Every Worker a Capitalist

My friend and mentor Jim Fisher, co-Founder of The Naples Institute, shared a blog entry of his regarding Argentine workers in a balloon factory who showed up one day to discover their factory an empty shell, their jobs gone along with their bosses. Desperate for a means to feed their families, they agreed to secure funding and run the factory themselves, each an equal owner. The results, as Jim shares, are dramatic - and inspirational. (http://peripateticphilosopher.blogspot.com/2008/01/work-without-managers-argentina-style.html)

I see what those factory workers did in Argentina as Capitalism 2.0, without doubt! I have wrestled ever since my college Psychology of Organizational Development class, maybe before that, with this one question: why on earth does everyone buy into the idea that all of the workers, up to the very top, work for pay, and only the capitalist business owner gets all of the profits? Why is that okay with everyone? Why do we all buy into the idea that the owner "owns" the business, and everyone else works to make that person rich? How can he look them in the eye, knowing that this year he will make $23 million, $80 million, $200 million of personal income, whereas the folks reporting to him are stuck at $200,000, or $50,000, or $23,000? And more importantly, how can they look at him and not resent him?

I have a friend who works for a big, privately-owned company who brags about his boss's mansion where he holds the annual employee picnic. This is not unique, by any means. Doesn't that seem weird to anyone?

Apparently, just about everyone buys into the central tenet of capitalism, which hold that the capitalist takes all the risk (yes, so true, I agree), and so for his pluck he deserves all the reward.

Now, fair is fair, and any capitalist will argue that anyone can start their own business if they like; that those who do so and do it well will get rich; others will make good money, and others - losers, tools, knuckleheads - will fail ...but even the failures can try again, and again, if they don't make it the first time, so they can eventually get it right. Fair is fair. If you want to trade the immense risk and opportunity of running your own business for the illusion of "security" as an employee, good for you. We all make choices, and every day we choose to keep at what we're doing rather than striking out on our own, we are making that choice anew.

Look at me! I've just talked myself back into being a Capitalist.

Here's the thing: As I shout from the rooftops at every occasion, I am an ardent Capitalist, a proselytizer for that best of all systems. Indeed, Jane and I own 100% of two companies! One time, a few years ago, I did some quick math in my head and realized that, where before I was making $15 an hour to teach English for someone else, and when I teach a class on my own for my own business I make about $160 an hour, I made (on that day, in that quarter) over $800 an hour not teaching, but letting our talented, well-paid and respected teachers do it for me. So yes, I'm a Capitalist and glad of it!

Given all that, why would I rock this really, really personally rewarding boat?

I'm having an existential crisis, that's why. It's what philosophers-turned-businessmen do, an indulgence we try not to share with the world; I'm sure I'm poisoning my future well with this missive. Well, I've never been one to respect caution. ...Another trait that makes me a good Capitalist.

Stories like that of the Argentine factory workers, though... If we all grew up, if all of the workers in the world got the picture - that Capitalism can work for them, too - then we'd have a world-full of privately-owned (Capitalist) companies such as the balloon factory that are owned by the workers. Why not? Everyone would be a Capitalist and everyone would win, not just a tiny, tiny minority, as is the case today.

The big thing that separates me from 98% of my peers in Capitalism is that, while I very much like making money, and the more the merrier, with me it is not for the sake of either having money or of spending it on lavish stuff. I want to make millions and millions so I can give most of it away - not through hand-outs, but through savvy teach-a-man-to-fish endeavors such as improved universal education and microloans.

Marx wanted to State to own the means of production, rather than the workers. At least, that's how Communism has played out, and why it's such a dismal failure. But what if we had companies like that example in Argentina of a closed factory taken over by the workers, who become the owners? That is one of the bright faces of Capitalism 2.0. It's coming; hopefully, it will come in strength, rather than as a series of isolated flukes.

Nobody owes us a living. Adult Capitalist workers understand that, whereas workers stuck in the arrested development of childish paternalistic Primitive Capitalism bemoan their fate, complain and protest, beg our politicians for intervention and demand their unions "do something" with their employers when those companies go out of business or move operations off shore.

Let's see how many more laid-off workers of closed business units stand up and do something for themselves, just as the balloon factory workers in Argentina have. I hope this is the start of a trend.

By the way...

