include geopolitical global issues, leadership and football.

Image of Sir Philip Hampton is from the RBS website.

Invisible Children, The Kony 2012 Video and the Processes of Influence globally

A Video from a little-known charity, Invisible Children, becomes an astonishing on-line success. It draws attention to the actions over a period of years of Joseph Kony and his Lord’s Resistance Army. The simple message of the video is the exploitation of children who become caught up in committing hideous war crimes. The influence forces at play require careful evaluation

Tudor Rickards, Editor Leader We Deserve

Two inter-related stories

There are two inter-related stories here to consider. The first concerns the actions attributed to a powerful and militant Ugandan leader and the monstrous methods deployed including rape as a military weapon, and the use of child soldiers. The second is to do with the nature and implications of messages that trigger change globally through the power of social media.

Kony 2012

The video, Kony 2012, turned into a global phenomenon last week [3rd -10th March 2012] reaching an estimated 70 million hits on YouTube. Subscriptions to support actions against Kony also mushroomed, and political awareness and actions may also have been triggered.

Going viral: a personal definition

The multiplicative effects of a trending message on social media are well illustrated. Twitter endorsement by celebrities such as Oprah Winfrey helped the process of explosive growth of an on-line message, which is my personal definition of going viral.

The New York Times critique

The New York Times offered an insightful critique which serves as an excellent examination of the story and its implications for global issues and leadership. The article is among things against reducing a complex argument to an over-simplistic message. Ironically, it is in the reduction of complexity to simplicity that seems an essential feature of the processes through which a story goes viral:

The grounds for objection to the video are many. Some critics begin and end with its deep misrepresentation of the current state of play, including the fact that Mr. Kony has largely been defeated and is in hiding. Others object to the reduction of a complex situation to the story of a single “bad guy” whose capture [implies that it ] would magically restore harmony to a conflict-scarred region. For some, the backlash becomes an opportunity to promote longstanding arguments. Evgeny Morozov, the author of “The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom,” objects that the video is another example of a kind of low-impact concern he calls slacktivism. It can all evoke George Bernard Shaw’s insight that “all professions are conspiracies against the laity.” Yes, “Kony 2012” may be crude, simplistic and shallow, but can it really be counterproductive if it prompts young people to ask why a well-known warlord with 30 years of atrocities to his name has not been caught and prosecuted?

Other examples

The article selects as parallel examples the online protests against conditions at the factories in China that produce Apple products, and the Occupy Wall Street movement. It then suggests that the viral phenomenon will have unintended consequences.

Ethan Zuckerman, an expert on social networking and Africa, came down against the “Kony 2012” video [drawing on] research done by Séverine Autesserre, a political scientist. Mr. Zuckerman wrote that “the focus on rape as a weapon of war, Autesserre argues, has caused some armed groups to engage in mass rape as a technique to gain attention and a seat at the negotiating table.”

Already, some have credited efforts by Invisible Children before the video with spurring the United States government to send 100 advisers to help capture Mr. Kony. We are entering an age when the shallow political power of the public including those too young to vote will increasingly help shape our policy debates.
Navid Hassanpour, a researcher the Yale political science [commented] that by creating advocates for one side in an internal struggle in a foreign land, it could lead to more intervention by the United States and other Western powers. And that might be the biggest backlash of them all.

New wine, old bottles

Systems theorists will recognise the ‘backlash against a lash’ as one more example of how systems react against intrusive shocks. Actions still promote counteractions, although there is always the possibility of complete systems disruption (going into meltdown remains a 21st century possibility of the 20th century nightmare metaphor based on a nuclear reactor going critical). But systems thinkers also tell us that lash and backlash tend to be manifestations of turbulence rather than simple causal chains that can be judged good or bad. Which is the simple (and complex) message that I am getting from the New York Times article.

Acknowledgement

Image is from the merely logic blog

Wolves faced a leadership dilemma over Mick McCarthy: what might the board have done differently?

Terry Connor

One of the most difficult dilemmas facing a sporting business occurs if the board decides that a leadership change is necessary. Wolves FC serves as a case study.

The pressures on the board at Wolves FC mounted as the team struggled to escape relegation [Jan 2012]. Mick McCarthy as head coach bore the brunt of the anger from frustrated fans. The board decides to fire McCarthy. After some delay the chairman announces the appointment of Terry Connor, McCarthy’s assistant

The dilemma: terms of engagement

The difficulties facing the board must have been relatively easy to simplify into finding a decisive course of action to kick-start a reversal of fortunes. Firing McCarthy and bringing in a new chief coach would offer the prospects of radical change. On the other hand, firing McCarthy would leave the club with the possibility that any high-calibre manager would be in a strong position to negotiate advantageous terms.

Intended and unintended consequences

The intended consequences of firing McCarthy would be renewed support from the fans and players alike. The unintended consequences included the possibility that no deal could be brokered. Also, as McCarthy argued, he had several exceptional seasons at Wolves working with limited resources. His dismissal would have sent warning signals to prospective managers

The fall-back position

Under such circumstances, a board needs some holding position. Wolves first indicated their intention of finding an experienced replacement for McCarthy. It seems several such candidates were approached. Eventually the club announced an interim appointment. McCarthy’s deputy Terry Connor would be promoted with the possibility of a full-time contract, according to results.

