DEBORAH DiSANZO AT PHILIPS MEDICAL SYSTEMS

Two things struck me after studying the case “Deborah DiSanzo at Philips Medical Systems”. First, if I was in her shoes, would I have accepted the position being offered by the CEO, and leave behind my present organization where I have already found considerable success? Second, what leadership lessons can I glean from DiSanzo’s experience as General Manager of Patient Monitoring System (PMS)? How do I approach my role as a manager? As a leader? How do I lead an organization that has already found success on its own, and whose people are already well-entrenched?

DiSanzo was already an accomplished career woman when Philips’ Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Steve Rusckowski asked her to head the Patient Monitoring business of Philips Medical Systems. She has been at the helm of the company’s successful cardiac resuscitation business, and she is looked at as a leader in the arena. But it was no surprise that she accepted the new leadership position. She was an adaptive leader after all. Adaptive leaders do not back away from challenges. As a matter of fact, they thrive in adversity. They find fulfillment in being able to solve such complex challenges.

I may not be an adaptive leader, yet, but I would have surely done the same- take on the challenge of navigating through an unchartered territory. The technical and tactical leader in me says that before I put my boots on the ground, I should first do a detailed analysis, an “intelligence preparation of the battlefield”- identifying the essentials; isolating the expendables; determining the friendly and opposing forces (in this case the key leadership and staff); analyzing the terrain- the obstacles, the key terrain features (the company’s critical hubs/ offices), and drawing the best possible avenues of approach. And that was how DiSanzo did it- good preparation. In other words, she did her homework. Adaptive leaders thrive because they know that for them to thrive in a new, often hostile environment, they have to adapt quickly and smartly which can only be done by painstakingly understanding what lies behind the façade, what lurks behind the shadows, what connects the dots, and what makes things go round.

DiSanzo, despite all her accolades in the business world did not show any signs of arrogance typical of high profile leaders. Instead, she was not ashamed to fold her sleeves up, get her hands dirty, and step into the fight. She could have just easily given out instructions, listened to her staff’s feedback and waited for results. But no. She dove right into the pool, careful enough not to make such a big splash and soak everyone, but forceful enough to make her presence known, and her impact felt. When challenged to establish her credibility, D

Deborah DiSanzo (Courtesy: Business Insider)

DiSanzo did just that and more. She easily earned the trust and confidence of her new ‘family” with her unassuming, light-hearted personality.

DiSanzo’s leadership was nothing extraordinary. Only that, she perfected (or so it seems), the art of listening to people and giving voice to their values by opening lines of communication with them to allow the free flow of ideas. Her sensing skills, honed by years of experience in the industry, allowed her to easily gain the support of her co-workers. Like a seasoned battlefield commander, she trusted her senses (but with research), to lead her team to the most advantageous position where they can win the fight.

DiSanzo knew that as a leader, she did not have monopoly of knowledge and she had a lot to learn from others. Instead, she empowered those who possess it. She recognized everyone’s potential and helped them become better by constantly building the capacity of the organization. She co-opted them to abandon their old paradigm and embrace the need to change and transform the structure and culture of the organization. She was unafraid to take risks, experiment on something unheard of, and even entertain diverse and divergent views. She was the real deal.

EK SONN CHAN

Adaptive Leaders are not ordinary leaders. They thrive in the most challenging environments and get out of the most difficult situations by adapting to the circumstances, and by accepting the challenges placed on their tables. They are bold enough to catalyze meaningful changes in their ecosystem, but patient enough to accept that change doesn’t happen overnight, that change is a gradual, often painful and arduous process.

EK SONN CHAN, the former head of the PPWSA was an Adaptive Leader. He is a survivor. He endured the most chaotic period of history of his country- hurt but unbroken; persecuted yet forgiving; conscious of the past yet optimistic about the future.

When he assumed as head of PPWSA, he realized that its mandate to provide safe water to the people cannot be achieved by just doing what it has been doing. He took it upon himself and the entire organization to create an enabling environment that would transform impossibilities to possibilities. A visionary leader who had high aspirations for his war-torn country, Chan sought to formulate a framework when no framework was available, to create a model out of their own, to effectively stir PPWSA amidst uncertainty and instability. He was not afraid to “rock the boat”, to interrupt and to innovate even in the face of internal and external challenges. How did he do it? How did he survive long enough [once again], to see the aspirations PPWSA come to fruition in spite of the situation’s volatility- amid “the chaos after the chaos”?

