MaxBlog

by Mary Mershein
Founders Chris DeWolfe and Tom Anderson launched MySpace in January 2004. Six months later Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp./Fox bought MySpace for $580 million. By 2007 Myspace had 300 million users and was valued at $12 billion
.
During the spectacular growth Myspace users came to include businesses selling products, most notably bands selling music. As Myspace commercialized, the original users stopped coming. In June 2011 Murdoch sold Myspace for a paltry $35 million.

Today we see Facebook undergoing a similar trajectory. In February 2004 it was a place for students to make friends online. Eventually new members were anyone or anything. Facebook commercialized when companies joined as “friends” transforming Facebook into a marketing and customer relations tool. Now your boss is on Facebook reading your personal conversations.

As with Myspace, commercialization caused the original users of Facebook to leave. By June 2011 Facebook lost 7 million users in the US and Canada and growth slowed. It continues to slow in other countries. Facebook Founder, Mark Zuckerberg, announced a sale of Facebook on February 1, 2012 through an IPO. The IPO values Facebook at $75 billion.

But only time will tell if Facebook joins Myspace as a ghost town in cyberspace.

In contrast, January 27, 2012 marked the 132th anniversary of the patent for the electric light bulb. General Electric, the company that Thomas Edison founded in 1892 with his light bulb invention, has grown to over $750 billion. That is the equivalent of growing by $75 billion every 10 years for 100 years. Or, maintaining roughly the same growth as Facebook for 100 years.

After 132 years in business General Electric still sells light bulbs. After only 8 years, Facebook is no longer a website dedicated to students.

In January 21, 2011, President Obama invited the CEO of General Electric, Jeffrey Immelt, to become his economic adviser on fixing America's economy. Mark Zuckerberg was not invited.

Leadership is not about only starting, building, selling a successful business. Superior leadership is about a vision to create an enduring business.
What kind of vision do the leaders of your company have? The kind that means it will be around in 100 years?
©2012

Mary Mershein is a Chartered Accountant with a master’s degree in management who believes common sense is our greatest financial analysis. Additional common sense can be found at www.moosemoney.wordpress.com.

Companies don’t need a great leader! from Mary Mershein

Great leaders maximize their own personal goals.

There is nothing wrong with this. However, if the goals of these leaders are not in line with the goals of their company, these great leaders become bad for their company. 
Consider the British newspaper “News of the World” established in 1843. It was the biggest selling English newspaper in the world with a circulation of over 8 million at its peak compared to the Wall Street Journal which had a peak circulation of just over 2 million. 

 In 2007 the editor of News of the World, Clive Goodman, admitted to publishing articles obtained by phone hacking and went to jail. In 2011 the newspaper paid fines to the victims and shut down. The parent company News Corp. made 20% return on investment in 2011. The executives, including CEO Rupert Murdoch, profited while the newspaper was destroyed.

So how does an organization ensure management and the company both want the same thing?

The answer is communication. Rupert Murdoch and the other executives at News Corp. testified before a parliamentary select committee in November 2011 that they were unaware of any wrongdoings.

The higher up a manager is in the organization, the less connection there is with staff. Once you reach the Executive and Board level decision makers receive almost all of their information funneled through a few individuals. Sometimes they employ analyses which cannot show the entire picture of what is truly going on. This is how situations are created where those in charge benefit from the demise of the company.

However, when people talk to people, face-to-face, on a regular basis it is much harder to disguise the truth. There are no numbers to manipulate. There are no one-sided stories. Any deviations between what the company wants and what the individual wants become evident and can be corrected before harm is done.

Companies don’t need a great leader. Great leaders are individuals working towards their own goals.

Companies need fraternities. These fraternities are groups of leaders all working together for a common cause.

And the next time you attend a leadership training course, don’t go alone! Take the Board of Directors and the CEO with you.

