Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘International’ Category

From a strategic communication perspective the US president’s approach to implementing his administration’s foreign policy has been  thoughtful and pragmatic. He comes across as an intellectual and approaches international problem-solving realistically.

But, I must say I have had difficulty with how he has handled some issues and crises. Two such moments have happened recently:

(1) He publicly expressed disappointment with US allies not getting more engaged with solving the problems in the middle east. While he might be expressing that privately, publicly he should be stressing repeatedly the importance of working together. Reprimanding allies publicly will only alienate them and make matters worse.

(2) The Brussels attacks happened while he was in Cuba. Mistakenly, he must have seen his primary audience as ISIS instead of his citizens because he chose to be pictured in the stands watching a baseball game. He was more determined to demonstrate that terrorists could not disrupt his schedule than to demonstrate real national leadership.

My experience suggests that at moments like this any president needs to move to a setting symbolizing taking control. This is so whether it be the president of the United States or the president of anything else… university, business, nonprofit, etc.

To do otherwise a top leader ends up handing adversaries a strong case for criticizing judgment under pressure, and then followers inevitably lose confidence they need to feel.

Read Full Post »

How can Putin’s words and deeds be interpreted? His rhetoric at home is about recapturing Russian prestige and pride. His actions in the middle east are making a statement about world leadership. At the same time Mr. Putin seems uncharacteristically interested in the US election. And Mr. Trump has on occasion suggested that he can get along with Putin.

Is Putin the Trump of Russia?  And what would their collaboration turn out to mean?

Russia has a rich cultural heritage. It’s history has been tumultuous, but its arts, music, ballet, theater, and literature are often acknowledged to be world-class. The fall of the Soviet Union and the years following were a blow to Russian pride. News stories stressed the struggles of the Russian middle and lower classes, the dysfunction of government, the corruption of government sponsored entities, the questionable practices of wealthy business moguls, and the decline of international prestige.

The situation was ripe in Russia (as in today’s America and 1930’s Germany) for a leader promising a better life and a revision of national pride. Trump promises to restore a stronger version of American exceptionalism. And Putin promises to restore his own brand of Russian exceptionalism. It’s easy to see the appeal. But it’s also difficult to see how powerful promises without “how-to” substance will work.

It seems to me that this is a critical question for our time:  How can we know that the leader who makes inspirational promises is legitimate, honest, transparent, substantive, and honorable… and not manipulative, dishonest, secretive, and self-serving?

Unfortunately, the lesson of the new media world we have yet to learn is how to tell the difference!

Read Full Post »

Not too long ago if someone made an outrageous remark about an organization I probably would have advised officials not to respond. To do so inevitably would give credibility to that person, put the organization’s spokesperson on the defensive, and unintentionally confirm the situation as controversial. Not responding would usually mean that the whole thing would just go away.

But in today’s media climate not responding can lead to unanticipated problems. For example, there is no doubt that today’s social media combined with the voracious appetite of 24/7 news very likely can lead to lies sounding true… at least true enough to seriously damage reputations.

And when a political party decides to attack the government as a whole, block everything a president does, object to every domestic and foreign policy, and reject every economic initiative, there also can be unintended consequences. In addition to creating gridlock and nothing getting done, a mean-spirited polarizing approach can also lead large numbers of people to view the attackers themselves as a huge part of the problem.

So in a new media world lies can begin to sound true,  attackers can eventually become part of the problem, and simple promises of a better life by someone outside the system can become very attractive. Feelings emerge that social progress has become hopelessly gridlocked, and very soon there is too much support and momentum for the outside person to be stopped. In other words, the desire for happy days “trumps” any demands for details about action plans.

The news media also plays a role here. Events and public  pronouncements that stand out and grab public attention are clearly news. When such stories have next day follow-up potential they are really good for business, i.e. ratings and headlines. The unintended consequence, however, is that the person able to generate grabber headlines gets what amounts to free publicity, and often a lot of it over extended periods of time. Eventually this adds up to establishing emerging leader credibility.

Similar conditions existed in Germany in the 1930’s. People had become disenchanted with government, the jobs economy was weak, international prestige was suffering, and conditions were ripe for promises of a better life. An unlikely individual emerged with that promise, as well as an additional one to restore the public’s pride in the superiority of all things German. By the time enough people saw what was actually happening it was too late to stop it.

Does all this mean that the news media has a responsibility to step in very soon and demand on-the-spot proof for comments that seem less than truthful? Or does it mean that many other organizations and schools need to accept the critically important responsibility of teaching masses of citizens about  today’s media dynamics and consequences?