Chan, thanks to his early life struggles, was able to separate the MUST HAVEs- the essentials, from the WANTs- the expendables, when he began working on his adaptive challenge. His tragic past did not cloud his vision to be able to see what is essential to the future of PPWSA. His experiences taught him well to determine the obstacles he will face and how to overcome them. He was unafraid to challenge the status quo- perhaps because he thought he had nothing else to lose (most of his family members perished during the war). But neither was he arrogant nor self-centered. He celebrated small wins and attributed big successes to his staff, to the team THEY have painstakingly built.

He smart enough to take unfathomable risks. He didn’t buckle down in the face of adversity - he didn’t flinch when the General pointed a gun on his head. He didn’t succumb to local and international pressures- he sought to prove them that the Cambodian people can stand on its own. When everyone was in doubt, he believed in his people’s capabilities, constantly challenging, educating and motivating them. They were able to develop, test and propagate their own “best practices”, and prove to both detractors and supporters that they can do it.

Chan’s character and strong leadership enabled him and the PPWSA to do a disciplined and comprehensive assessment of the entire organization- where they stand, where they want to go, what to do next. They made selfless service, transparency and accountability as their battle cry at a time when selfishness, corruption and nepotism seemed to be the norm.

An adaptive leader knows when to take a step back, take the high ground, survey the arena, listen to voices, watch out for missing pieces, see through the cloud of dust, know where to go and how- and dive right back into the melee, put the parts together and keep on moving and pushing forward. And that exactly was how Chan did it.

We need more EK SONN CHANs nowadays.

The Road to Transformation: Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) in the Philippines [1]

In September 2015, the United Nations (UN) formally adopted “Transforming our World: 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” also known as “Global Goals for Sustainable Development”. The 2030 Agenda was launched during the UN Sustainable Development Summit in New York City, USA, and the Philippines was among the 193 UN Member States that unanimously approved the global agenda to end poverty by 2030.[i] The newly adopted Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) which is touted to be a universal call to action to “end poverty, protect the planet and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity”, came to effect in January 1, 2016. After its launch, the Philippines immediately mobilized its national government agencies for its adoption and full implementation in the country.

This paper presents insights on the different policies and institutional arrangements made by the Philippines as it pursues the attainment of the 17 Goals espoused by the 2030 Agenda. It tries to provide a perspective on the ability of the Philippine Government and the entire country to attain its targets, as well the challenges faced by the Filipinos in pursuing the SDGs.

The Millennium Development Goals (MDG)[ii]

In September 2000, 191 Member States of the United Nations agreed to combat poverty, hunger, disease, illiteracy, environmental degradation and discrimination against women by 2015 in a landmark declaration dubbed as the “United Nations Millennium Development Goals”[iii]. Upon its expiration, the MDG which consists of 8 goals was hailed as the most successful anti-poverty movement in history [yet]. According to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, the MDGs helped in uplifting more than one billion people out of extreme poverty, allowed more girls to attend school, and protected the planet. However, he also admitted that despite the remarkable gains, inequalities around the world continues to exist, and progress has yet to reach everyone.[iv]

The Philippines, led by the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) launched various programs and interventions to achieve these goals such as: Conditional Cash Transfer (Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program); Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social Services-National Community-Driven Development Program; Universal Health Care (Kalusugan Pangkalahatan); and the K to 12 Program. As NEDA’s Cecil Reyes said: “The biggest contribution of the MDG is making politicians, the leaders, the general public aware of the importance of looking at these [development] areas.”[v] While the MDGs may not have been a complete success in achieving its targets, it provided governments like the Philippines, with a solid framework on which they can anchor their efforts to combat poverty, illiteracy, diseases and hunger in their respective countries. The MDGs may be too narrow according to its critics but it has achieved remarkable success in many aspects of socio-economic development.

