A new era of morality in business; pharmaceutical industry giants joining forces with prominent charities

The pharmaceutical industry has been weathering public controversies for decades, not only in dealing with damage control on countless patents that are either proven to be ineffective or dangerous, but also with the crushing cost of their drugs in developing countries. This last point has been painfully obvious with anti-malarial agents and HIV treatment; both are usually priced far beyond the means of those that most desperately need them.

Now things are beginning to look better. The BBC recently reported that Britain’s drug giant, GlaxoSmithKline, is radically changing tack and joining the much-needed philanthropic drive to save the lives of millions in Africa by joining forces with prominent charities like Save the Children. This is great news, and it’s about time. Both organizations have been at loggerheads for quite awhile; Save the Children’s chief executive, Justin Forsyth, even admitted “that he used to picket GlaxoSmithKline over that controversy (of high HIV drug prices)… Now, though, he thinks this particular drug giant has reformed itself under the leadership of Sir Andrew Witty.” It would be heartless to assume that this was just a PR stunt on the part of GSK (although they have incurred a spate of very public and embarrassing lawsuits lately), but it really doesn’t matter why their attitude has changed. It’s probably more to do with modernity – the reality is that companies of every stripe need to be cognizant of ethics regarding their profits; we are in a different age of consciousness and conscientiousness, and it’s time for more transparency in every facet of business practices – the public demands it.

It’s not that surprising that we may be witnessing a new era of morality in business – stretching far beyond the spectrum of the financial sector, oil companies and now the pharmaceutical industry. Without a clear, desirable connection to customers, any brand or business is now in jeopardy; profit motive is not enough for this generation of consumers or businesses.

Facebook is being watched very closely…

Someone always has to come in second place. In competive markets, the number 2 can be highly indicative. Is the contender threatening to overtake the incumbent? Or does the leading brand seem to possess an unassailable advantage? The swirl of speculation surrounding Facebook, the most popular social media site, is unprecedented. No one expects Facebook to be made instantly redundant like MySpace. But after the IPO fiasco, rebound, and new product release, Facebook is being watched very closely. Looking at the Facebook milestone infographic can inspire palpitations.

There are mixed reports of mass user exodus, while other data suggests that 82% of Facebook accounts are owned by active users. This number represents an impressively committed following. The numbers drop by around 20% for Twitter and Google Plus, the newer claimants for the social media game of thrones. Are they stalkers trying to poach users from Facebook, or do they offer new expressive possibilities? The answer lies somewhere in between.

This is good news for Facebook; it still has its edge. This is also good news for Twitter; its active user growth rate rose by 44%. This is good news for Google Plus too; it can legitimately say that it doesn’t aspire to make Facebook go the way of the dinosaurs. Google Plus is what is known as a “third way.” Third ways are positive market players. We don’t need costly antitrust lawsuits to tell us that monopolies aren’t healthy. At the same time, warfare between two rival brands can lead to a scorched earth policy, with nobody winning. On the other extreme, the third way is the balance between consumers having options and not being overwhelmed by a dizzying number of choices. The decision-maker in a win-win situation is good for business and the creativity that social media platforms promote.

City of Chicago – most fascinating will be how the collaboration between CIO and citizen data crunchers evolves

Talk about a cool job – managing your city’s data! It would be even better if the city was a metropolitan hub like Chicago. The Economist recently sneaked a peek at how its chief information officer stays busy. The really interesting aspect of the job is what happens when it’s done. The CIO can dump huge caches of open data. Then the eager computing public can aggregate and sort the information in whatever way they want. The creativity is only limited by the citizenry. This is part of the rise of Big Data that perhaps not many pundits forecasted. They were too preoccupied with dark visions of a mass surveillance society. But here we have the rise of the analytics honcho, a well-paying and hip-sounding job.