©2012

Mary Mershein is a Chartered Accountant with a master’s degree in management who believes common sense is our greatest financial analysis. Additional common sense can be found at www.moosemoney.wordpress.com.

 

Is this the end of the Internet?  By Mary Mershein

Companies are in business to make money.

Nowhere in financial records is there a place for ethics, morality, law abiding or decency.  Income statements recognize only financial gains and losses.  As a result, corporations are encouraged to maximize profits with actions that may not always be in the best interests of the public. 

This may include dumping pollution in the environment (Feb 2011 Chevron fined $8 billion for damage to the Amazon), hiring labor at slave wages in poor countries (July 2011 Nike employees in Taiwan earn 50 cents an hour) or treating staff so ruthlessly they want to commit suicide. (Jan 2012 Foxconn employees in China) 

Leaders of such companies include the richest people on earth who are frequently admired and respected despite these seemingly immoral transgressions.  In their situation, the end justifies the means.  So why do leadership courses continue to preach ethical behavior?  Why would companies, bent on profit, want ethical leaders? 

The answer is sustainability.  History proves over and over that a single minded pursuit of profit eventually leads to downfall. 

Google’s “Don’t be Evil” philosophy was created in 2004. It was challenged when it went up against China’s censorship policies.  When Google threatened to leave China in 2009 rather than comply with China’s censorship demands, Google’s share price fell by 8%.  

Google backed down and complied with China’s demands.  Later in 2009 Google dropped its “Don’t be Evil” motto.    

In 2011 Google faced censorship demands by India but this time there were no threats by Google to leave the country and no drop in share price.  Now, in January 2012 South Korea is considering adding its own censorship demands.   What country is next?  In the pursuit of profit how far will Google go?  When does this result in a censored internet? 

Will a censored internet even be viable?

Ironically the end of an open internet would mean the end of Google.  

We still need ethics and leadership courses to prevent decisions that result in short-term profits at the expense of the long-term viability of the company. 

What kind of decisions does your company make?

 

What kind of decisions do you make?

 

©2012  

 

Mary Mershein is a Chartered Accountant with a master’s degree in management who believes common sense is our greatest financial analysis.  Additional common sense can be found at www.moosemoney.wordpress.com.

 

Why do companies fail?

Historically the typical company was a manufacturer whose greatest asset was the equipment that produced the products that made the sales.  Today we are in a different age, an information age, where our products are innovations produced by our people. 

Today’s equipment, such as phones and computers, has very little to do with company value.  Instead, they are simply tools for our team to use to generate the real value of ideas.  But while equipment is recorded in the accounting books as an asset, people are expensed as wages overhead, a burden to the company profits.  Was Steven Jobs a burden to Apple profits?  The accounting books say he was. 

When equipment is upgraded and enhanced with new features, the costs are treated as a betterment, an asset on the balance sheet.  When people are trained so that their capabilities are enhanced, the costs are expensed, a detriment on the income statement.  Clearly the system of accounting has not kept up with the times. 

Companies that are “profit driven” and “bottom line focused” don’t spend money on developing staff because the accounting system punishes profits when they do.  Machines are reviewed to ensure they are running properly and have routine maintenance and upgrades to keep them in top working condition.  How many companies do the same with their staff? 

And yet companies depend on their staff to make sound decisions to direct the company towards a viable future.  

In 1975 Kodak invented the first true digital camera.  But its competitors embraced the technology innovation and by 2010 sales of digital cameras were $7.2 billion in the US alone.  As of January 2012, Kodak is near bankruptcy - stuck in the film processing age.   

Will your company be next? 

 

Our special thanks to Mary Mershein CA for this insightful thought. It takes an accountant to point out the truth - the value is in the people!

 

It has started.

 

It’s everywhere.

 

It has people running, with their hands over their ears, eyes tightly shut.

 

You recognize the din – it’s not banging pots at midnight or ubiquitous fireworks that create such a response in us - it’s the plethora of advice, challenges and motivational articles designed to help us make the most of the next 12 months!