The Philippines, as one of the member states that adopted the 2000 declaration, vigorously worked on achieving the MDGs but after 15 years of implementation, it too was unable to fully attain its targets. Nonetheless, it reported to have halved the proportion of Filipinos with no access to basic sanitation when the MDG expired in 2015. It also claimed to be on track in providing universal access to primary education and educational opportunities for girls; and in reducing infant and under-five mortality, reversing the incidence of malaria, increasing tuberculosis detection and cure rates; and increasing the proportion of households with access to safe water supply. Despite these relative successes, it admitted having failed in meeting targets on gender equality, prevalence of underweight preschool children, maternal mortality, access to reproductive health, incidence of income poverty, and elementary education among others.

The Philippines has learned many valuable lessons from the implementation of the MDGs. It helped the government in identifying and prioritizing the people’s development needs, on a national and subnational context. In a 2016 report submitted by the country during the High- Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HPLF)[2], it cited the need for good governance as one of the key lessons in attaining its goals. It said that achieving the MDGs required a sustained commitment from all stakeholders- government, non-government, private, civil society and development partners. Implementing the MDGs also needed a clear implementation plan that contains institutional arrangements, communication and advocacy strategies, financial plan and programs that help build the resiliency of the Filipinos against natural calamities and disasters. Moreover, it highlighted the need for an appropriate data monitoring system to make it more responsive to the demand for data disaggregation. [3]

The Sustainable Development Goal

“Sustainable Development” came into popularity after it was defined by the Brutland Report (Our Common Failure) as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."[vi]. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) was then developed by UN Member states and officially came into force in January 1, 2016, four years after it was launched. The 2030 Agenda, as its Preamble says, “is a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity that seeks to strengthen universal peace in larger freedom”. It has more goals (17), targets (169), and indicators (230), than the MDG. Food security and agricultural development is at the core heart of the 2030 Agenda as it aims to address the root causes of poverty and hunger, promote equality in the society and leaving no one behind.[vii]

Upon its full implementation, the Philippines embarked on its own journey towards the attainment of the SDGs. With 15 years of experience in MDG implementation behind it, the country is confident it would be able to implement the SDGs more efficiently and effectively. It has committed itself towards the pursuit of much a bigger challenge, and has been vigorously trying to integrate the various aspects of sustainable development (social, economic, technological, environmental) to propel the country towards a higher level of progress.

THE ENABLING ENVIRONMENT
In implementing the SDGs, the Philippines first focused on developing policies and creating an enabling environment by securing the support of policymakers and stakeholders. Since its implementation in 2016, various efforts have been undertaken to by the Philippine Government and its partners to promote awareness and generate support for the agenda by enhancing communications and advocacy initiatives, and intensifying engagements with various stakeholders. Other initiatives include incorporating the SDGs into the national framework and developing institutional mechanisms to ensure its thorough implementation.

The Philippines adopted various approaches in implementing the SDGs particularly the whole-of-government, multi-sector and multi-stakeholder approaches. The National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) acts as the lead agency in performance monitoring, while other national level government agencies spearhead the implementation of programs under each thematic goal. Early in 2016, the NEDA Technical Secretariat held various consultation meetings and dialogues with national agencies and departments and representatives of Non-Government Organizations (NGO), Civil Society Organizations (CSO) and the private sector to identify and prioritize areas of implementation. This initiative brought about positive response and encouraged different stakeholders to support the campaign. It has become a solid platform on which various advocacy groups have anchored their own social development programs.

Building constituency for the SDGs is crucial to its implementation. As such, vigorous efforts are being undertaken by the lead agencies to create a community of supporters and advocates at the national and subnational level. Continuous briefings and information campaign are being held with other national agencies. Universities and other institutions of learning, and different partners are being engaged to broaden the stakeholder base. Various symposia, fora, dialogues and workshop-consultations are continuously being held across different sectors and interest groups. The quad-media (radio, TV, print and internet) are being tapped propagate information as far and as inclusive as possible. At the global and international level, the country is actively collaborating with other countries in the development of SDG indicators. It has been consistently engaging in discussions and expert group meetings at the global and regional arena to share and learn from best practices, and enhance its own capabilities for implementing the program.

