Wednesday December 3, 2008
Bogged down by negativity
MUSINGSBy MARINA MAHATHIR
We need to change our culture from a disabling one to an enabling one. But, first, we need to change those in charge of reform.
When you have children growing up, part of the challenges of parenthood is to ensure that they make their way safely in the world without being so protected that they can never be independent.
While we warn them of the many dangers out there, we also want them to be curious and creative so that they may learn to be innovative.
Incurious people or those unwilling to take risks never made great scientific discoveries or found solutions to the world’s problems.
To do that, they must have the freedom to think and to explore the world around them. They must live in an environment that nurtures that curiosity rather than suppresses it, that allows expressions of ideas rather than beats them down.
When I look around our current environment, I wonder how we are ever going to produce that kind of citizen. Every day, we are told about the great many things we cannot do, rather than what we can do.
Our emphasis is to take the same old course in life, to keep our heads down and ask no question. We think of those who see things differently, who ask awkward questions and will not take no for an answer, as aberrations, rebels or sometimes even apostates.
When Barack Obama made his victory speech, his simple message of “Yes We Can” struck a chord even with non-Americans. It was a message that was positive and full of hope. Yet some leaders are not trying to fill us with that optimism, that while times are hard we can still overcome it if we work together.
Instead, we see petty issues being made gargantuan and a constant negativism being touted. The good and the upright are the ones who sit obediently and demand nothing while the evil and the lost are those who demand answers to life’s problems and reject simplistic ones. Everything is a big no-no; life feels like a giant minefield we have to navigate, lest one wrong move results in us being blown to pieces.
How do we innovate if we constantly have to think of whether our souls can survive? What new things can we discover if we’re constantly told to take no risk?
How do we solve the big problems of the world when we are constantly being distracted by minutiae?
The polio vaccine would never have been found if Dr Jonas Salk had not discovered that injecting someone with dead poliomyelitis viruses would cause the body to produce antibodies against it.
The result of this discovery is that thousands of people all over the world were saved from this crippling disease. A few years later Dr Albert Sabin discovered the non-invasive form of immunisation by giving children polio drops.
These types of discoveries would not have happened if these two people had not used their brains to find creative solutions. But imagine if someone had told them that they needed to get dispensation from some religious authority first or they lived in an environment where thinking of new ways to solve a problem was discouraged?
Despite 50 years of efficacy, as late as 2003, some Nigerian Muslim authorities saw it fit to make unfounded claims about the polio drops, resulting in this easily eradicable disease spreading to 12 new countries within 18 months.
How do we expect our children to find the next big thing, perhaps a cure for AIDS, when they live in such an un-nurturing environment? When the mainstays of policy are not sound and rational research but personal whims and fancies which brook no dissent from anyone else?
Perhaps that is the real reason behind our inertia regarding reforming our education system. Why should we change it to one that makes our children think, because then they will ask even more awkward questions.
Perhaps we realise that in order to reform our education system, we have to first reform those of us who are in charge of that reformation.
And those people are notoriously unwilling to do so because once that is done, it will be like opening Pandora’s Box.
Imagine, suddenly lots and lots of young people will be asking endless questions! And we might not be able to answer them, or worse, tell them they should not be asking such questions at all.
Yet, among a thousand annoying questions, there might be one really brilliant one that lets us think in a new way. By not allowing the many, we may never find that one that can change our lives for the better. What a loss that would be!
We need to change our culture from a disabling one to an enabling one. But it won’t happen if we allow the negativists to rule.
Dr Ismail Aby Jamal
Born in Batu 10, Kg Lubok Bandan, Jementah, Segamat, Johor
Friday, December 5, 2008
Creativity and our life
Tuesday December 2, 2008
Creativity and our life
IKIM VIEWS
By DR MOHD ZAIDI ISMAILSenior Fellow/Director, Centrefor Science and Technology, Ikim
The need for change in our life should not blind us to what is permanent in life, and its corresponding human manifestation, identity and tradition.
CREATIVITY, as held by many, can take two forms. One is invention, which has quite often been described as “one creating totally new things”. The other is innovation, usually understood as “one doing old things in new ways”.
Talks on creativity, as well as interest in it, are in fact abounding.
Recently, for example, as reported by some local dailies on Nov 11, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi reiterated its importance following the Cabinet meeting on the Malaysian Innovation Foundation (MIF) at Parliament House the day before.
There is no doubt that such talk and interest will never cease, largely because of the dynamism that arises out of the evanescent nature of our worldly life.
The local magazine Symbiosis, in one of its issues about five years back, began its editorial with a statement expressing exactly this sentiment about change craving for creativity.
“It is an irony, but it is agreed that change is the only persistent and constant force that surrounds us.”
That statement – one loaded with a rather controversial ontological commitment – was then followed by two other assertions which, as a matter of fact, were not unheard of before.
“This unrelenting force of change demands that we continually re-invent our respective organisations or risk the possibility of extinction. To do so requires creativity and innovation.”
Those very much familiar with the history of ideas would be aware of Heraclitus’ prototypical remark more than two millennia ago: “You can never step into the same river twice.”
Echoing a similar penchant was the dictum of the 14th-century Chinese author Luo Guanzhong: “Do not dwell in the past, do not stay in the present, change with the trends, change with the times.”
Yet, it is important for anyone desiring to seriously address the issue of creativity vis-à-vis human life to realise that while the problem of change is related to the larger context of existence and reality – the macrocosm, so to speak – creativity is largely a phenomenon pertaining to man as its microcosmic representation.
But our passion for this dimension of our life – change and the demand for creativity – ought not to blind us from its other equally, if not more, important aspect – the constant or the permanent in life, and its corresponding human manifestation, identity and tradition.
For we have frequently found ourselves trapped in a situation where, on the one hand, with regard to such matters of life as technological and managerial problems, we have been urged, whether from within or from without ourselves, to change and be creative.
But, on the other hand, as regards other dimensions of life such as the social contract, we have been strongly advised not only to remain where we have been but also to preserve our identity and the established convention or tradition.
As humans, many – if not all – of us would like to know why there is such a dichotomy; why one applies here and not there but the other applies there and not here; why X plays a role now and then while Y only has a role in the future.
Whereas we cannot deny that some who raise such questions are antagonistic or cannot help sounding hostile, we should also acknowledge the fact that some do voice them sincerely and honestly.
It is therefore important that we – especially leaders, policy-makers and decision-makers from among us – deal with them in a manner cogent and assuring enough as to not make us appear to have practised double-standards in addressing such issues.
Only when we are able to satisfactorily answer them can we expect to chart a clear way forward, tentatively at least.
In fact, at a more fundamental level, the ability to resolve the tensions between creativity and identity depends on our ability to deal with similar tensions springing from the various modes of interaction between the two dimensions of our life and existence – change and permanence.
The main challenge to all of us, among others, is to find a convincingly effective and efficient way to deal with both.
Only when we are able to satisfactorily address such a dual manifestation of reality can we be deemed to have lived a whole, balanced life.
Otherwise, our life is simply incomplete and unstable.
Creativity and our life
IKIM VIEWS
By DR MOHD ZAIDI ISMAILSenior Fellow/Director, Centrefor Science and Technology, Ikim
The need for change in our life should not blind us to what is permanent in life, and its corresponding human manifestation, identity and tradition.
CREATIVITY, as held by many, can take two forms. One is invention, which has quite often been described as “one creating totally new things”. The other is innovation, usually understood as “one doing old things in new ways”.
Talks on creativity, as well as interest in it, are in fact abounding.
Recently, for example, as reported by some local dailies on Nov 11, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi reiterated its importance following the Cabinet meeting on the Malaysian Innovation Foundation (MIF) at Parliament House the day before.
There is no doubt that such talk and interest will never cease, largely because of the dynamism that arises out of the evanescent nature of our worldly life.
The local magazine Symbiosis, in one of its issues about five years back, began its editorial with a statement expressing exactly this sentiment about change craving for creativity.
“It is an irony, but it is agreed that change is the only persistent and constant force that surrounds us.”
That statement – one loaded with a rather controversial ontological commitment – was then followed by two other assertions which, as a matter of fact, were not unheard of before.
“This unrelenting force of change demands that we continually re-invent our respective organisations or risk the possibility of extinction. To do so requires creativity and innovation.”