 

I am tooting on my own little noise maker as the calendar page turns to January… adding to the cacophony of blogs, coaches, articles, teachers, sermons… and yes even parental lectures.

 

I will be brief – a short attitude adjustment – because what we believe is true, and what we think everyday as a result of our “truths” has everything to do with how we perform in 2012. No matter what we say, it is what we actually do that reveals our innermost convictions.

 

So what are you thinking?

 

On a scale of one to 10 rate these simple attitude statements                           (10 is “essential” 1 is “nonsense”)

• I assume the best about others, their intentions, their efforts…
• I act in a generous manner to others….
• I am grateful every day…
• I accept I am a gifted person with something to share with the world…
• I know my purpose is more than eat, sleep, work, eat, sleep, work…die.

That’s it for today - just 5 attitudes

.

There is enough noise out there about change/improve/perform. I am not inviting you to change. I don’t have to - change is already happening, constantly, inevitably.

 

I am inviting you to control the direction of the changes happening within you this year. As a result, for you, 2012 won’t be about simple change.

 

It will be about transformation.

 

So what was your score – remember transforming action comes from these transforming beliefs – the attitudes build on each other - in reverse order to the list above:

 

·         Faith – My purpose is beyond the physical – there is something more.

·         Acceptance - I believe in myself and my mission to touch the world

·         Gratitude – I humbly appreciate all the blessings in my life

·         Generosity – I have been given so much, so freely, I am free to give

·         Freedom – I accept others without fear. And without fear:

 

                                            … I can love.

 

And that is the most powerful attitude of real leaders everywhere.

 

Happy New Year!

 

In the now famous Steve Jobs commencement address, he offered advice that you have surely heard before: 

“You've got to find what you love…. Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work.

And the only way to do great work… is to love what you do.”

All worthy leaders, all great managers, all exceptional employees are doing it for the love. Love drives us. We are energized when we know what we are about and we can focus on what we love – it’s our mission, our purpose, our “gift” to the world. When the going gets tough, it’s the love of our craft, that exercising of our gift, our vision perhaps, that keeps us engaged.

This is why cyberspace superblogger Seth Godin writes continually about art – it’s his shorthand, his code word for “doing what you love,” what you would do even if you weren’t getting paid.

While he was alive, Dutch “post-impressionist” Vincent Van Gough painted over two thousand paintings, including 37 self-portraits from 1886 to 1889 alone.

He could not help it – he had to paint - and yet he did not sell one painting while he was alive. He did not stop; he could not stop as long as he was living.

This is a key to finding out what you love to do – not simply shrug and say “sure I like my work, I like most anything… I’m just a versatile person,” or “I make the best of the situation”

No… the question really is “what can you not stop doing if you are going to be truly you?”

If the “REAL YOU” was going to burst out of your skin like the green hulk, what would the “REAL YOU” be doing – even if you were never going to sell one part of it, never going to make a living from it?

Scott Belsky, author of “Making Ideas Happen” quotes artist Jonathon Harris on one more aspect of acting on our passion.

“Love is the only thing that’s going to pull you through and get you to finish… but here is also a paradoxical and interesting fact: The thing you actually end up making is going to be such a failure compared to the original feeling that you had, the original vision you had. The feeling of it is so pure that you can’t make a real thing that has the same feeling and so you’re inevitably going to be disappointed by it.”

Harris says it’s love that ensures some level of disappointment at the end. And for a time, for the unaware, that may be true. But we can mature, and cope with our feelings of love and imperfection.

After his death from self inflicted gunshot wound, Van Gough’s art was recognized as a national treasure, impacted thousands of artists, and millions of art fans. Self-portrait Without Beard, sold for $71.5 million in 1998 in New York making it one of the most expensive paintings of all time.

It was painted in late September 1889, as a simple gift for his mother, on her birthday.

He did it for love.