For now, however, it may be that we can only cross our fingers. If we actually do elect a president based more on promises than substance, let’s all hope it all works out anyway!

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

What is the consequence of arguing against ideas or programs without providing alternative solutions? Simply put, you are leaving your audience hanging with the most constructive part of your message missing. Such an approach might gain support from sympathizers in the short run, but it is likely to prove insufficient in the end.

Republican legislators have spent the last several years objecting to the president’s initiatives and policies without offering specific alternative solutions. Now the new speaker of the house said this week that this will change. This new development is important, but for practical reasons it might be easier said than done.

While the politics of “no” leaves the communication loop incomplete and audiences ultimately unsatisfied, it still is much easier to rally people around their common dissatisfaction with a situation than it is to get them to agree on a solution.

This dilemma has also appeared in foreign policy matters. There was widespread support for the rhetoric to oust the Iraqi government, but there was no agreed upon plan to replace it. In Egypt it was easy to rally people against the government  but impossible to find agreement on who and what should replace it. The situation has been the same in Libya and elsewhere.

Now we are facing the same dilemma in Syria. Even if the US engineers the ouster of the current government, what will follow. What kind of government? Who will lead it? What will it cost? Who will pay?

This is both a political and communication reality. The lesson is that in the long run it is impossible to have success by only  objecting to the current state of affairs. In the short run it might seem to work, but over time it will become apparent that tearing down without a plan for what follows can leave entire nations in endless turmoil.

On this issue, political leaders with a truly international education might ultimately be our only best hope. This is because a global  education will feature multicultural forums for both the systematic nonpartisan examination of ideas and programs, and for finding pragmatic workable solutions.

Read Full Post »

(more…)

Read Full Post »

By watching the news over the last few months it’s possible to see the Greek government as totally dysfunctional, its people too lazy to work a full day, its political leaders as ego driven, and its approach to its membership in the EU as naive.

My wife and I just spent almost three weeks touring Athens and many of the Greek isles. We experienced a Greece that is actually functioning fairly well in spite of high unemployment. Christmas decorations are appearing everywhere, and most restaurants are doing fine. People complain about their extremely high taxes, but I must say that their “enjoy-life everyday” lifestyle came off to me as a healthy alternative to the relentless success-driven world from which I retired!

Simply put, being there was a much different experience than just seeing it on television or in textbook photos or on videos. For example, standing on the Acropolis and walking slowly around the Parthenon is truly an emotional experience. These are familiar images we have all seen in books, magazines, and movies. But when you are actually there you cannot escape the thrill of putting your feet on the same ground where ancient people walked,  worked, fought, worshiped, lived, and debated ideas.

At archeological sites and in museums throughout the Greek isles and in Athens my wife repeatedly commented on how breathtaking it was for her to see the actual artifacts and paintings that she had only seen in art and world history textbooks. Being there connects you directly with the same places where artists painted, philosophers taught, and the historical events that we read about really happened. Now you are the director of your own movie. You decide where to point the camera. You alone determine what to spend more time exploring.

Just walking streets and neighborhoods gives you a good  impression of how people live each day. And talking with only a few of them can provide new insights about their core values and life goals. You find that they can be different from yours, but still engaging and understandable.

And sometimes you may also be disappointed. For example, you may find that many of the charming towns and villages you have seen in travel photos and movies have become overcrowded tourist traps much of the year. But this too is a real life lesson about how the world is constantly changing and the price that is being paid for progress.

Observing people’s daily lives, absorbing cultures and values, making foreign friendships, encountering political and religious conflicts, seeing poverty that you can’t change with your own eyes, and even experiencing the consequences of global warming for yourself… all this and more changes people forever.

Yes, the digital technology revolution can bring great images of the world to the campus experience. And we certainly must use this new and traditional media to enrich our classroom conversations and dialogues. But with the globalization of higher education all of this should just be the preparation for students spending more time experiencing the world first-hand.

One final thought about being there: A new level of fear came over me after experiencing the terrorist killings in Paris while in Athens. After all, I had just traveled through the history of this  ancient land and there was no way now I could ignore the fact that many great societies came to an end because of this kind of extreme intolerance coupled with a disregard for the value of human life.

So, what will it take to bring about tolerance in this world! I still believe that the globalization of higher education is a huge step in the right direction. But last week in Athens I must say it felt like we are now in a race against time.

Read Full Post »

Reflecting over 50 years of struggling to help people and institutions make themselves better understood I offer the following lessons:

1. Once people have made a commitment to a point of view it is almost impossible to change their minds. So in the case of ISIS today, military and/or political solutions seem to be the only immediate options.