Those very much familiar with the history of ideas would be aware of Heraclitus’ prototypical remark more than two millennia ago: “You can never step into the same river twice.”
Echoing a similar penchant was the dictum of the 14th-century Chinese author Luo Guanzhong: “Do not dwell in the past, do not stay in the present, change with the trends, change with the times.”
Yet, it is important for anyone desiring to seriously address the issue of creativity vis-à-vis human life to realise that while the problem of change is related to the larger context of existence and reality – the macrocosm, so to speak – creativity is largely a phenomenon pertaining to man as its microcosmic representation.
But our passion for this dimension of our life – change and the demand for creativity – ought not to blind us from its other equally, if not more, important aspect – the constant or the permanent in life, and its corresponding human manifestation, identity and tradition.
For we have frequently found ourselves trapped in a situation where, on the one hand, with regard to such matters of life as technological and managerial problems, we have been urged, whether from within or from without ourselves, to change and be creative.
But, on the other hand, as regards other dimensions of life such as the social contract, we have been strongly advised not only to remain where we have been but also to preserve our identity and the established convention or tradition.
As humans, many – if not all – of us would like to know why there is such a dichotomy; why one applies here and not there but the other applies there and not here; why X plays a role now and then while Y only has a role in the future.
Whereas we cannot deny that some who raise such questions are antagonistic or cannot help sounding hostile, we should also acknowledge the fact that some do voice them sincerely and honestly.
It is therefore important that we – especially leaders, policy-makers and decision-makers from among us – deal with them in a manner cogent and assuring enough as to not make us appear to have practised double-standards in addressing such issues.
Only when we are able to satisfactorily answer them can we expect to chart a clear way forward, tentatively at least.
In fact, at a more fundamental level, the ability to resolve the tensions between creativity and identity depends on our ability to deal with similar tensions springing from the various modes of interaction between the two dimensions of our life and existence – change and permanence.
The main challenge to all of us, among others, is to find a convincingly effective and efficient way to deal with both.
Only when we are able to satisfactorily address such a dual manifestation of reality can we be deemed to have lived a whole, balanced life.
Otherwise, our life is simply incomplete and unstable.
Windmills of political change
Sunday November 9, 2008
Windmills of political change
By SUHAINI AZNAM
Since ‘serious’ bloggers are also socio-political commentators, any change in the political seascape will also mean a shift in bloggers’ orientation.
BLOGGERS are the windmills of political change, shifting with political winds. When Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi announced that he was no longer going to defend his post as Umno president, he took the wind out of the sails of his sharpest critics.
One such is Syed Azidi Syed Aziz, 38, of sheih kickdefella fame, who now has to “do some soul searching”. Before the March 8 general election, bloggers were either outright pro-Opposition or pro-establishment but against the Pak Lah administration. The latter “had such a huge impact that they swayed the final majority,” said Sheih.
In 1999, those who opposed Dr Mahathir had not had such great an impact because they were preaching to the converted.
“Blogs then were just to update. The DAP and PAS had only 500 to 3,000 hits per day. They did not appeal to the masses,” added Sheih.
Former New Straits Times journalist and editor Ahirudin Attan, better known as Rocky of “Rocky’s Bru”, concurred. In March, “all three categories were blogging for change”.
But “almost overnight, post March 8, all bloggers who had been critical of the Government, toned down.
“We are seeing the true colours of the socio-political bloggers,” explained Rocky. “There is a change in attitude. Bloggers are shown to be political activists.
“Those claiming they are for change are not walking the talk,” he said, citing the Selangor Government’s stand on the latest temple demolition. People are rearranging their hierarchy of trust. Before, trust was very high. Now we are slipping very fast.”
“I used to support Pakatan,” declared Zainol Abidin, 50 (aka Mahaguru58). “I felt we needed a change. I expected change. Now they have taken over five states and there is no change. So I am aligning myself to no one, not the Barisan, and I will whack Anwar (Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim) left, right and blue!”
Former journalist Nuraina Samad, whose 3540 jalan sudin has over a million hits, was more philosophical. The Government had come under “unbridled attack and some people now feel that enough is enough”, she said.
“Umno lost because a lot of Malays voted for the Opposition,” observed Nuraina.
“A new group of bloggers, more pro-Barisan, emerged because a lot of people realised that maybe it was not such a good idea to vote the PKR. These were people trying to go with the renewal of Umno and trying to counter Opposition bloggers like Elizabeth Wong and Jeff Ooi.”
Before March, a lot of MPs and politicians who blogged were from the DAP, PAS, and the PKR. After Abdullah said the Barisan must counter this trend, several Barisan politicians answered the call, “opening Facebooks and using the tools that were said to have given them a miserable time”, said Rocky.
Jebat Must Die, Demi Negara, Chedet are all very influential, he added. Even Abdullah’s warkahuntukpm was launched after the general election to deal with thorny issues and people’s complaints.
Divided for change
Bloggers are very political now, on both sides of the divide, said Nuraina.
“Bloggers during the general election were for change,” she noted. “We walked together many times: the penguin walk, freedom walk, yellow march.”
If after the election, the PR had expected bloggers to continue with this line, they were disappointed. “We can’t attack the DAP, Anwar, Teresa,” said Nuraina.
When bloggers try to point out corruption in Pakatan-held states, they become very combative and go on the offensive.
“Those Opposition bloggers even view neutral ones like me as pro-government. I am accused of not being supportive,” said Rocky.
If readers have noticed a slight change in his stance, particularly after Abdullah said he was stepping down, Rocky maintained that “bloggers are divided more by political agenda, beliefs, than who they are rooting for as prime minister.”
With the changing of the guards to Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, the future of bloggers actually depends on Najib’s strategy in the local mainstream newspapers. Najib already has his own people who manage blogs for him, said Rocky, citing Najib’s 1malaysia, launched last September.
Already, the pressure on Pak Lah has eased, agreed Sheih. “Bloggers who endorse Najib will monitor him but won’t be that critical of him. The ball will be in Najib’s court”.
Speaking of NST and Berita Harian, how they will behave under Najib will depend on whether the Government changes its old ways in terms of media control, said Rocky.
“If the Government can show it is more liberal – meaning if they put me there (laughing) – intervention is vastly reduced, the relevance of blogs will be severely tested. It has been proven that “wherever the media is most free, blogs are dependent on crumbs”, hoping for that one big scoop a year, he noted.
The future
Rocky remains the bloggers’ favourite, as “Rocky’s Bru” not only has the numbers – a total of seven-going-on-eight million hits – but it also enjoys peer acclaim. Rocky, however, feels he has reached optimum point.
“Bloggers like me are finding that there are limitations to what a blog can do. At the rate I am doing (working alone), I get 30,000 unique visitors per day. Chedet gets 60,000 to 70,000 per day. To go beyond that is perhaps not possible,” he admitted.
He thinks the logical next step would be to “turn blogs into news portals, add new features, thereby increasing readership, while maintaining Rocky’s Bru (which would) occupy a small corner on the news portal.”
He thinks chedet.com, former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s immensely popular blog, would also go the same route, and may be enhanced with a photo corner of his life’s experiences.
“This solo act is very tiring,” sighed Rocky, referring to the tremendous effort involved in researching and writing, plus sifting through the comments of their fans and detractors. “I can’t go on like this.”
What then drives bloggers in the absence of monetary rewards?
Whatever their political stripes and personal idiosyncrasies, bloggers are crusaders.
Dr Mahathir’s daughter Datin Paduka Marina (rantingsbymm) feels that “blogs grew exponentially because of people’s almost uncontrollable need to speak out. People were bursting to express themselves.”
Pride in growing their blogs is another motivator, and certainly there is idealism.
In April 2007, Rocky set up the National Bloggers Alliance, which has yet to be registered. It is being managed by a pro-temp committee of which Rocky is president. The Alliance is non-partisan and is intended to protect bloggers and promote responsible blogging.
A year ago, Zainol formed the Muslim Bloggers Alliance “to pool together the thoughts of Muslim bloggers, safeguard the good name of Islam, clarify and teach about Islam and to correct misconceptions about Islam, especially online”.
Applications for membership have flooded in but Zainol is careful. He vets through their blogs and has pared them down to a select 93. Once registered as a mutual benefit society, its monthly contributions will go to a trust fund to take care of legal fees and dakwah activities.