Chicago is apparently sharing restaurant inspector grades so as to merge them into restaurant directories. This is a valuable service, no doubt. The future is going to be exponentially more ambitious. Most fascinating will be how the collaboration between CIO and citizen data crunchers evolves. Right now, the data is superabundant. There’s so much of it, in fact, that the city needs this sort of grassroots help. Down the road, however, technology will find a way to tame the data. At that point the relationship between governor and governed might change. It might change because of the data. Even more far reaching, data sharing might change the very nature of governance.

So, this is where futurists should be looking. They ought to watch closely when new services are set up to make snowplows run more on schedule. It may seem insignificant on the face of it, but improving decision-making using a mix of big data, crowd computing, and open source savvy will transform many an urban landscape in the years to come. 

Daktari  Diagnostics – small business owners might just be the answer to the stagnant economies of Europe, and better still, might help humanity as a whole

The BBC’s online site has been running a very optimistic and revelatory series entitled ‘Running a Business.’ Besides being an in-depth look at innovative new ideas, it is also a showcase for underdogs persevering in this current economic malaise. Never fear, small business owners might just be the answer to the stagnant economies of Europe, and better still, might help humanity as a whole. Case in point was a recent article about the new trend in startups that not only have profits in their sights, but also helping those in need.

Unsurprisingly, much of the current activity is happening in the rapidly changing countries of Africa. Whether new, affordable medical diagnostic tools are coming to the rescue, or investments in mobile phone technology, Africa is fertile ground for fresh ideas. Not content to just make money, people like Dr. Bill Rodriguez and his company Daktari Diagnostics in Boston have started businesses with the aim of helping others: “Dr Rodriguez, with the help of other academics, developed a prototype that can count the number of a certain immune cell in a patient’s blood – a good indication of their HIV state. The device, which can be used with very little training, provides results in about 10 minutes and costs $5-$10 (£3.20-£6.50) a test.” This is just one example of something that can potentially revolutionize the lives of millions.

Other entrepreneurs in the piece were involved in developing something as rudimentary as miner lights for emergencies, and providing them to customers in the West with the option to buy a second light for charity. Something similar has also been reported in the trendy world of boutique cafes in Europe – with customers being encouraged to buy a second cup for the homeless. The overall sentiment in the article was that finding investors for, and turning a profit in the developing world isn’t harder than in the capitalist West – it just takes a better business model, perseverance in getting backers, and more patience. This seems to be an encouraging trend and one that’s definitely good news.

“Apple went ahead and apologized. It was a real apology, not a non-apology apology that we’re so used to with qualifiers smothering all sense of sincerity”

To be an Apple shareholder these days is to live in interesting times. For the Chinese, such times are to be avoided or at least so goes the ancient proverb. Apple has recently relied on two very interesting strategies to persevere through the Steve Jobs post-partition. The first exists in endless supply, but is rather underused. The second is more finite and Apple has done an impressive job in stockpiling it. Had enough with the Zen riddles?

Tim Cook, Apple’s new CEO, has been on an apology tour of late. The maps fiasco now has the status of an internet meme. More interesting is Apple’s apology to Chinese consumers over iPhone warranty problems. The issue wasn’t exactly manufactured, but the media pressure on Apple was certainly given a not too gentle state-sponsored push. 

So Apple went ahead and apologized. It was a real apology, not a non-apology apology that we’re so used to with qualifiers smothering all sense of sincerity. Research has shown that aggrieved parties actually feel better when they resist apologizing. It must be something about standing on principle even at the expense of falling on your sword.

But for Apple, the results have been positive, especially considering China is a market that Apple knows is as lucrative as it is increasingly competitive. So Apple placated a customer problem. Next it pivoted to deal with a shareholder problem. With no new product announcements forthcoming on the scale of or in the imaginative scope that could be called Jobsian, Apple instead decided to wow the crowd with its cash. 

The increased dividends and share buyback plan promises to be one of the more ambitious in corporate history. The figure quoted by the Economist is $100 billion by the end of 2015! This only happens to work if you’re sitting on top of a $145 billion pile of cash and liquid assets to begin with. 

Hugh Laurie is starring in the movie adaptation of Llyod Jones’ 2006 novel, Mr. Pip

I just saw the trailer for the movie adaptation of Llyod Jones’ 2006 novel, Mr. Pip. The film starring Hugh Laurie of House fame will be released in October. Yes, trailers are supposed to whet the moviegoer’s appetite. You never know what the final product will look like. But I was very moved by what I saw. First, there’s the premise: The story of a young girl in the autonomous region of Bougainville, Papua New Guinea who encounters violence and literature all at once. Violence comes in the form of civil war and harrowing loss. Literature and hope for the future come together in her teacher, the lone Westerner on the island, Mr. Watts, who introduces her to Charles Dickens’ Great Expectations. The girl ends up deeply identifying with the orphan Pip, one of Dickens’ finest creations. 

The story stands on its own fine merits. The novel was shortlisted for the Man Booker Prize. Still, it’s good news when a novel like this wins screen time and investment. The scenery is exotic; the island paradise is the farthest thing from Princeton Plainsboro Hospital. The cast is mostly indigenous to Papua New Guinea and the film is directed by New Zealand native Andrew Adamson.  

This is a smart move by Hugh Laurie. His titular character on House is so iconic that it could easily overwhelm the talented actor. Mr. Pip still has Laurie looking like the disheveled House, but his refined English accent is back. The social pariah is also there, but not the edgy doctor alienated by his own pain and genius.

Movies like Mr. Pip make so much sense from just about every perspective. They tell an ultimately uplifting story based on outstanding source material, use authentic locations and the actors they provide, draw on a talented regional film industry, and reboot the career of one of the greatest actors alive today. Now I just have to go see the actual movie. 

Watch the trailer on http://youtube.com/watch?v=6zGhQJMm4A4

“The emphasis is on partnership, on building resilience in communities, and on business models.”

The recent Madonna debacle in Malawi – centered around a statement sent from the State House erroneously labeling the singer as a pompous attention-seeker for her charity work (who would have thought?) – has led to a much larger investigative look at the role philanthropy now plays in Africa. I recently read a lengthy piece on the BBC’s site by Africa correspondent, Andrew Harding, illuminating a new sensitivity hitherto disregarded and raising the issue of the changing role and challenges Africa faces globally, “That old image of a white person holding a starving black child is just embarrassing these days,” said one official, speaking off the record. “The emphasis is on partnership, on building resilience in communities, and on business models.”

Although the fact remains that much of the continent is still impoverished and struggling with privations that the West can’t understand – clean water, power and agricultural sustainability are still difficult targets for many countries –nonetheless, there is definitely a palpable sea change occurring: many self-reliant industries and new approaches to global problems (like energy) are emerging from all over Africa – this isn’t the 1970s, after all. Other interesting avenues like the emerging mobile phone app ‘revolution’ have taken root in many places, often superseding the West’s still lumpy approach to banking and communication on-the-go. But, if the Madonna fracas highlights another issue, it’s that many nations are moving beyond governmental involvement altogether. Philanthropy, in general, certainly tends to move without the cumbersome involvement of politics.

This current mess may really be more of an example of the entanglement of government (and their ineptitude, in this case), with good charity work, and an important lesson in better diplomacy. Unfortunately when money is involved, as it is with everything, things can get messy. Let’s hope that Madonna et al can get over this current spat and realize why they are there in the first place: a caring response to need, and the respect afforded to those who are both giving and receiving.

SoMa-like zones of creativity, idealism, and entrepreneurial tech savvy are the envy of the world

Kevin Kelly is one of Wired Magazine’s great scribes. Recently, he went on a photo journalistic walkabout in San Francisco’s booming SoMa (South of Market) start up quarter. The neighborhood is a honeycomb of now trendy warehouses and lofts, the perfect work and design space for young paradigm shifters.