Although the country has gained many lessons from the implementation of the MDGs, it has a long way to go in terms of effective, efficient and proper identification, assessment and prioritization of SDG indicators. Technical workshops with concerned agencies, academe, civil society, NGOs, UN Agencies and the private sector are being conducted to hone competencies in these areas. Meanwhile, the national and subnational level consultations on the implementation of the SDGs resulted to the Philippines’ current list of Priority Goals.

THE POLICY ENVIRONMENT

Policy support is vital in pursuing any development program because it serves as the backbone for its implementation. Implementing the SDGs in the country calls for the formulation of different policies and development of new strategies at different echelons of government and levels of community.

The launching of the SDGs coincided with the first year of the President Duterte’s administration which saw the agenda being integrated into the country’s long-term vision dubbed as “AmBisyon Natin 2040”. The 17 goals were subsequently incorporated in different national, subnational and sectoral plans, programs, policies and frameworks such as in the successor Medium- Term Development Plans (Philippine Development Plan[4], Public Investment Plan, Budget Priorities Framework). The SDGs were also included in the Philippine Statistical Development Plan 2011- 2017 to ensure government support in the generation of data an which enable other stakeholders to plan for and contribute to its attainment. An Implementation Plan, Financing Plan, Monitoring Plan and other institutional mechanisms were likewise developed and established as primary means of implementing the Agenda.

The Philippines held a review of the different institutional mechanisms established for the implementation of the MDGs to serve as the same bodies for the implementation of the SDGs. It was found out that, first, there is no centralized coordinating and reporting body for the SDGs hence the need to create a dedicated oversight committee and technical secretariat. Second, there is a need for the establishment of SDG Mechanism at the Subnational Level which includes mainstreaming the goals in development budgeting.

Among the initiatives undertaken by the Philippine to address the lessons learned from the past development goals is the issuance of various policy pronouncements across all government agencies including Government Owned and Controlled Corporations (GOCC) to support the implementation of the SDGs specifically through data support and performance monitoring. A webpage was created to further strengthen the monitoring and reporting mechanisms while SDG Watch has been developed to monitor relevant and available indicators. SDG Focal Points were identified from each data- source agency to facilitate coordination and data gathering. A high-level interagency NEDA Committee that will plan and oversee the coordinated implementation of SDG- related policies and programs is currently on the works.

OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES

Records show that the Philippines was not able to fully attain all MDG targets when it lapsed in 2015. As it embarks on a journey to pursue a new set of goals, it is once again faced with an extensive list of issues and concerns, some of which were the same challenges encountered in the MDG implementation. On top of the list is the availability of data and data disaggregation. Most depressed communities are in hinterlands and far-flung islands were transportation and communication remain as major concerns which hampers the timely collection, integration, submission and processing of data. There is also a need for optimal use of information technology to maximize the utilization and dissemination of the SDG indicators. Lack of clarity of the assorted technical terms used in the indicators is also a major challenge as well as the overlaps and inconsistencies of the concepts. Misconception and misinterpretation of these parameters result to varying degree of implementation and consequently, to errors in reporting as well. Still, accountability and ownership remain as among the top obstacles to be hurdled by the country. It is not surprising for different government agencies and offices to pass on responsibility to each other and blame one another when it comes to performance issues. Lastly, budgetary constraints hinder the country from speedily attaining its targets. The SDGs will reach unprecedented success if and only if it is backed up by a sustainable financing plan.

Meanwhile, the country also sees major areas or venues on which it would be needing technical support. Capacity- building on the technical aspects of the SDG monitoring and implementation, and the improvement of database systems remain as top priorities. Data collected no matter the quality and quantity, will only matter if it is processed, analyzed and converted into ‘edible’ statements for the consumption of policymakers and relevant agencies. Advocacy and information communication as well as enhancement of human resources are critical areas of concern as well. Stakeholder engagement should not be a single and stand-alone activity if we want to maximize its impacts and benefits. Constituency and ownership must be encouraged and built up to the lowest echelons of the government and society. Furthermore, the timely, effective and efficient implementation of a comprehensive list of goals and targets is heavily reliant on the availability of well-trained, skilled and dedicated personnel throughout the country. Investing on human capital is always paramount in these kinds of undertaking.