Political affiliations can also be ideals. A new, small grouping called the Barisan Rakyat bloggers, born during the March general election, became most prominent during the Permatang Pauh by-election in August.
Bernard Khoo (blog name Zorro Unmasked), Harris and Raja Petra Kamaruddin (Malaysia Today) were all either “inspired or sponsored by Anwar”, said Rocky.
“It gives more variety, choice. It is good for the three to finally declare where their allegiance lie.”
Nuraina noted that “a lot of racialism has reared its head since the general election”. Like other responsible bloggers, she would edit for sedition and slander.
She steers clear of race and religion because “I might have to be brutally frank”. If commentators to her blog are racist or slanderous, she would have to address their issues.
For others, ideologies had emerged from blurred racial lines. Sheih has about three million plus hits, mostly from non-Malay and non-PAS visitors. “The majority read me for my stand on a few things like justice and equality.”
Span of influence
Public Relations consultant and The Star guest columnist Raslan Sharif feels that although most bloggers, especially those from Umno, may be younger people, their target audience are not necessarily so. “They just target voters, irrespective of age. And more people in their 40s and 50s are also getting tech savvy.”
Even among those who are not, “a lot of the issues I hear in the kedai kopi were (first) brought from the blog,” said Raslan.
The trend-setters, however, are not the socio-political bloggers but the personal bloggers, lifestyle, entertainment and business bloggers who form the bulk of the community. And while lifestyle bloggers are known to sell space, socio-political bloggers blog for free.
“We make the noise and they make the money,” said Rocky flatly.
“Lifestyle bloggers like kennysia.com have a huge following,” noted Raslan. “They are an advertising goldmine since readers are mainly in the 25-35 age bracket who tend to spend. In Kenny’s case, ad space would earn him about RM10,000 per month.”
It is a time-consuming task for “a serious hobby”, said Nuraina. “When bloggers carry google ads, you are not in control of what comes out,” even though you appear to have endorsed the products.
Being original is tough work and only the best succeed in stamping a distinctive mark.
“Most socio-political bloggers pick their topics from the newspapers, then dissect, deconstruct the report and analyse or comment on them. But their primary source is the newspapers,” said Raslan.
But Sheih, who does “not see bloggers as reporters, they are columnists, they analyse. People read them to see how they view (events)”, said he seldom picks items from the newspapers, preferring to go to “the source itself, my “informers”, people who e-mail me something”.
He would not, however, call his blog neutral. “They (readers) want a bit of emotion.”
Windmills of political change
By SUHAINI AZNAM
Since ‘serious’ bloggers are also socio-political commentators, any change in the political seascape will also mean a shift in bloggers’ orientation.
BLOGGERS are the windmills of political change, shifting with political winds. When Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi announced that he was no longer going to defend his post as Umno president, he took the wind out of the sails of his sharpest critics.
One such is Syed Azidi Syed Aziz, 38, of sheih kickdefella fame, who now has to “do some soul searching”. Before the March 8 general election, bloggers were either outright pro-Opposition or pro-establishment but against the Pak Lah administration. The latter “had such a huge impact that they swayed the final majority,” said Sheih.
In 1999, those who opposed Dr Mahathir had not had such great an impact because they were preaching to the converted.
“Blogs then were just to update. The DAP and PAS had only 500 to 3,000 hits per day. They did not appeal to the masses,” added Sheih.
Former New Straits Times journalist and editor Ahirudin Attan, better known as Rocky of “Rocky’s Bru”, concurred. In March, “all three categories were blogging for change”.
But “almost overnight, post March 8, all bloggers who had been critical of the Government, toned down.
“We are seeing the true colours of the socio-political bloggers,” explained Rocky. “There is a change in attitude. Bloggers are shown to be political activists.
“Those claiming they are for change are not walking the talk,” he said, citing the Selangor Government’s stand on the latest temple demolition. People are rearranging their hierarchy of trust. Before, trust was very high. Now we are slipping very fast.”
“I used to support Pakatan,” declared Zainol Abidin, 50 (aka Mahaguru58). “I felt we needed a change. I expected change. Now they have taken over five states and there is no change. So I am aligning myself to no one, not the Barisan, and I will whack Anwar (Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim) left, right and blue!”
Former journalist Nuraina Samad, whose 3540 jalan sudin has over a million hits, was more philosophical. The Government had come under “unbridled attack and some people now feel that enough is enough”, she said.
“Umno lost because a lot of Malays voted for the Opposition,” observed Nuraina.
“A new group of bloggers, more pro-Barisan, emerged because a lot of people realised that maybe it was not such a good idea to vote the PKR. These were people trying to go with the renewal of Umno and trying to counter Opposition bloggers like Elizabeth Wong and Jeff Ooi.”
Before March, a lot of MPs and politicians who blogged were from the DAP, PAS, and the PKR. After Abdullah said the Barisan must counter this trend, several Barisan politicians answered the call, “opening Facebooks and using the tools that were said to have given them a miserable time”, said Rocky.
Jebat Must Die, Demi Negara, Chedet are all very influential, he added. Even Abdullah’s warkahuntukpm was launched after the general election to deal with thorny issues and people’s complaints.
Divided for change
Bloggers are very political now, on both sides of the divide, said Nuraina.
“Bloggers during the general election were for change,” she noted. “We walked together many times: the penguin walk, freedom walk, yellow march.”
If after the election, the PR had expected bloggers to continue with this line, they were disappointed. “We can’t attack the DAP, Anwar, Teresa,” said Nuraina.
When bloggers try to point out corruption in Pakatan-held states, they become very combative and go on the offensive.
“Those Opposition bloggers even view neutral ones like me as pro-government. I am accused of not being supportive,” said Rocky.
If readers have noticed a slight change in his stance, particularly after Abdullah said he was stepping down, Rocky maintained that “bloggers are divided more by political agenda, beliefs, than who they are rooting for as prime minister.”
With the changing of the guards to Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, the future of bloggers actually depends on Najib’s strategy in the local mainstream newspapers. Najib already has his own people who manage blogs for him, said Rocky, citing Najib’s 1malaysia, launched last September.
Already, the pressure on Pak Lah has eased, agreed Sheih. “Bloggers who endorse Najib will monitor him but won’t be that critical of him. The ball will be in Najib’s court”.
Speaking of NST and Berita Harian, how they will behave under Najib will depend on whether the Government changes its old ways in terms of media control, said Rocky.
“If the Government can show it is more liberal – meaning if they put me there (laughing) – intervention is vastly reduced, the relevance of blogs will be severely tested. It has been proven that “wherever the media is most free, blogs are dependent on crumbs”, hoping for that one big scoop a year, he noted.
The future
Rocky remains the bloggers’ favourite, as “Rocky’s Bru” not only has the numbers – a total of seven-going-on-eight million hits – but it also enjoys peer acclaim. Rocky, however, feels he has reached optimum point.
“Bloggers like me are finding that there are limitations to what a blog can do. At the rate I am doing (working alone), I get 30,000 unique visitors per day. Chedet gets 60,000 to 70,000 per day. To go beyond that is perhaps not possible,” he admitted.
He thinks the logical next step would be to “turn blogs into news portals, add new features, thereby increasing readership, while maintaining Rocky’s Bru (which would) occupy a small corner on the news portal.”
He thinks chedet.com, former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s immensely popular blog, would also go the same route, and may be enhanced with a photo corner of his life’s experiences.
“This solo act is very tiring,” sighed Rocky, referring to the tremendous effort involved in researching and writing, plus sifting through the comments of their fans and detractors. “I can’t go on like this.”
What then drives bloggers in the absence of monetary rewards?
Whatever their political stripes and personal idiosyncrasies, bloggers are crusaders.
Dr Mahathir’s daughter Datin Paduka Marina (rantingsbymm) feels that “blogs grew exponentially because of people’s almost uncontrollable need to speak out. People were bursting to express themselves.”
Pride in growing their blogs is another motivator, and certainly there is idealism.
In April 2007, Rocky set up the National Bloggers Alliance, which has yet to be registered. It is being managed by a pro-temp committee of which Rocky is president. The Alliance is non-partisan and is intended to protect bloggers and promote responsible blogging.