Just like the appointment of Stuart Pearce by the FA?

There appear to be some similarities to the position facing the English FA recently [2012] as the contract with current manager Fabio Capello approaches its termination date. There has been media clamour for appointment of Tottenham’s Harry Redknapp. The FA decided to go for a holding position, appointing Steward Pearce as an interim manager.

When the two cases are compared, it is seem that the FA could (for once) be seen as avoiding a tricky premature decision. Redknapp has shown interest in taking a part-time appointment. And there is some evidence of longer-term planning. Pearce as youth team coach has been seen as being groomed as a possible future England manager. On the other hand, Connor’s interim appointment could have been made immediately as the unfortunate McCarthy was being relieved of his duties. It appeared to follow failed attempts by the board to attract an experienced manager to the club.

Leadership issues

The case raises interesting issues. There is the tricky question of promoting someone who was himself appointed by the manager that had just been fired. There is the issue of the ways in which a change can appear to have been mishandled. This is where students of leadership may find it useful to think themselves in the minds of the board and assess the likely dilemmas they faced.
An additional issue: The appointment of a black manager to Premier League football is surely worthy of comment. The press broadly avoided comment on the story. Which maybe itself is worth a little reflection..

Apple’s new leader faces ethical dilemmas at Foxconn

As Tim Cook picks up the leadership of Apple from Steve Jobs, he faces a significant ethical dilemma in Wuhan in a supplier’s company where workers threaten suicide in protest over their working conditions

[THIS DEVELOPING STORY IS BEING UPDATED REGULARLY. ADDITIONS ARE AT THE END OF THE ORIGINAL POST BY PAUL HINKS]

by Paul Hinks

Articles recently reported that Tim Cook (Apple’s new CEO) earned $378m in 2011 He inherited a global technology juggernaut, renowned for its creativity and innovation; a business with $90 billion in cash reserves (The Guardian). Yet there are serious problems at one of its key suppliers, Foxconn, where a recent mass suicide threat posed an ethical dilemma facing Apple and its new leader.

The Telegraph reported [11th Jan 2012]:

Around 150 Chinese workers at Foxconn, the world’s largest electronics manufacturer, threatened to commit suicide by leaping from their factory roof in protest at their working conditions. The workers were eventually coaxed down after two days on top of their three-floor plant in Wuhan by Foxconn managers and local Chinese Communist party officials.

Not all measures should be financial

A lot of organisations highlight in their annual reports the progress they’ve made against various Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) metrics. Very commendable, but it’s important to dig deeper beyond the glossy brochures and corporate fanfare. Increasingly social-economic factors come in to play, creating a conflict of priorities opposite financial metrics.

Apple is indeed well placed to influence the working conditions at Foxconn. Despite assurances from Apple on its website that it is committed to the highest standards of social responsibility across its worldwide supply chain, the evidence presented highlights that Foxconn employees are seriously aggrieved with their working conditions. In an online article published on Thursday 26 Jan 2012 Reuters noted Apple’s apparent silence on the Foxconn situation – referencing on-going investigations carried out by the New York Times, the Reuters article is an example of growing interest and awareness of the problems at Foxconn.

Difficult working conditions

The Foxconn situation has not developed overnight. The Guardian reported recently [16th Jan 2012] the problems had been developing since at least 2010:

In 2010, a total of 18 of their colleagues in the Shenzhen campus of the Taiwan-owned company did attempt suicide; 14 died. Some employees and labour organisations blamed a combination of factors for the workers’ deaths: low wages, long working hours – sometimes up to 16 hours a day – and inhuman treatment. A number of Apple products have been cited as ‘game changers’ – products that have helped to change how we use technology to live our lives – in stark contrast, it seems that the workforce at Foxconn that help to create these Apples products survive, and sadly tolerate a rather mundane existence. Loyal Apple consumers crave for their Apple products. However, it appears there is a darker, more un-savoury side to how Apple products make it to our shelves.

Leaders can’t ignore ethics

On Tuesday [Jan 24th 2012], Apple announced its financial results for its first fiscal quarter: the figures were impressive and beat analysts’ expectations. Bloomberg (& others) immediately focused on the financial merits of Apple’s results – increasing revenue forecasts & speculating on dividend payments – a few websites noted the share price increments of various Apple suppliers, including Foxconn.

This is all very good news if you’re an Apple shareholder – however will the fortunes of Apple mean anything to the workers in Wuhan?

I borrow a comment from Dilemmas of Leadership [1st edition, p196]: “For some leaders, matters of ethics arise as unwelcome intrusion in the pursuit of economic success”.

Apple’s financial strength isn’t in doubt; however Apple’s position on ethical topics such as the welfare of workers at its suppliers is clearly attracting increased interest. Continued negative media coverage of working conditions at its suppliers may begin to influence and alter customer perceptions of the Apple brand; perhaps ultimately impacting Apple’s cherished economic success?