To follow up regarding "Ted Sees Red" (below): Stephen Covey (The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People) and Ken Blanchard (The One-Minute Manager) are both contributing to our book, Enlightened Leadership. So things could be worse - and my head is swimming with the caliber of people I have recently (past 2+ years) found to be my peers.

Eventually, I win. Every time. I am a fierce competitor, even when there is no specific person I am vying against.

Dad is proud, on his cloud up in Heaven.

Ted sees Red

Note to my Dear Readers: I say the following tongue-half-in-cheek. That's hard to convey in writing, but that is where you will find my tongue about 1/2 of the time, just so you know. I am at once laughing at myself, and dead-cold serious.


Nothing wakes me from a stupor quite so fast as a little resistance.

Here I was, wallowing in physical and mental torpor from this SARS/Bird Flu/Plague/T.B./"90-Day Cough" that I've enjoyed now since my birthday 24 days ago. I've actually been highly productive, but only in spurts, with a lot more downtime than I'm used to.

Things are going well. All of a sudden, everybody wants in on Naples Social Action in one way or another (www.naplessocialaction.org). The Naples Institute and NI Consulting are gathering a really, really powerful head of steam (www.institutenaples.org). On the surface they're going infuriatingly slowly, but I'm operating well below that surface, and I can see clearly that it's a winning idea that is already taking off - by the time The Naples Institute is a household name (at least in NPR, News Hour, and New York Times households), we'll already be out in front of the pack.

Even the NSA-CAN Ride seems off to a good start, despite my inattention. And my family is back from Boston, so all is right in the world.

So I was feeling rather... uninspired. And sick. And sluggish. And sorry for myself, cuz I have a little bitty cough. Poor, poor Ted.

Then, a sure thing turned out to need some coaxing.

In order to put our name out there, The Naples Institute is writing a book, Enlightened Leadership. We've already got an all-star cast of business authors assembled to contribute a chapter each, giving their take on what those two words mean to them. And we have an all-star editor in Ken Shelton, editor of Executive Excellence magazine and Steven Covey's ghost writer. It's a great topic, a chapter is a night's work for most authors, and proceeds are going to charity - a really great cause, namely (my favorite) One Laptop Per Child (www.waveplace.org).

So I reached out to an author who has endorsed one of my books, a friend of the family through his dad and my Dad, a bestseller whose work is right in line with this topic. And I thought, "How easy is this gonna be?"

But he hasn't said yes yet! He needs more courting!! I'm not used to this!!! People who don't matter to me don't always go along with my ideas, but when it counts, the ones I want are right there with me - proof, obviously, that great minds think alike. (ehem).

Now I feel GREAT! What cough? What general feeling of malaise? I am challenged, and my synapses are firing away at double-time.

The issue: How can we make this project more compelling? - not just to this one author; indeed, if he isn't in, that's his loss, not ours. Exactly the opposite of Groucho Marx, I would never want to join a club that wouldn't have me as a member. But how do we find each potential contributor's sweet spot, the motivator that will get them to refuse to take No (from us) as an answer? That's what has me all fired up and ready to go.

You see, that's how I work in sales; I don't actually try to "sell" at all. I like to provide something that people are dying to get for their own. When we created Coiné Language School that is exactly how we designed it: What would make companies line up to ask for our service, as opposed to (a) not having on-site language classes at all, or (b) going with another provider? We started with what they knew they wanted, and then dug deeper, looking for what they didn't even know they would want. We brought that to them, then spent years improving it. The result? A Rolls Royce for the price of a Toyota.

I can't stand to convince anyone of anything, so I crafted something that easily, really and truly effortlessly, sells itself.

I'm working on making the Enlightened Leadership project the same kind of proposition. Before we have our last author, any bestseller will be dying to get invited to participate. My compatriots and I just have to figure out what that motivation is.

Stay tuned. It's coming.

An easy "Yes" is my favorite thing in the world. But right after that, a good challenge isn't so bad, either. I feel challenged now, and I probably won't sleep much for the next few nights, till I've figured this puzzle out. But I also won't be sleepy.

Adult workers, and happy for it.