A year ago, Zainol formed the Muslim Bloggers Alliance “to pool together the thoughts of Muslim bloggers, safeguard the good name of Islam, clarify and teach about Islam and to correct misconceptions about Islam, especially online”.
Applications for membership have flooded in but Zainol is careful. He vets through their blogs and has pared them down to a select 93. Once registered as a mutual benefit society, its monthly contributions will go to a trust fund to take care of legal fees and dakwah activities.
Political affiliations can also be ideals. A new, small grouping called the Barisan Rakyat bloggers, born during the March general election, became most prominent during the Permatang Pauh by-election in August.
Bernard Khoo (blog name Zorro Unmasked), Harris and Raja Petra Kamaruddin (Malaysia Today) were all either “inspired or sponsored by Anwar”, said Rocky.
“It gives more variety, choice. It is good for the three to finally declare where their allegiance lie.”
Nuraina noted that “a lot of racialism has reared its head since the general election”. Like other responsible bloggers, she would edit for sedition and slander.
She steers clear of race and religion because “I might have to be brutally frank”. If commentators to her blog are racist or slanderous, she would have to address their issues.
For others, ideologies had emerged from blurred racial lines. Sheih has about three million plus hits, mostly from non-Malay and non-PAS visitors. “The majority read me for my stand on a few things like justice and equality.”
Span of influence
Public Relations consultant and The Star guest columnist Raslan Sharif feels that although most bloggers, especially those from Umno, may be younger people, their target audience are not necessarily so. “They just target voters, irrespective of age. And more people in their 40s and 50s are also getting tech savvy.”
Even among those who are not, “a lot of the issues I hear in the kedai kopi were (first) brought from the blog,” said Raslan.
The trend-setters, however, are not the socio-political bloggers but the personal bloggers, lifestyle, entertainment and business bloggers who form the bulk of the community. And while lifestyle bloggers are known to sell space, socio-political bloggers blog for free.
“We make the noise and they make the money,” said Rocky flatly.
“Lifestyle bloggers like kennysia.com have a huge following,” noted Raslan. “They are an advertising goldmine since readers are mainly in the 25-35 age bracket who tend to spend. In Kenny’s case, ad space would earn him about RM10,000 per month.”
It is a time-consuming task for “a serious hobby”, said Nuraina. “When bloggers carry google ads, you are not in control of what comes out,” even though you appear to have endorsed the products.
Being original is tough work and only the best succeed in stamping a distinctive mark.
“Most socio-political bloggers pick their topics from the newspapers, then dissect, deconstruct the report and analyse or comment on them. But their primary source is the newspapers,” said Raslan.
But Sheih, who does “not see bloggers as reporters, they are columnists, they analyse. People read them to see how they view (events)”, said he seldom picks items from the newspapers, preferring to go to “the source itself, my “informers”, people who e-mail me something”.
He would not, however, call his blog neutral. “They (readers) want a bit of emotion.”
How to retain your talent
Friday December 5, 2008
How to retain your talent
Psychological factors are as important as financial remuneration
IT’S interesting that when the topic of staff/talent retention is discussed, the talk inevitably tends to focus on financial renumeration. Yet research seems to indicate that psychological factors are just as important as money.
A survey by Gallup among organisations in the Asia-Pacific found that worker engagement levels are a key predictor of staff retention. Worker engagement can be loosely defined as how connected a staff feels with the organisation.
One could argue that the opposite of engagement is “alienation from work”, which was a concept Karl Marx introduced when he was describing how workers during the industrial revolution were robbed of their ownership and meaning.
What is engagement and how do we measure it?
Gallup developed a set of 12 questions that capture the essence of employee engagement and in my opinion, are immensely useful as a guide for managers who are looking at practical ways to retain their top talent:
Top talent, who are also self-motivated individuals, enjoy being part of a team that is filled with individuals who demonstrate the same level of commitment.
Do you know what is expected of you at work?
This is linked to the need for clarity. Employees need to be clear about expectations, targets, standards, goals and other key performance indicators. We retain our talent when the organisational culture encourages clear and transparent communication about what we expect of our people.
Do you have the materials and equipment you need to do your work right?
This is linked to the concept of enabling. “Give the workman his tools” goes the saying.
At work, do you have the opportunity to do what you do best every day?
The key is to match talents to job scope. People enjoy doing what they do best. If our staff feel that their talents are not being utilised and developed, they will start to look for alternatives elsewhere.
In the last seven days, have you received recognition or praise for doing good work?
A culture of recognition breeds a sense of pride and fulfilment. Praise should be genuine and spontaneous rather than superficial and contrived. When someone does something well, recognise them.
At work, do your opinions seem to count?
Top talent have no shortage of ideas on how to improve the organisation. Some are good and some may not be practical. Most staff don’t expect management to implement every idea raised. The point though is that talent must feel that management is open and willing to listen.
Does the mission/purpose of your company make you feel your job is important?
It is important to help our staff link their job scope with the vision and mission of the organisation as a whole. People need to feel significant, in that they have a role to play in the larger scheme of things. All of us need to feel like we matter. The opposite of this is when staff feel that their job is meaningless and insignificant.
Are your associates (fellow employees) committed to doing quality work?
Top talent, who are often self-motivated individuals, enjoy being part of a team that is filled with individuals who demonstrate the same levels of commitment. Successful people want to work in a performance-driven organisation.
Does your supervisor, or someone at work, seem to care about you as a person?
When bosses show that we care just as much about the person as we do their productivity, we reinforce the philosophy that the organisation puts people first. This helps build a level of loyalty towards both the organisation and the immediate superior.
Do you have a best friend at work?
It may sound trivial but it’s true. Many employees stay at an organisation because they have developed close friendships there. Therefore, it’s worthwhile investing in activities and space that enable regular social interaction among staff.
In the last six months, has someone at work talked to you about your progress?
Top talent will be willing to accept constructive criticism as long as it is fair, accurate and delivered with the intention of helping rather than punishing. Some managers make the mistake of being less than transparent and forthcoming in their performance reviews because they fear that staff may not take kindly to any criticism. The point is that without constructive criticism, staff cannot develop and progress.
Is there someone at work who encourages your development?
In the last year, have you had opportunities at work to learn and grow?
The final two questions both relate to talent development. If organisations are serious about retaining their top talent, they need to move away from ad hoc training programmes to cohesive and integrated development programmes that lead to genuine growth. Nothing drives away staff quicker than a sense of stagnancy.
Dr Goh Chee Leong is the vice-president of HELP University College and a psychologist who believes that too many people in the “rat race” are so concerned about “speed” that they’ve not stopped to think about “direction”.
How to retain your talent
Psychological factors are as important as financial remuneration
IT’S interesting that when the topic of staff/talent retention is discussed, the talk inevitably tends to focus on financial renumeration. Yet research seems to indicate that psychological factors are just as important as money.
A survey by Gallup among organisations in the Asia-Pacific found that worker engagement levels are a key predictor of staff retention. Worker engagement can be loosely defined as how connected a staff feels with the organisation.
One could argue that the opposite of engagement is “alienation from work”, which was a concept Karl Marx introduced when he was describing how workers during the industrial revolution were robbed of their ownership and meaning.
What is engagement and how do we measure it?
Gallup developed a set of 12 questions that capture the essence of employee engagement and in my opinion, are immensely useful as a guide for managers who are looking at practical ways to retain their top talent:
Top talent, who are also self-motivated individuals, enjoy being part of a team that is filled with individuals who demonstrate the same level of commitment.
Do you know what is expected of you at work?
This is linked to the need for clarity. Employees need to be clear about expectations, targets, standards, goals and other key performance indicators. We retain our talent when the organisational culture encourages clear and transparent communication about what we expect of our people.
Do you have the materials and equipment you need to do your work right?
This is linked to the concept of enabling. “Give the workman his tools” goes the saying.
At work, do you have the opportunity to do what you do best every day?
The key is to match talents to job scope. People enjoy doing what they do best. If our staff feel that their talents are not being utilised and developed, they will start to look for alternatives elsewhere.
In the last seven days, have you received recognition or praise for doing good work?
A culture of recognition breeds a sense of pride and fulfilment. Praise should be genuine and spontaneous rather than superficial and contrived. When someone does something well, recognise them.
At work, do your opinions seem to count?