The need for more than ethical tokenism

The Telegraph highlighted [27 Jan 2012] that Apple have been working on number of initiatives:

In response to outside pressure, Apple this year published a list of its 156 suppliers, representing almost all its supply chain, for the first time. It also joined the Fair Labor Association, becoming the first technology company to do so. Apple has also worked with Chinese labour rights advocates, environmental groups, and has agreed to allow outside monitors into its suppliers’ factories.

Hopefully, Mr Cook and Apple will ensure their corrective actions are interpreted as more than just ethical tokenism; the challenges presented at Foxconn provide an opportunity for Apple to lead by example beyond the technology forum where it enjoys such enviable success.

Background

Paul sent us updating information [Feb 14th 2012] aboutsYou can find more out about Paul in his earlier post on Antonio Horta-Osorio.

Update [LWD editors]

More than 10 people were injured in a fight that broke out among workers at a Foxconn plant in north China’s Shanxi Province, police said Monda [September 2012]

Foxconn, the world’s largest maker of computer components, faced criticism on harsh working conditions two years ago after a string of suicides committed by several Chinese factory employees. The company currently has about 1 million employees on the Chinese mainland.

The relationship between Foxconn and Apple flourishes. China Daily announced [May 2012]

Foxconn Technology Group will invest $210 million to build an Apple production line in October in east China’s Jiangsu province, local authorities announced Monday to be located in Huai’an city. Foxconn Technology Group, a top maker of products for Apple, announced [April 2012] that it will build a high-tech manufacturing base in Hainan, China’s southernmost island.

The working conditions at FoxConn have been said to have improved:

Working conditions have improved at plants owned by Foxconn, a Taiwan-based electronics giant and Apple Inc’s biggest supplier, according to a report released on Tuesday. The Fair Labor Association, a United States-based nonprofit organization, said that Foxconn, a Taiwan-based electronics giant and Apple Inc’s biggest supplier, has completed the actions it agreed to take to improve working conditions at its two plants in Shenzhen and one plant in Chengdu, which make Apple’s popular iPhone and iPad products.

Sunday 7th October 2012

There is growing interest internationally in the Foxconn situation. China Daily commented as follows:

A major supplier for tech giant Apple on Saturday denied reports that thousands of workers making components for the iPhone 5 went on strike at the company’s plant in Zhengzhou, Henan province.

The strike was said to have started at 1 pm Friday [5th October 2012] and continued to 11 pm, involving workers mainly from assembly lines and quality-control inspectors.

“Foxconn raised overly-strict demands on product quality without providing worker training for the corresponding skills. This led to workers turning out products that did not meet standards, and ultimately put a tremendous amount of pressure on workers,” China Labor Watch said in a statement.

October 12th 2012

A new story is developing which suggests harsh treatment of an employee after a near-fatal accident.

October 18th 2012 Latest allegation in Western media is of Foxconn using underage students to work in one of their factories.

November 26th 2012

Foxconn has begun its scheme to replace workers with robots which have been called Foxbotts. Scheme was announced in 2011

March 8th 2013

Major report claims Foxconn factories are ‘Labour camps’

April 2nd 2013

Foxconn profits jump aided by manufacture of Apple components. However, The adverse publicity continues with a denied report about a further suicide attempt as a Foxconn factory.

May 21st 2013

Apple leaders including Tim Cook defend the Corporation’s tax arrangements to a Senate Sub-Committee.

Much More than Marmite: The Unilever Strike

One popular newspaper has been running stories about ‘Marmite workers’ going on strike. For Unilever’s employees it’s much more than that

To associate Unilever only with one of the manufacturer’s more quirky products is an oversimplification. Unilever is a modern global organization founded by the entrepreneur and social welfare pioneer William Hesketh Lever.

The strike last month and continued today [January 18th 2011] is over the 21st (as well as the 19th century) issue of pension rights. It is believed to be the first in the company’s century of operations.

The Guardian describes the background to the strikes:

Before Christmas, Unilever, which produces goods such as Dove soap, Wall’s ice-cream, PG Tips and Marmite, was hit by the first ever national strike involving its UK operations after revealing plans for a pensions shake-up.
The firm, which employs around 7,000 workers, is looking to move 5,000 staff to a less generous career average scheme by the middle of next year. The remainder are already signed up to the new scheme, which was closed to newcomers in 2008.
On Saturday, leaders of the Unite, Usdaw and GMB unions said they would call for a series of strikes from 17 January, claiming new pension arrangements could cut retirement income for staff by 40%.

A personal view

Unilever recruited me as a technical manager in its Port Sunlight laboratories on Merseyside at the start of my professional career in the late 1960s. Even in proximity to the militant culture of the shipyards of Birkenhead and with Liverpool across the Mersey, Port Sunlight retained its paternalistic but cosy ethos. The laboratory and manufacturing sites were in walking distance from Port Sunlight’s model village built for the workers, with its Art Gallery, Bowls green and (open-air) swimming pool.

Later, as a management researcher, I retained memories leaving me with a largely positive view of big company culture and sensible employee relationships with ‘management’. Today, Unilever employees are facing up to changes to a century of tradition.

[Image is not of your editor protesting for pension rights]