Kelly visited 30 new area tech companies in a two block radius. The plan was to gauge the spirit of the age blowing through the cubicles. It turns out that there aren’t many actual cubicles. The typical office set up is open and uncluttered with practically no trace of paper. Apple products outnumber non-Apple products by an obscene ratio.

Many of these innovators spoke to Kelly in a shared language. The most critical buzz words sounded a common refrain: sharing, connectedness, and engagement. The question “Do you think technology is making the world a better place?” was met with near universal agreement. Where else in the world is the sincerity and good-hearted intentions to spread the gospel of the internet to the underprivileged across the globe so palpable?

Anyone bemoaning the end of American economic innovation should look again. SoMa-like zones of creativity, idealism, and entrepreneurial tech savvy are the envy of the world. They represent a working balance between profit margins and world saving. The denizens of SoMa are very aware that they are living in an exceptional time. Kelly asked them to give this moment a name. The answers ranged from inspiring (“The Age of Mass Connectivity”) to predictable (“The Decade of Apps”). But Kelly’s favorite is the best at summing up what makes these people so special – The Period of Awesomeness.

Reasons my son is crying on Glen Pembroke’s Tumblr blog

It’s natural to understand life as a series of stages. We’ve been doing this since ancient times, and we have the riddles to show for it. The internet can put an interesting twist on the life cycle. I came to this thought after seeing Glen Pembroke’s new Tumblr. The concept is simple and cute: Pictures of crying son and reasons behind the meltdowns in the captions. It’s all rather witty and sobering if you have a toddler who does the same thing. Many parents it would seem do, since the site has gone viral. You know something is popular when Conan O’Brien parodies it!

There is some chatter that fears little Pembroke will be emotionally scarred from his fifteen minutes of online fame. I think that’s a bit of an overreaction (although not as much as the kid flipping out when he’s given the wrong sippy cup). More likely, he will grow up to appreciate the fact that his dad has a great sense of humor.

Then there’s the life stage on the other extreme. Death is now part of Google, and that’s a good thing. The what-happens-when-I-die question is tough to answer. But the where-do-all-my-data-and-passwords-go is now no longer a source of anxiety (or mystery). Google’s “Inactive Account Manager” (vague, but suggestive) gives users the freedom to adjust their settings for the eventuality of longterm or permanent non-use. In case it’s not clear, that would be because you’re dead. But I would rather have the power to plan for the who and how of accessing my data when I’m gone then leave it up to the vagaries of the internet. 

Leonard Lauder: “You can’t put together a good collection unless you are focused, disciplined, tenacious and willing to pay more than you can possibly afford.”

Who knew that Leonard Lauder’s donation of $131 million to the Whitney Museum of American Art was just a warm up act? The main event: Giving his prized private collection of Cubist art to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York. The gift is estimated to be worth $1 billion. Lauder is the son of Estee Lauder and the former CEO of the famous cosmetics brand.

In a single gesture of giving, Lauder has transformed one of New York’s great cultural institutions. No one is more aware of this than Thomas Campbell, the Met’s director. The Met is one of the world’s great museums. Although it has many treasures, it lacks a world class gallery of early twentieth century art. That is, until April when Lauder announced his donation.

Lauder, 81, is the classic tycoon-philanthropist. We seem to be witnessing a revival of the species. Just think about Bill Gates. He might even be more respected at this charitable stage of his career than rival visionary, Steve Jobs. Gates’ raft of good works on a global scale is helping the neediest. Gates has given $28 billion of his not too shabby $66 billion fortune.

Lauder is making his contribution in the art world. And his gift represents a lifetime of art-buying acumen. Lauder started his collecting at the age of six with that most unlikely of art objects, the postcard. Not surprisingly, he went on to amass a world renowned collection, the best of which the Boston Museum of Fine Arts exhibited in 2012.

Lauder’s advice for building a first rate collection sounds an awful lot like running a successful business: “You can’t put together a good collection unless you are focused, disciplined, tenacious and willing to pay more than you can possibly afford.”