2. But it is not too late for mayors and city managers to collaborate on both communication and action initiatives that will enable Muslim groups to feel better connected to genuine opportunities. Hopelessness and despair in the multi-cultural ghettos of the world’s great cities can still be addressed.

3. This is also a moment that top Muslim leaders can and should seize to plan and launch a major communication campaign to explain Islam to the world. This is because the world’s news media will be looking for new breaking news stories right now, and the timing is especially right for this one. But to be effective at a time like this a story must cut through mounds of negative information clutter. And to do so it must be a completely positive, simple, and endlessly repeated description of what Islam stands for and what it does not.

4. This is also a “right time” opportunity for the leaders of the Western world to unite behind their shared democratic values. However, for this to ring credible politicians and prominent leaders in every country will have to be willing to find the right common language to “rally” everyone behind their president or top leader, no matter political background or past mistakes. Common cause must become the unifier. Blame must be left for historians. Dissent can be accommodated, but not at this time among the leaders.

It’s true that 24/7 news coverage can make it difficult to get beyond many momentary crises. But continuing news coverage in a crisis of ISIS magnitude might prove to be helpful. It can provide an opportunity for the Western world to unite around shared values, a catalyst for addressing ghetto neighborhood hopelessness, a new opportunity for top Islamic leaders to make their religion better understood, and a perfect “teachable moment” for educators and students everywhere around the world.

 

Read Full Post »

On Monday I met with the executive editor of the Economist news magazine in London. Because it is so current and comprehensive those who work there still call it a weekly newspaper, and many international leaders will argue that it is the most influential business and political publication in the world.

My TCU John V. Roach Honors College classes and Bob Schieffer Communication College seminars have been enriched by “live” dialogues with this noted international journalist. We have “Skyped” him in to converse with students, and we have also visited with him in the board room at the top of the Economist building in London.

Today my discussion with him was about the future of higher education. He is responsible for the new media initiatives at the Economist as well as its annual publication, The Year Ahead. So I presented ideas from my new book The Transition Academy (CASE Books), and he made observations based on his daily immersion in the turmoil of international news.

When all was said and done we agreed that on-line education is improving and will establish itself as a convenient alternative for many students around the world, that residential institutions will have to combine new media enhancements and experiences with face-to-face dialogues in order to succeed, that all of higher education is rapidly becoming a global industry and every institution will have to adapt, and that “university advancement” is a misleading term for what might better be called “university business development.”

Advancement is a term that is intended to cover university fundraisng, alumni relations, strategic communication, marketing, and even government relations. I have even described it as including everyone involved with advancing the institution. But it has become misleading to many, and my meeting today at the Economist convinced me that as the industry becomes more global we really do need to find a better term.

 

Read Full Post »

The EU is a collection of separate countries that came together to prevent the possibility of another world war, as well as to compete more powerfully in the international marketplace. However, right now a common currency and shared issues in higher education seem to be the only things they have in common.

Latin America is made up of many separate countries too. Each has its distinct culture and political environment. As with the EU, it is almost impossible to refer to Latin America as a unified entity. Few if any would see it as a common market.

I had the honor this week of kicking off a conference attended by university marketing and communication professionals from many of the countries in Latin and Central America, the United States, and Puerto Rico.  I talked with them about my new book, The Transition Academy, and about my lessons learned over 50 years adapting marketing and communication strategies and tactics to the challenge of making academic institutions better understood. I found that on these topics they indeed did have a lot in common. They were all experiencing government cutbacks, the impact of the digital technology revolution both inside and outside their institutions, and the widespread effects of globalization.

The participants talked to me about how social media tools were changing their students, as well as how they were marketing their institutions differently. They were interested in more sophisticated approaches to brand identity development, and ways to get more support for their work inside their universities. In other words, they have the same internal politics issues that we all do. They asked about the importance of world rankings, and how smaller institutions can respond to related constituent pressures.

In other words, I experienced with this group what I had previously experienced in Canada, Europe, Australia, Asia, and even South Africa. While some of the specifics are different, many of the big issues we face in the academy are the same. While we compete for students and money in some cases, we also can come together and share common concerns and lessons.

Latin America is not a common market. But the universities of Latin America do have many issues in common and problems they can resolve together. And when I suggested that the ultimate potential of all this interaction was a global industry that developed truly international leaders and the expertise to solve our most pressing international problems, no one seemed to object.

Read Full Post »

(more…)

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »