There’s lots of interesting content in Amazon.com’s launch page for “No One Would Listen”, a book by the main whistleblower in the Bernie Madoff saga. The timeline in particular is very impressive: it shows that it took ten years to uncover the mess – nine since the first contact with the SEC – by which time the problem was irreversible. And that’s far from the only case, which begs a question… How do we justify still having institutions supposed to keep watch so unready and unwilling to investigate red flags?
David Pogue’s presentation at TED in 2006 was pretty funny and carried an important message for designers: simplicity sells. The iPhone wasn’t even out, but the trend is clearer than ever. The talk starts slowly but quickly builds momentum. As we always stress: view it critically, play with the idea, try to contradict it or apply it in some other field(s).
A rare but always welcome interview by Charlie Munger embedded inside, courtesy of Stanford University’s Law School. Some highlights inside as well. The main theme is the economic/ financial crisis (what else?).
God has spoken, go out and read it. The core is dedicated to welcoming and explaining BRK to its new shareholders acquired through BNSF, so no big news. Buffett complains more about the media and investments analysts, on how they distort things, causing losses to the less diligent and recommends that everybody form their own knowledge base and opinion. Hope he lives to see that happening, but we sincerely doubt it.
Judging by the recent troubles in Belgium and the article at Valor (in portuguese), the love-hate relationship with InBev in Belgium has gone to hell. And there’s the “socialism vs. capitalism” conflict in Europe again. If it weren’t for the image deterioration risk – and it seems that they’re handling it by going as far as they can, but no further – the union representative’s words would be music to shareholders’ ears.
Buffett used the Thriftsville vs. Squanderville metaphor in this brilliant article back in 2003. Now it’s Charlie Munger’s turn with a parable on the wealth of a nation and how to lose it. It’s a fun read.
There’s one aspect that seems overlooked in the whole “multidisciplinary approach” cult: communication. If you don’t have the adequate communication policies/ environment, how does one reap the rewards from all this multidisciplinary goodness? How does a team interact in order to extract value from its members’ diverse interests and skill sets?
Continue reading about Multidisciplinary approach and communication
“If we did not do this already, would we, knowing what we now know, go into it?” Peter Drucker’s question can be applied in both the big picture and small picture – from the broadest strategic moves of your company to its tiniest daily processes. More than that: try substituting “company” in the previous sentence for “department”, “nation”, “regulatory system” and even “life”.
How does “fixing” Toyota (whatever that means) change a country’s demographics time-bomb or its still-rattling financial system? While there are interesting food-for-thought bits in these pieces, they all seem to give way too much importance to “planning a country” in a world where central planning (again, whatever that means) for a country of this size and relatively free market is ever less effective – if it ever was.
In his latest post, Tom Barrack of Colony Capital writes about some similarities between a big wave surfer and a successful investor. While we would be even more conservative in general, we agree with most the “credos”.