Top talent have no shortage of ideas on how to improve the organisation. Some are good and some may not be practical. Most staff don’t expect management to implement every idea raised. The point though is that talent must feel that management is open and willing to listen.
Does the mission/purpose of your company make you feel your job is important?
It is important to help our staff link their job scope with the vision and mission of the organisation as a whole. People need to feel significant, in that they have a role to play in the larger scheme of things. All of us need to feel like we matter. The opposite of this is when staff feel that their job is meaningless and insignificant.
Are your associates (fellow employees) committed to doing quality work?
Top talent, who are often self-motivated individuals, enjoy being part of a team that is filled with individuals who demonstrate the same levels of commitment. Successful people want to work in a performance-driven organisation.
Does your supervisor, or someone at work, seem to care about you as a person?
When bosses show that we care just as much about the person as we do their productivity, we reinforce the philosophy that the organisation puts people first. This helps build a level of loyalty towards both the organisation and the immediate superior.
Do you have a best friend at work?
It may sound trivial but it’s true. Many employees stay at an organisation because they have developed close friendships there. Therefore, it’s worthwhile investing in activities and space that enable regular social interaction among staff.
In the last six months, has someone at work talked to you about your progress?
Top talent will be willing to accept constructive criticism as long as it is fair, accurate and delivered with the intention of helping rather than punishing. Some managers make the mistake of being less than transparent and forthcoming in their performance reviews because they fear that staff may not take kindly to any criticism. The point is that without constructive criticism, staff cannot develop and progress.
Is there someone at work who encourages your development?
In the last year, have you had opportunities at work to learn and grow?
The final two questions both relate to talent development. If organisations are serious about retaining their top talent, they need to move away from ad hoc training programmes to cohesive and integrated development programmes that lead to genuine growth. Nothing drives away staff quicker than a sense of stagnancy.
Dr Goh Chee Leong is the vice-president of HELP University College and a psychologist who believes that too many people in the “rat race” are so concerned about “speed” that they’ve not stopped to think about “direction”.
Former US President Clinton in KL
Published: Friday December 5, 2008 MYT 8:25:00 PMUpdated: Friday December 5, 2008 MYT 9:25:24 PM
Former US President Clinton in KL (updated)
By ROYCE CHEAH
PUTRAJAYA: Former United States President Bill Clinton met with Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi at Bangunan Perdana Putra here on Friday.
Clinton was in Kuala Lumpur to give a talk at the inaugural BC Sekhar Memorial Lecture on Friday.
During his address on Friday, Clinton said political conflict is a good thing whereby disagreements or discussions only promote thinking.
“I was told that there are political conflicts here. That is a good thing. Nobody is right all the time,” Clinton said in reference to the current political situation in Malaysia.
Clinton said just like when he was president of the United States, he would prefer a slightly negative press as opposed to a press that only sings praises of the administration.
“My wife Hilary and I also disagree on many issues but it is this disagreement that allows thinking. It is also healthy to have discussions,” he told a packed hall.
Clinton said he paid a courtesy visit to Abdullah, visited the KL Bird Park and did some shopping for souveniors for his wife and daughter.
Clinton had actually turned up half an hour late for the lecture, arriving at 6.30pm, instead of 6pm as scheduled. He however said it was due to the traffic that lengthened his journey from 35 minutes to 65 minutes.
“Given the current economic climate, having that much traffic indicates that your economy is doing just fine,” he said to laughter from the crowd.
On his visit to the bird park, Clinton said he had met two Muslim women who came up to greet him.
“It is this ability to respect people’s faith that I admire in Malaysia. If only everyone could look another person in their eye and welcome them to their common space, what a different world we would have.”
During the 40-minute lecture, Clinton touched on a vast array of topics ranging from climate change, health issues, global interdependence and empowering people to take control of their lives. He also related the many experiences he had gone through in the 100-odd countries he had visited since setting up the Clinton Global Inititive foundation.
Clinton said the current global economic crisis showed that it was now a fact that the people of the world were simply more interdependent than the entire human race has ever been.
“It shows that divorce is not an option. We’ve seen the negative aspects of the interdependency from terrorist attacks and the financial crisis but good things can also come out of it.”
In this context, Clinton said that the definition of success also had to change from comparing what one person had over another to a situation that ensured all parties benefited. He said it required people to embrace anyone who they shared common values with.
“We have no choice but to share the future. Since most of us care for the future of our children and grandchildren than ourselves, I’m sure we will make the right decision,” he said.
Later during a question and answer session, Clinton said the only way to balance the growth of developing countries at the expense of the environment was to make the business of environment a good business.
“Most cities have landfills. The organic waste could be compacted and used as biofuel and the tyres can be recycled.”
He said the problem was that people think profits could only be made in the way it is already being done rather than challenging the status quo to make profits in a different manner.
Clinton gave the example of how the business model for AIDS medication was changed from one of low volume, high profit margin and uncertain payment to one that is now of high volume, low profit margin and certain payment. He said this sort of paradigm shift could also be done in the environmental industry.
Organised by the Sekhar Foundation, the lecture was held at the Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre and aired live on Astro Awani.
This is Clinton’s first trip to Malaysia. He will also receive the BC Sekhar Medal for Transformational Leadership which is handed out to world leaders who have an excellent record and have brought positive change to the lives of the people.
Former US President Clinton in KL (updated)
By ROYCE CHEAH
PUTRAJAYA: Former United States President Bill Clinton met with Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi at Bangunan Perdana Putra here on Friday.
Clinton was in Kuala Lumpur to give a talk at the inaugural BC Sekhar Memorial Lecture on Friday.
During his address on Friday, Clinton said political conflict is a good thing whereby disagreements or discussions only promote thinking.
“I was told that there are political conflicts here. That is a good thing. Nobody is right all the time,” Clinton said in reference to the current political situation in Malaysia.
Clinton said just like when he was president of the United States, he would prefer a slightly negative press as opposed to a press that only sings praises of the administration.
“My wife Hilary and I also disagree on many issues but it is this disagreement that allows thinking. It is also healthy to have discussions,” he told a packed hall.
Clinton said he paid a courtesy visit to Abdullah, visited the KL Bird Park and did some shopping for souveniors for his wife and daughter.
Clinton had actually turned up half an hour late for the lecture, arriving at 6.30pm, instead of 6pm as scheduled. He however said it was due to the traffic that lengthened his journey from 35 minutes to 65 minutes.
“Given the current economic climate, having that much traffic indicates that your economy is doing just fine,” he said to laughter from the crowd.
On his visit to the bird park, Clinton said he had met two Muslim women who came up to greet him.
“It is this ability to respect people’s faith that I admire in Malaysia. If only everyone could look another person in their eye and welcome them to their common space, what a different world we would have.”
During the 40-minute lecture, Clinton touched on a vast array of topics ranging from climate change, health issues, global interdependence and empowering people to take control of their lives. He also related the many experiences he had gone through in the 100-odd countries he had visited since setting up the Clinton Global Inititive foundation.
Clinton said the current global economic crisis showed that it was now a fact that the people of the world were simply more interdependent than the entire human race has ever been.
“It shows that divorce is not an option. We’ve seen the negative aspects of the interdependency from terrorist attacks and the financial crisis but good things can also come out of it.”
In this context, Clinton said that the definition of success also had to change from comparing what one person had over another to a situation that ensured all parties benefited. He said it required people to embrace anyone who they shared common values with.
“We have no choice but to share the future. Since most of us care for the future of our children and grandchildren than ourselves, I’m sure we will make the right decision,” he said.
Later during a question and answer session, Clinton said the only way to balance the growth of developing countries at the expense of the environment was to make the business of environment a good business.
“Most cities have landfills. The organic waste could be compacted and used as biofuel and the tyres can be recycled.”
He said the problem was that people think profits could only be made in the way it is already being done rather than challenging the status quo to make profits in a different manner.
Clinton gave the example of how the business model for AIDS medication was changed from one of low volume, high profit margin and uncertain payment to one that is now of high volume, low profit margin and certain payment. He said this sort of paradigm shift could also be done in the environmental industry.
Organised by the Sekhar Foundation, the lecture was held at the Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre and aired live on Astro Awani.
This is Clinton’s first trip to Malaysia. He will also receive the BC Sekhar Medal for Transformational Leadership which is handed out to world leaders who have an excellent record and have brought positive change to the lives of the people.
Employers cut 533K jobs in Nov., most in 34 years
Employers cut 533K jobs in Nov., most in 34 years
By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer Jeannine Aversa, Ap Economics Writer 7 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Skittish employers slashed 533,000 jobs in November, the most in 34 years, catapulting the unemployment rate to 6.7 percent, dramatic proof the country is careening deeper into recession.
The new figures, released by the Labor Department Friday, showed the crucial employment market deteriorating at an alarmingly rapid clip, and handed Americans some more grim news right before the holidays.
As companies throttled back hiring, the unemployment rate bolted from 6.5 percent in October to 6.7 percent last month, a 15-year high.
"These numbers are shocking," said economist Joel Naroff, president of Naroff Economics Advisors. "Companies are sharply reacting to the economy's problems and slashing costs. They are not trying to ride it out."
The unemployment rate would have moved even higher if not for the exodus of 422,000 people from the work force. Economists thought many of those people probably abandoned their job searches out of sheer frustration. In November 2007, the jobless rate was at 4.7 percent.
The U.S. tipped into recession last December, a panel of experts declared earlier this week, confirming what many Americans already thought.
Since the start of the recession, the economy has lost 1.9 million jobs, the number of unemployed people increased by 2.7 million and the jobless rate rose by 1.7 percentage points.
President-elect Barack Obama said the dismal job news underscored the need for forceful action, even as he warned that the pain could not be quickly relieved.
"There are no quick or easy fixes to this crisis ... and it's likely to get worse before it gets better," Obama said. "At the same time, this ... provides us with an opportunity to transform our economy to improve the lives of ordinary people by rebuilding roads and modernizing schools for our children, investing in clean energy solutions to break our dependence on imported oil, and making an early down payment on the long-term reforms that will grow and strengthen our economy for all Americans for years to come."
On Wall Street, stocks slid. The Dow Jones industrials were down more than 175 points in morning trading.
Job losses last month were widespread, hitting factories, construction companies, financial firms, retailers, leisure and hospitality, and others industries. The few places where gains were logged included the government, education and health services.
The loss of 533,000 payroll jobs was much deeper than the 320,000 job cuts economists were forecasting. The rise in the unemployment rate, however, wasn't as steep as the 6.8 percent rate they were expecting. Taken together, though, the employment picture was dismal.
The job reductions were the most since a whopping 602,000 positions were slashed in December 1974, when the country was in a severe recession.
All told, 10.3 million people were left unemployed as of November, while the number of employed was 144.3 million.
Job losses in September and October also turned out to be much worse. Employers cut 403,000 jobs in September, versus 284,000 previously estimated. Another 320,000 were chopped in October, compared with an initial estimate of 240,000.
Employers are slashing costs to the bone as they try to cope with sagging appetites from customers in the U.S. and in other countries, which are struggling with their own economic troubles.
The carnage — including the worst financial crisis since the 1930s — is hitting a wide range of companies.
In recent days, household names like AT&T Inc., DuPont, JPMorgan Chase & Co., as well as jet engine maker Pratt & Whitney, a subsidiary of United Technologies Corp., and mining company Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc. announced layoffs.
Fighting for their survival, the chiefs of Chrysler LLC, General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. returned to Capitol Hill Friday to again ask lawmakers for as much as $34 billion in emergency aid.
Workers with jobs saw modest wage gains. Average hourly earnings rose to $18.30 in November, a 0.4 percent increase from the previous month. Over the year, wages have grown 3.7 percent, but paychecks haven't stretched that far because of high prices for energy, food and other items.
Worn-out consumers battered by the job losses, shrinking nest eggs and tanking home values have retrenched, throwing the economy into a tailspin. As the unemployment rate continues to move higher, consumers will burrow further, dragging the economy down even more, a vicious cycle that Washington policymakers are trying to break.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is expected ratchet down a key interest rate — now near a historic low of 1 percent — by as much as a half-percentage point on Dec. 16 in a bid to breathe life into the moribund economy. Bernanke is exploring other economic revival options and wants the government to step up efforts to curb home foreclosures.
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, whose department oversees the $700 billion financial bailout program, also is weighing new initiatives, even as his remaining days in office are numbered.
Obama, who takes office on Jan. 20, has called for a massive economic recovery bill to generate 2.5 million jobs over his first two years in office. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has vowed to have a package ready on Inauguration Day for Obama's signature.
The measure, which could total $500 billion, would bankroll big public works projects to create jobs, provide aid to states to help with Medicaid costs, and provide money toward renewable energy development.
At 12 months and counting, the recession is longer than the 10-month average length of recessions since World War II. The record for the longest recession in the postwar period is 16 months, which was reached in the 1973-75 and 1981-82 downturns. The current recession might end up matching that or setting a record in terms of duration, analysts say.
The 1981-82 recession was the worst in terms of unemployment since the Great Depression. The jobless rate rose as high as 10.8 percent in late 1982, just as the recession ended, before inching down.
Given the current woes, the jobless rate could rise as high as 8.5 percent by the end of next year, some analysts predict. Projections, however, have to be taken with a grain of salt because of all the uncertainties plaguing the economy. Still, the unemployment rate often peaks after a recession has ended. That's because companies are reluctant to ramp up hiring until they feel certain the recovery has staying power.
By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer Jeannine Aversa, Ap Economics Writer 7 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Skittish employers slashed 533,000 jobs in November, the most in 34 years, catapulting the unemployment rate to 6.7 percent, dramatic proof the country is careening deeper into recession.
The new figures, released by the Labor Department Friday, showed the crucial employment market deteriorating at an alarmingly rapid clip, and handed Americans some more grim news right before the holidays.
As companies throttled back hiring, the unemployment rate bolted from 6.5 percent in October to 6.7 percent last month, a 15-year high.
"These numbers are shocking," said economist Joel Naroff, president of Naroff Economics Advisors. "Companies are sharply reacting to the economy's problems and slashing costs. They are not trying to ride it out."
The unemployment rate would have moved even higher if not for the exodus of 422,000 people from the work force. Economists thought many of those people probably abandoned their job searches out of sheer frustration. In November 2007, the jobless rate was at 4.7 percent.
The U.S. tipped into recession last December, a panel of experts declared earlier this week, confirming what many Americans already thought.
Since the start of the recession, the economy has lost 1.9 million jobs, the number of unemployed people increased by 2.7 million and the jobless rate rose by 1.7 percentage points.
President-elect Barack Obama said the dismal job news underscored the need for forceful action, even as he warned that the pain could not be quickly relieved.
"There are no quick or easy fixes to this crisis ... and it's likely to get worse before it gets better," Obama said. "At the same time, this ... provides us with an opportunity to transform our economy to improve the lives of ordinary people by rebuilding roads and modernizing schools for our children, investing in clean energy solutions to break our dependence on imported oil, and making an early down payment on the long-term reforms that will grow and strengthen our economy for all Americans for years to come."
On Wall Street, stocks slid. The Dow Jones industrials were down more than 175 points in morning trading.
Job losses last month were widespread, hitting factories, construction companies, financial firms, retailers, leisure and hospitality, and others industries. The few places where gains were logged included the government, education and health services.
The loss of 533,000 payroll jobs was much deeper than the 320,000 job cuts economists were forecasting. The rise in the unemployment rate, however, wasn't as steep as the 6.8 percent rate they were expecting. Taken together, though, the employment picture was dismal.
The job reductions were the most since a whopping 602,000 positions were slashed in December 1974, when the country was in a severe recession.
All told, 10.3 million people were left unemployed as of November, while the number of employed was 144.3 million.
Job losses in September and October also turned out to be much worse. Employers cut 403,000 jobs in September, versus 284,000 previously estimated. Another 320,000 were chopped in October, compared with an initial estimate of 240,000.
Employers are slashing costs to the bone as they try to cope with sagging appetites from customers in the U.S. and in other countries, which are struggling with their own economic troubles.
The carnage — including the worst financial crisis since the 1930s — is hitting a wide range of companies.
In recent days, household names like AT&T Inc., DuPont, JPMorgan Chase & Co., as well as jet engine maker Pratt & Whitney, a subsidiary of United Technologies Corp., and mining company Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc. announced layoffs.
Fighting for their survival, the chiefs of Chrysler LLC, General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. returned to Capitol Hill Friday to again ask lawmakers for as much as $34 billion in emergency aid.
Workers with jobs saw modest wage gains. Average hourly earnings rose to $18.30 in November, a 0.4 percent increase from the previous month. Over the year, wages have grown 3.7 percent, but paychecks haven't stretched that far because of high prices for energy, food and other items.
Worn-out consumers battered by the job losses, shrinking nest eggs and tanking home values have retrenched, throwing the economy into a tailspin. As the unemployment rate continues to move higher, consumers will burrow further, dragging the economy down even more, a vicious cycle that Washington policymakers are trying to break.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is expected ratchet down a key interest rate — now near a historic low of 1 percent — by as much as a half-percentage point on Dec. 16 in a bid to breathe life into the moribund economy. Bernanke is exploring other economic revival options and wants the government to step up efforts to curb home foreclosures.
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, whose department oversees the $700 billion financial bailout program, also is weighing new initiatives, even as his remaining days in office are numbered.
Obama, who takes office on Jan. 20, has called for a massive economic recovery bill to generate 2.5 million jobs over his first two years in office. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has vowed to have a package ready on Inauguration Day for Obama's signature.
The measure, which could total $500 billion, would bankroll big public works projects to create jobs, provide aid to states to help with Medicaid costs, and provide money toward renewable energy development.
At 12 months and counting, the recession is longer than the 10-month average length of recessions since World War II. The record for the longest recession in the postwar period is 16 months, which was reached in the 1973-75 and 1981-82 downturns. The current recession might end up matching that or setting a record in terms of duration, analysts say.
The 1981-82 recession was the worst in terms of unemployment since the Great Depression. The jobless rate rose as high as 10.8 percent in late 1982, just as the recession ended, before inching down.
Given the current woes, the jobless rate could rise as high as 8.5 percent by the end of next year, some analysts predict. Projections, however, have to be taken with a grain of salt because of all the uncertainties plaguing the economy. Still, the unemployment rate often peaks after a recession has ended. That's because companies are reluctant to ramp up hiring until they feel certain the recovery has staying power.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Can anyone rescue the U.S. automakers?
Who Can Save Detroit?
by Chris IsidoreThursday, December 4, 2008
Automakers are heading back to Capitol Hill to plead for a bailout. They may finally get help...but not from Congress.
Can anyone rescue the U.S. automakers?
General Motors, Ford Motor and Chrysler LLC each unveiled plans Tuesday that detailed how they would return to profitability if they get federal loans.
Still, even with President-elect Obama and the outgoing Bush administration saying they support providing assistance to the automakers, it's not clear that they will get the help they need.
The CEOs of the three firms are again appearing in front of Congress Thursday and Friday to make their case for what's now a $34 billion loan package. They had originally been requesting $25 billion.
GM is asking for up to $18 billion and says it needs $4 billion of that almost immediately to avoid running out of cash before the end of the year.
Chrysler is seeking $7 billion and has warned that it too could run out of cash.
The situation is a bit better at Ford but it said it wants to be able to access up to $9 billion as a backstop.
The Big Three's last visit to Capitol Hill was nothing less than a public relations disaster, as many members of the House and Senate denounced the CEOs for their bad decisions and worse symbolism. Each CEO flew to Washington to ask for help aboard their own corporate jets.
This time, GM CEO Rick Wagoner, Ford CEO Alan Mulally and Chrysler CEO Robert Nardelli all drove to Washington in fuel-efficient hybrids. And they all have agreed to cut their salaries to $1 a year if they get federal loans.
Will that be enough to convince a skeptical Congress to grant Detroit the help it needs? Here's a look at how various rescue situations for the Big Three could play out, even if Congress says no (or simply doesn't vote on) a bailout.
Congress Gives In
Even critics in the House and Senate may be reluctant to reject the automakers' request for help.
There are few members of Congress who haven't heard from the auto dealers in their district, as the U.S. automakers mobilized dealers to turn up the pressure on Washington.
And since the Big Three's 14,000 dealers employ about 740,000 people nationwide, legislators have to worry about rising job losses if a Big Three automaker were to fail -- even if their district is no where near the Midwest auto belt.
But one of the problems facing the automakers is that they are asking for money from the current session of Congress, which includes more Republicans than the new Congress that will take office on Jan. 6.
Democratic leaders of both houses, who support the automakers' request for help, still won't commit to a vote by the current Congress. But once the new session starts, there could be a vote early in the year...even before President-elect Obama is inaugurated on Jan. 20.
While GM officials stress they need help before then, others believe they might be able to survive long enough for the new Congress to keep them out of bankruptcy.
"If the GM board decided there was help on the way in early January, I'm sure they'd make an effort to preserve cash and get to that point," said Bob Schulz, Standard & Poor's senior auto credit analyst.
The Treasury or Fed Decide to Help
If Congress doesn't act before the end of this year, it's still possible that other parts of the government step in.
Some Democrats, including House Speaker Pelosi, insist that the Treasury Department could use some of the $700 billion set aside in October to help banks and Wall Street firms.
But Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and the Bush administration strongly oppose that idea. What's more, the Treasury has already committed all but $20 billion of the first $350 billion it is allowed to hand out without approval from Congress.
That leaves the Federal Reserve as another option. The Fed agreed to loan $85 billion to insurer American International Group in September and has been loaning hundreds of billions of dollars more to major companies, many outside the financial sector. It also recently agreed to guarantee up to $306 billion in assets of struggling bank Citigroup.
A spokesman for the Fed did not return calls seeking comment.
The Fed could probably justify intervention as necessary given the tens of billions of unsecured debt that could go into default if there was a bankruptcy of one of the Big Three. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke pledged in a speech earlier this week that the central bank wasn't done doing what is necessary to avoid damage to the financial system and the economy.
Still, some Fed watchers think the agency would be unlikely to go where Congress has refused to go.
"The Fed is already so activist that I feel Bernanke...would see assistance to Detroit as unnecessarily complicating an already very complicated relationship with Congress," said Tom Schlesinger, executive director of Financial Markets Center, a research firm that closely follow the Fed.
But he also said the Fed might be more open to such a move if Democratic leaders in Congress signal they would welcome such stop-gap support.
"There may be winking and nodding going on as we speak," he said.
Union Concessions Provide a Spark
The United Auto Workers union announced Wednesday that members will be willing to make modifications in the contracts they reached with the three U.S. automakers just last fall.
Those contracts granted the companies many cost-savings concessions, including a two-tier wage and benefit structure for new hires and a shift of $100 billion in future retiree health care costs to trust funds controlled by the unions.
The 2007 contract closes much of the labor cost gap between the automakers and the non-union plants operated in the United States by Asian automakers.
Ford estimates that its hourly labor costs will go down from an average of $71 under its previous contract of $71 for pay, benefits and all retirement costs down to $53 an hour by 2010 under the new contract. The comparable numbers for the Asian auto plants is $49 an hour, according to Ford.
But none of the savings that the UAW can offer, while important to their long-term competitiveness, will provide the automakers with the billions they need to get through the current auto sales slump.
"To be honest with you, right now if the UAW members went in these facilities and worked for nothing...it would not help the companies that much," said UAW President Ron Gettelfinger.
Fresh Start After Bankruptcy
Many critics of the auto industry argue that bankruptcy is the best choice for the Big Three. A bankruptcy judge has broad powers to let the automakers shed their debts and other obligations, as well as get out of labor contracts that they can no longer afford.
Other industries, including steel and airlines, have used bankruptcies to emerge financially healthy.
But the automakers say that consumers' concerns about warranties and the resale value of vehicles would stop them from buying from a bankrupt automaker. The resulting drop in sales would make already bleak conditions worse.
There are also questions about whether the automakers could get the financing they need to operate under bankruptcy court. Many lenders that have loaned to bankrupt companies in the past have exited the field in the wake of the credit crunch. And experts question whether the crucial source of funds needed to emerge from bankruptcy would be available to the automakers.
"The size of the companies, the state of the capital markets [and] the uncertainty about how bankruptcy would play out...means the ability to get [financing] is a big question mark," said S&P's Schulz.
Car Buyers Come Back
The Big Three's problem is mainly that demand for their products has fallen off a cliff. And unfortunately, consumers are the least likely saviors of the industry.