I grew up jaded by the experience of those of my father's friends who were top executives in their 50's who, one after another, found the last 5-10 years of their careers derailed by employers who laid off, fired, or downsized them. Whatever the reason in each case - and at the time, in the 80's, that reason was often age discrimination and/or replacing a six-figure executive with a kid at half that pay grade - the result was the same: these guys had lived their lives by the lie that if you work hard, take your lumps, and pay your dues, you will be rewarded and looked after by your company.

Maybe life worked that way before this era, but that is so far a thing of the past by now, it is beyond quaint - it's just hard to imagine anyone buying it these days. Yet I think we all know plenty of people who do. It's sad, actually.

That's why I see self-employment as the only mature decision. This is not to say that one cannot work for a corporation at times in his or her career, but to risk one's livelihood and (often) sense of self worth on the caprices of others higher-up... I don't want to seem mean, but that is not a wise choice.

The bad news is, we can't act like good school kids anymore, and expect the authority figures in our lives to take care of us in exchange for our autonomy. The good news is, if we manage our own lives well, there are so many companies looking for outside "consultant" and "contractor" help to augment the in-house payroll, and there are so many opportunities for professionals to work with employers as clients instead, that I think this "bad news" is actually liberating.

I was just at lunch today with a business owner who was in sales with RCA when GE bought it. Not enjoying the GE culture, he asked his boss if he could quit, start his own company, and provide the same sales service for less money as an outsourced service provider. His boss fired him, then signed up with him as requested as his first and biggest client. Why work for the man when you can work for yourself and help the man, making more money and employing others in the process?

More on Capitalism 2.0

There's a shift in how business is being done, and we're at the very start of it. Primitive Capitalism will be replaced, in a few generations, with what we at The Naples Institute have labeled Capitalism 2.0.

The idea is that profit is a vital component of business, but in the future it will only be one component of several in a company's value to stockholders, employees, customers, and the general public. The Good (with a capital G) that companies do will be just as important to our children and grandchildren as how much their stock appreciates over time - and it will indeed strongly effect the value of that stock.

Shift Happens

I love the information presented in this video (below). You may hate it - I know a lot of people find quantum change scary.

Why don't I? Because the details of life may change dramatically, but the human animal remains largely the same, and that animal developed its out-sized brain specifically to master an ever-changing environment.

One lesson to learn from all this? Tell your children that learning how to learn, rather than learning a trade, is the whole point of going to school.

Enjoy! http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/video/shifthappens

Capitalism 2.0

The Naples Institute is putting together its first book now, with the working title of "Enlightened Leadership." I'll share more about that as we go, but suffice it to say that one best-seller has already submitted his chapter to the editor, Ken Shelton of Executive Excellence Magazine, for review. It's damned good, too.

Here's something I shared with a couple of the contributors:

I'm already thinking of The Naples Institute's next book: "Capitalism 2.0" The premise being that there was Adam Smith/Industrial Revolution/Robber Baron "primitive capitalism," a zero-sum game, and that now - with our globally dependant trade, our corporate interdependency, our freelancing professionals, and our ever-increasing eco- and socially-conscious bent to consumerism - we're just at the periphery of something far more sophisticated, interesting... and profitable!

Don't get me wrong: very few people in business today get that, and those that are entrenched in primitive capitalism will see it as a challenge to the status quo that has worked for them all their lives. Very few would agree it's even possible, or (my least-favorite word) "realistic." But we see some hints of it, and I for one think it would be a fun challenge to paint this picture not of what is, but what may one day be.

More on Tomatoes and Justice

I submit the following in response to a very well-thought-out email I received concerning our stand on the tomato pickers versus Burger King and the growers. You can infer what this man wrote in my reply:

Whether an evil such as slavery, or even "just" exploitation, is performed by whites, blacks, browns, greens, or reds, no civilized society can tolerate it. Allowing such a thing to continue demeans us all as human beings. Frederick Douglas, the escaped slave-turned-abolitionist and the conscience of our nation, said as much in his writings and speeches in the 1840s and '50s. Whether the bad guys are Anglo or fellow Latinos, what they are doing is wrong and must be stopped.

I think that if the workers of Immokalee, and Florida in general, could influence the growers who employ them, they would. I think that it is more effective for them to pressure public corporations with images to protect, and so I can't blame them for taking that tack. They are in desperate straits.

At the same time that we are trying to help the poor, possibly uneducated, probably illegal field workers in Immokalee, we are also working to provide a better education to their children so that they can grow to have choices of careers in the middle class or better. (When I say "we," I want to point out that The Naples Institute is a small part of this effort, and late to arrive).

The old style thinking, that an unfettered market will pay what supply and demand dictates, is not a workable solution in an advanced economy. The Robber Barons of the 19th and early 20th Centuries exploited their workers similarly because they could. There is clearly so much unskilled labor eager to pick tomatoes at any rate of pay that the wages will never increase if the government or customers - in this case, McDonald's, Yum! Brands, and Burger King - don't step in to help solve such problems.

Another aspect to consider is that underpaid workers harm our economy. They cannot afford to buy our products, and so do not stimulate the economy the way that middle-class workers do. For better or for worse, the US economy is dependant on the extravagant spending of its vast middle class. Low-paid workers also strain our social programs, as they require public assistance for services such as health care, and they do not pay the taxes needed to support the community. A lot of attention has been paid recently to how Wal-Mart, among other low-wage employers, is actually subsidized by taxpayers because of the services rendered versus taxes paid by employees. This is corporate welfare. I don't pay my taxes to support Wal-Mart or to support the growers in rural Florida, either.

When Henry Ford doubled the rate he was paying his workers, from $2.50/day to $5/day, his fellow capitalists called him a socialist, a class-traitor, dangerous, and deranged. The Wall Street Journal railed against him. But the result was that our nation's economy was stimulated wildly; he actually created a market for his cars among his own employees, and other businesses added to this because they were forced to raise their pay as well, creating still more consumers. He was no saint, and he raised pay to benefit his own business by attracting and keeping the best employees, not to be nice. But Henry Ford literally created the middle class and the modern economy.

I don't see any down-side to corporations paying one additional penny per pound for tomatoes. I think it's important that we keep this in perspective: what is one penny per pound, to anyone? Yet multiplied over the number of pounds the workers can pick in an hour, they are able to double their pay! It's a brilliant, simple solution to a grievous problem.

That's my take, anyway.

Is "Evil" Too Strong a Word for Business?

Let me begin with praise for McDonald's and Taco Bell's parent company, Yum! Brands. They are ethical companies.


The following article illustrates the flip-side of "Enlightened Self-Interest," the basis of everything that I teach corporate leaders. While The Naples Institute has created its Socially Conscious Enterprise certification to recognize and reward the most ethical companies in America and the world, it will also be instructive in showing, through omission, what companies are unethical.

I have railed against Reggie Brown before. I will call it like I see it: Brown, and the coalition of Florida tomato growers he speaks for, is evil. His actions and the attitude behind them directly hurt the people who work for those he represents. I invite my readers to provide another adjective that more accurately describes him.

Burger King, likewise, is reprehensible.

To put this in perspective: Taco Bell's parent company, Yum! Brands, will pay an additonal $100,000 per year for tomatoes once the deal they and McDonald's have agreed to goes into effect. I do not have a figure on Burger King, but I would wager that the sum is close.

How much has Burger King spent on lawyers and executive man-hours since this issue arose? How much will it lose from the ill-will it is creating in the public? I believe far, far more than $100,000.

Meanwhile, the workers affected currently average little over $3.00/hour (there is a loop-hole in the Federal minimum wage law specifically for agricultural pickers). As the article said, their pay will double when this $.01/pound goes into effect. Double. Yet even making twice as much as before, they will remain at a level below the Federal poverty line. Think about that.

My question, given the context - the benefit to poverty-stricken workers versus the meager expense to Burger King (and no expense whatsoever to the growers, who are merely passing through the added wage) is this: what is wrong with Reggie Brown, the Tomato Growers, and Burger King?

What is wrong with these people?

Burger King may stop buying local tomatoes
Fast-food giant threatens move as it resists efforts to increase pay for pickers by a penny a pound

Daily News staff and wire reportsTuesday, January 15, 2008

Burger King is telling suppliers it may stop buying tomatoes from Southwest Florida, where farmworkers have fought to get the second-largest hamburger chain to pay more for its produce and help boost field-worker wages, according to a letter obtained Monday by The Associated Press.

The Coalition of Immokalee Workers has tried for more than a year to get Burger King Corp. to join deals signed by rivals McDonald’s Corp. and Taco Bell owner Yum! Brands Inc.
Those agreements require that the companies pay a penny more per pound for the tomatoes they buy from Florida farms.

Farmers then would pass the extra money through to field workers, although the agreements are on hold after growers balked at participating this year.

Burger King has refused to join the deals and repeatedly insinuated the coalition was keeping the extra money, even after Yum! Brands and several human rights groups dismissed the allegations.

So the Miami-based chain, owned by Burger King Holdings Inc., is asking suppliers to plan for the chain to possibly buy tomatoes elsewhere.

In the Dec. 18, 2007, letter to suppliers, Burger King Vice President Steven Grover wrote: “In an effort to protect the BKC brand and supply system from disruption, we are developing contingency plans to assure our long-term supply of tomatoes.”

Grover went on to ask the suppliers to “submit contingency plans for the possibility that we would choose not to purchase tomatoes grown on farms in the Immokalee, Florida region.”
If it happens, the change would not begin until the 2008-09 season. The letter does not say whether Burger King would completely move its supply chain out of Florida.

“It’s unfortunate and unfounded when we are responsible employers paying good wages and there is no reason why anyone should not do business with the industry in Immokalee,” said Reggie Brown, executive vice president of the Florida Tomato Growers Exchange.
Brown said he hasn’t had any discussions with Burger King.

“We would hope that there is little or no basis for this claim,” Brown said.

Florida supplies 80 percent of the nation’s domestic fresh tomatoes between Thanksgiving and February, but the number of domestically produced winter tomatoes has declined in recent years due mostly to imports from Mexico and Canada.

Burger King spokeswoman Denise Wilson confirmed the letter’s authenticity and said the chain is always looking at contingency plans. She emphasized that Burger King buys from repackers in Immokalee, not directly from farmers there.

Coalition spokeswoman Julia Perkins called the letter “defensive and not thought out.”

She said the group’s campaign has never been limited to Immokalee but to the working conditions and pay for workers across the state.

Florida tomato pickers earn about 45 cents per 32-pound bucket. If all purchasers of Florida tomatoes agreed to the penny deal, the state’s mostly migrant farm workers would see their pay nearly double.

“Instead of really dealing with the issues at hand, which are wages and working conditions for farm workers, they are trying to run away from dealing with them,” Perkins said. “If there weren’t any problems for wages and working conditions, there wouldn’t be any reason for them to turn elsewhere — or even look into turning elsewhere.”

Burger King does have support from the Florida tomato growers association.

Earlier this season, the group, which represents nearly all tomato farms, threatened to levy $100,000 fines on members who participated in the McDonald’s and Yum! Brand deals. As a result, no Florida farmers are participating in the deals this year.

U.S. Sen. Bernard Sanders, a Vermont independent lawmaker, is scheduled to visit Immokalee Thursday and Friday to learn more about the farmworkers’ situation, which he calls “the race to the bottom,” spokesman Michael Briggs said.

A press conference is planned at noon Friday at the Coalition of Immokalee Workers office in Immokalee. [http://www.ciw-online.org/]

Certifying Ethical Companies

The following is the introduction to a speech I'm giving tomorrow, entitled "The Socially Conscious Enterprise."

The day of the greedy corporation is coming to an end. Businesses across the country and in many parts of the world are coming to see that, while profits are essential to their success, profit alone does not justify an organization's existence.

Market forces are shaping this shift in corporate values. Study after study show that employees flock to companies that are morally responsible: take Google, with its motto, "Don't be evil," as an example of this movement. While many firms are fighting to attract employees of even modest skill, Google and other ethical companies have a line of highly-qualified applicants that is miles long. Clearly, we are not just working for a paycheck anymore.

To attract the highest-caliber workers, and to appeal to consumers who likewise often choose based on a company's ethics, corporations are giving more to charity, encouraging their workers to volunteer, and are even taking initiatives such as green building buying fair trade-certified goods where no law says they must.

In order to recognize companies that are doing the right thing, The Naples Institute has established a certification for what it dubs Socially Conscious Enterprises. This certification will be to philanthropy what the Good Housekeeping Seal is to quality consumer products.

To speak about Socially Conscious Enterprises, let me introduce Ted Coiné, co-founder of The Naples Institute, a think tank dedicated to fighting for social justice.