Sales have been in a downward spiral all year and the nation's major automakers, including Toyota and Honda, each reported sales drops of at least 30% in November on Tuesday, resulting in the worst month for industrywide U.S. auto sales since 1982.
The fact that overseas automakers also saw huge drops in sales is a sign that the problems in the auto industry are not due only to bad decisions by Detroit.
Toyota also cut its production Wednesday due to weak sales. It now has more laid off U.S. workers collecting nearly full pay than the Big Three, according to the UAW.
With the economy getting weaker, job losses mounting and credit remaining tight, a needed rebound in demand appears unlikely in the near-term. The seasonally adjusted annual sales rate was just over 10 million vehicles in November, far below the 16.1 million vehicles sold in 2007
Chrysler is forecasting that industrywide sales will stay below 14 million through 2012. GM expects somewhat stronger sales but is still designing a business plan to be profitable even if annual sales are in the 13 million range.
But if the economy does turn around next year and credit conditions improve, some experts say that there could be pent up demand for cars. And that could deliver the revenue and cash flow the automakers sorely need.
Copyrighted, CNNMoney. All Rights Reserved.
by Chris IsidoreThursday, December 4, 2008
Automakers are heading back to Capitol Hill to plead for a bailout. They may finally get help...but not from Congress.
Can anyone rescue the U.S. automakers?
General Motors, Ford Motor and Chrysler LLC each unveiled plans Tuesday that detailed how they would return to profitability if they get federal loans.
Still, even with President-elect Obama and the outgoing Bush administration saying they support providing assistance to the automakers, it's not clear that they will get the help they need.
The CEOs of the three firms are again appearing in front of Congress Thursday and Friday to make their case for what's now a $34 billion loan package. They had originally been requesting $25 billion.
GM is asking for up to $18 billion and says it needs $4 billion of that almost immediately to avoid running out of cash before the end of the year.
Chrysler is seeking $7 billion and has warned that it too could run out of cash.
The situation is a bit better at Ford but it said it wants to be able to access up to $9 billion as a backstop.
The Big Three's last visit to Capitol Hill was nothing less than a public relations disaster, as many members of the House and Senate denounced the CEOs for their bad decisions and worse symbolism. Each CEO flew to Washington to ask for help aboard their own corporate jets.
This time, GM CEO Rick Wagoner, Ford CEO Alan Mulally and Chrysler CEO Robert Nardelli all drove to Washington in fuel-efficient hybrids. And they all have agreed to cut their salaries to $1 a year if they get federal loans.
Will that be enough to convince a skeptical Congress to grant Detroit the help it needs? Here's a look at how various rescue situations for the Big Three could play out, even if Congress says no (or simply doesn't vote on) a bailout.
Congress Gives In
Even critics in the House and Senate may be reluctant to reject the automakers' request for help.
There are few members of Congress who haven't heard from the auto dealers in their district, as the U.S. automakers mobilized dealers to turn up the pressure on Washington.
And since the Big Three's 14,000 dealers employ about 740,000 people nationwide, legislators have to worry about rising job losses if a Big Three automaker were to fail -- even if their district is no where near the Midwest auto belt.
But one of the problems facing the automakers is that they are asking for money from the current session of Congress, which includes more Republicans than the new Congress that will take office on Jan. 6.
Democratic leaders of both houses, who support the automakers' request for help, still won't commit to a vote by the current Congress. But once the new session starts, there could be a vote early in the year...even before President-elect Obama is inaugurated on Jan. 20.
While GM officials stress they need help before then, others believe they might be able to survive long enough for the new Congress to keep them out of bankruptcy.
"If the GM board decided there was help on the way in early January, I'm sure they'd make an effort to preserve cash and get to that point," said Bob Schulz, Standard & Poor's senior auto credit analyst.
The Treasury or Fed Decide to Help
If Congress doesn't act before the end of this year, it's still possible that other parts of the government step in.
Some Democrats, including House Speaker Pelosi, insist that the Treasury Department could use some of the $700 billion set aside in October to help banks and Wall Street firms.
But Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and the Bush administration strongly oppose that idea. What's more, the Treasury has already committed all but $20 billion of the first $350 billion it is allowed to hand out without approval from Congress.
That leaves the Federal Reserve as another option. The Fed agreed to loan $85 billion to insurer American International Group in September and has been loaning hundreds of billions of dollars more to major companies, many outside the financial sector. It also recently agreed to guarantee up to $306 billion in assets of struggling bank Citigroup.
A spokesman for the Fed did not return calls seeking comment.
The Fed could probably justify intervention as necessary given the tens of billions of unsecured debt that could go into default if there was a bankruptcy of one of the Big Three. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke pledged in a speech earlier this week that the central bank wasn't done doing what is necessary to avoid damage to the financial system and the economy.
Still, some Fed watchers think the agency would be unlikely to go where Congress has refused to go.
"The Fed is already so activist that I feel Bernanke...would see assistance to Detroit as unnecessarily complicating an already very complicated relationship with Congress," said Tom Schlesinger, executive director of Financial Markets Center, a research firm that closely follow the Fed.
But he also said the Fed might be more open to such a move if Democratic leaders in Congress signal they would welcome such stop-gap support.
"There may be winking and nodding going on as we speak," he said.
Union Concessions Provide a Spark
The United Auto Workers union announced Wednesday that members will be willing to make modifications in the contracts they reached with the three U.S. automakers just last fall.
Those contracts granted the companies many cost-savings concessions, including a two-tier wage and benefit structure for new hires and a shift of $100 billion in future retiree health care costs to trust funds controlled by the unions.
The 2007 contract closes much of the labor cost gap between the automakers and the non-union plants operated in the United States by Asian automakers.
Ford estimates that its hourly labor costs will go down from an average of $71 under its previous contract of $71 for pay, benefits and all retirement costs down to $53 an hour by 2010 under the new contract. The comparable numbers for the Asian auto plants is $49 an hour, according to Ford.
But none of the savings that the UAW can offer, while important to their long-term competitiveness, will provide the automakers with the billions they need to get through the current auto sales slump.
"To be honest with you, right now if the UAW members went in these facilities and worked for nothing...it would not help the companies that much," said UAW President Ron Gettelfinger.
Fresh Start After Bankruptcy
Many critics of the auto industry argue that bankruptcy is the best choice for the Big Three. A bankruptcy judge has broad powers to let the automakers shed their debts and other obligations, as well as get out of labor contracts that they can no longer afford.
Other industries, including steel and airlines, have used bankruptcies to emerge financially healthy.
But the automakers say that consumers' concerns about warranties and the resale value of vehicles would stop them from buying from a bankrupt automaker. The resulting drop in sales would make already bleak conditions worse.
There are also questions about whether the automakers could get the financing they need to operate under bankruptcy court. Many lenders that have loaned to bankrupt companies in the past have exited the field in the wake of the credit crunch. And experts question whether the crucial source of funds needed to emerge from bankruptcy would be available to the automakers.
"The size of the companies, the state of the capital markets [and] the uncertainty about how bankruptcy would play out...means the ability to get [financing] is a big question mark," said S&P's Schulz.
Car Buyers Come Back
The Big Three's problem is mainly that demand for their products has fallen off a cliff. And unfortunately, consumers are the least likely saviors of the industry.
Sales have been in a downward spiral all year and the nation's major automakers, including Toyota and Honda, each reported sales drops of at least 30% in November on Tuesday, resulting in the worst month for industrywide U.S. auto sales since 1982.
The fact that overseas automakers also saw huge drops in sales is a sign that the problems in the auto industry are not due only to bad decisions by Detroit.
Toyota also cut its production Wednesday due to weak sales. It now has more laid off U.S. workers collecting nearly full pay than the Big Three, according to the UAW.
With the economy getting weaker, job losses mounting and credit remaining tight, a needed rebound in demand appears unlikely in the near-term. The seasonally adjusted annual sales rate was just over 10 million vehicles in November, far below the 16.1 million vehicles sold in 2007
Chrysler is forecasting that industrywide sales will stay below 14 million through 2012. GM expects somewhat stronger sales but is still designing a business plan to be profitable even if annual sales are in the 13 million range.
But if the economy does turn around next year and credit conditions improve, some experts say that there could be pent up demand for cars. And that could deliver the revenue and cash flow the automakers sorely need.
Copyrighted, CNNMoney. All Rights Reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)