THE WAY AHEAD

The Philippine Development Framework aims for inclusive growth, focusing on national security, good governance and ecological integrity. To make this happen, market access must be improved (through trade agreements and trade fairs, etc.) and innovation must be encouraged especially in agricultural research and development and product design. Our competitiveness must be enhanced particularly in infrastructure (roads, ports, airports, communications, power, energy etc.), and flagship programs such as the K-12 and CCT must be supported. Likewise, we must continue developing our socioeconomic resiliency through capacity-building and information campaigns as we continue efforts to promote good governance to encourage investments and create jobs; and increase social participation in the growth process.[viii]

The implementation of the SDG in the next 13 years will face more challenges along the way but the Philippines is gradually adapting to it. Although expert opinion is divided on whether the country is on track in attaining its targets, it is beyond debate that it needs to pursue as clear strategic direction for its implementation. For one, it should be able to develop, establish and consistently abide with an SDG Implementation Roadmap. The roadmap shall at the minimum, contain the requisite objectives, courses of actions, tasks and responsibilities and array of resources, and serve as framework for its successful implementation. It shall pursue the creation of a dedicated high-level committee chaired by NEDA to oversee the synchronized implementation of all plans, programs, activities and policies. The committee shall also lead the monitoring and evaluation of the country’s progress in terms of each target until its closure.

Another area which the government will have to focus on is the refinement of the SDG Indicators to further fine-tune it vis-à-vis our national priorities. Having a clearly defined set of indicators will help in ensuring ownership and accountability from implementing bodies and other stakeholders. Continuously harmonizing the SDGs with the national development frameworks, and the enhancement of the indicators must also be attended to. Existing policies must be regularly reviewed to determine its relevance to SDG implementation. Meanwhile, the Philippine should be relentless in building partnerships and promoting ownership among its stakeholders. A strategic communication plan must be able to raise awareness and mobilize mass support for the 2030 Agenda. Lastly, the leadership capacity of local leaders, the cooperation of communities, and the technical expertise of pertinent government agencies and other private and public institutions need to be strengthened to make them more capable of contributing to the attainment of these aspirations.

At present, it is still too early to tell whether the Philippines will be able to successfully deliver on each of the 17 SDGs. The level of optimism varies from sector to sector but in general, the 2030 Agenda was buoyed by the promise that came with the new administration. A good enabling environment has already been created to promote ownership of the SDGs. It has already been integrated into the national development framework which puts the country into a more solid position for its implementation. With its experience in MDG, the country is now more adept at mapping out SDG indicators for a more efficient national monitoring. Moreover, it has been generally successful in engaging the participation of stakeholders from various sectors.

Still, the country cannot rest on its laurels yet because there is more work to be done. Poverty, hunger, diseases, illiteracy and inequality persist alongside a multitude of other social ills. Real socio- economic development has yet to be felt in the farthest villages across the country where access to electricity is decades away, where cellular phones are rare, and where internet is unknown. In many urban and rural areas, access to clean and safe water is still a luxury for many, and shelter is just a place under a bridge. Religious and ideological conflict pervades in many regions, and violent extremism is rapidly gaining a solid foothold. While some of our government institutions have shown stability through the years, many have yet to achieve maturity and reliability as political dynasties and traditional politics continue to thrive.[5]

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) is an ambitious list of aspirations for a country known for its resilience. Still, in a competitive, dynamic and rapidly- changing global and regional environment, the country is poised to take on such goals- armed with the best weapon ever made.

HOPE.

Notes:

[1] Most of the information presented here were based on the report “Voluntary National Review at the 2016 High-Level Political Forum on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)- Philippines”. Available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/memberstates/philippines. Also, the presentation entitled “PSDP Chapter on the Millennium and Sustainable Development Goals (MDGs/SDGs)” made by Romeo S. Recide, Deputy National Statistician, Sectoral Statistics Office Philippine Statistics Authority; and the report entitled “Philippine Initiatives in the Implementation of the SDG by Rosemarie G. Edillon, PhD Deputy Director-General National Economic and Development Authority were extensively used.

[2] The High- Level Forum Political Forum on Sustainable Development is the UN platform for the global follow-up and review of the 2030 Agenda. It provides political leadership, guidance and recommendations for sustainable development. It reviews progress in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with the aim to integrate the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development. The HLPF meets every year under the auspices of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), and every four years under the auspices of the UN General Assembly, when Heads of State and/or Government attend the Forum. Information available at http://www.unwomen.org/en/how-we-work/intergovernmental-support/hlpf-on-sustainable-development

[3] The lessons learned were cited by the Philippine Report submitted to the Voluntary Review of the 2016 HLPF from the National Report prepared for the Annual Ministerial Review during the High-Level Segment of the 2015 Session of the UN Economic and Social Council.

[4] The Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2017-2022 is the blueprint for the country’s development under the Duterte Administration which largely stems from the 0-10-point Socioeconomic Agenda. It is the first of four medium-term plans geared towards the realization of AmBisyon Natin 2040, the collective vision of Filipinos over the next 25 years. Its implementation is mandated by Executive Order (EO) No. 27 as well as the Public Investment Program (PIP) for 2017-2022.

[5] Please See Annex 1: The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)- Philippines: Insights and Assessment. This is based on different Philippine SDG Reports particularly from the “Voluntary National Review at the 2016 High-Level Political Forum on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)- Philippines”. Available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/memberstates/philippines.

References:

[i] https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2015/09/historic-new-sustainable-development-agenda-unanimously-adopted-by-193-un-members/

[ii] http://www.unescap.org/events/media-launch-report-millennium-development-goals-2015-and-asia-pacific-mdg-report-2015

[iii] “Millennium Development Goals”. Available at http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sdgoverview/mdg_goals.html

[iv] “Were the Millennium Development Goals a Success? Yes! Sort Of!” Available at https://www.wvi.org/united-nations-and-global-engagement/article/were-mdgs-success

[v] “Special Report: PHL to adopt new development targets despite difficulties in achieving MDGs. Available at https://www.pids.gov.ph/pids-in-the-news/1332

[vi] “Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future”. Available at http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdf.

[vii] “FAO Philippines and the Sustainable Development Goals”. Available at http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6756e.pdf

vii. “Towards Achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”. Lecture presentation of Myrna Clara Asuncion, Social Development Staff National Economic and Development Authorithttps://www.pep-net.org/sites/pep-net.org/files/CBMS/Conference/12th/Presentations/Asuncion.pdf 

Social Marketing Research and the Military

In 1951, Dr. G.D. Wiebe, a research psychologist asked: “Why can’t you sell brotherhood and rational thinking like you can sell soap?”. This seemingly innocent yet provocative question triggered controversy in the commercial marketing world. Marketing professionals claimed that a concept such a “brotherhood” cannot be marketed unlike a tangible product. Yet world renowned marketing gurus Koetler, Levy, Zaltman and others thought otherwise and must have in stead said: “Why not?”. The controversial idea hence gave birth to what is now known as Social Marketing- a hybrid of social science and commercial marketing.[i]

Koetler and Zalman coined the term Social Marketing in 1971 which refers to marketing practices in pursuit of social rather than monetary gains. It applies marketing principles and techniques to influence the target audience to voluntarily accept, reject, modify, or abandon a behavior for the benefit of individuals, groups, organizations, or society as a whole.[ii] It aims to bring about positive change in the target audience by applying relevant marketing tools such as market research, segmentation and differentiation, Marketing Mix (Product, Price, Place, Promotion (4P’s), etc., to solve various issues such as health and sanitation, environment, peace and security, gender equality, among others. The marketing tools applied by social marketers are not that different from the ones used by their counterparts in the commercial sector: both are aimed at bringing about behavioral change in the target audience.

It is quite understandable for readers to easily confuse themselves on the difference between social and commercial marketing precisely because of the word MARKETING. Marketing, as defined by the American Marketing Association (AMA), refers to activities, set of institutions and processes for creating, communicating, delivering and exchanging offerings that have value for customers, clients, partners and society at large. However, people often relate it with “flowery” words to promote a particular product among consumers. This is why marketing is often shunned by many because of the “subtle” deception that comes with it. On the other hand, social marketing can be easily misconstrued these days as marketing using the social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Youtube, etc.) as platform. I initially thought that social marketing solely refers to selling products through the internet. Social marketing nowadays has been increasingly reliant on social media platforms to promote various advocacies. Many volunteer organizations, NGOs, civil society and people’s organizations have found remarkable success in their respective endeavors by capitalizing on the power of this innovation.

The contrasts between social and commercial marketing can be summed up according to its output, outcome and impact to consumers/customers or target audience. Commercial marketers peg the success of their marketing campaign on tangible outputs like volume of sales, brand popularity, market share, product reach and other measurable parameters. On the other hand, social marketers are concerned with how the outcome of their programs will improve individual lives and uplift societal conditions. The goal of social marketers can be said to be more noble in nature than that of their friends from the commercial side.

Depending on whom you are talking to, social and commercial marketing can be both easy and difficult but many practitioners point to the former as the more difficult field than the latter. After all, selling a desired behavior- an intangible product is not as easy as selling something that can be seen and felt.  Social marketing is about delivering social gain. It focuses on reaching the target audience, influencing their behaviors and satisfying the needs of the society as a whole- the social good. On the other hand, commercial marketing is about earning profit- the financial good, by satisfying individual customers through physical products or services. However, there is no doubt that both disciplines are customer-focused and needs all available and relevant marketing tools to attain their objectives. Likewise, the results in both fields are monitored, measured and evaluated to serve as basis for future performance improvements.

Social Marketing, being a controversial idea initially struggled to make it big in Western countries like the US and the UK. In fact, the idea was first widely used far from where it was conceived- in India, where it was adopted to implement a family planning program. However, once it was able to break free, its potential began to be discovered by many. Sally Dibb in her article “Up, up and away: Social Marketing Breaks Free”, said that social marketing ideas can be applied to a vast array of problems, to various groups of people and at different levels and scopes. It could be applied to individuals, groups, communities, villages, and even at the national and global arena. Social marketing is most visible in campaigns to promote gender and development, smoke-free public places, drug and alcohol-free communities, breastfeeding, women empowerment and many others. It can be utilized to influence policy-makers to legislate laws that promote overall social welfare and well-being, or influence people’s behavior on contemporary social issues like open defecation, garbage disposal, responsible voting, sexual health, etc.

Social Marketing is practiced mostly by government units and agencies to effect the desired change in behavior among their constituents. Sectoral, non-profit and development organizations have also adopted this field to create positive social change. Local Government Units for example may use social marketing to change the perception of its residents on reproductive health. The Yellow Boat of Hope Foundation (YBH), an NGO on the other hand, conducts advocacy campaigns to influence people’s attitude towards education.

Meanwhile, Social Marketing Research (SMR) refers to the study or investigation of the behavior, needs, attitudes, opinions, motivations or other characteristics of individuals, a particular sector of a community, or of an entire population to identify pertinent issues and concerns that could influence or support the decision-making process of service providers. Essentially, SMR gives credence to the decisions and actions made by these entities by making available relevant empirical data. Like other research fields, it usually begins by identifying the goals and objectives of the study. The researcher/s (either an individual or a research group) must have a good grasp of the client’ mission, vision and core values. They must be cognizant of the overall intent of their client to guide them throughout the process. They must be able to establish the goals and objectives of the study to ensure that they are on the right track; and identify the specific information needed to achieve the desired objectives. SMR likewise includes designing the overall research methodology including its framework, data collection process, and data analysis, and must be able to recognize its limitations, and its implications to the organization. Furthermore, it must have a means to effectively communicate its findings.[iii]

On Behavioral Change

According to the International Evaluation Group (IEG), behavior refers to the outward manifestation of an individual’s response- an action or change in action, to a situation. Quoting Kahneman, IEG said that response emanates from an individual’s automatic or deliberate decision-making process. On the other hand, behavior change, also called desired outcomes, are observable changes such as maintenance, improvement/enhancement, and increase or decrease in specific behaviors targeted or supported by behavior change activities. In the context of international development, these outcomes are individual’s behavioral responses to specific interventions such as the provision of information and incentives or other behavioral design elements. These interventions are referred to as behavior change activities and focus on affecting or shaping individual decisions and decision-making process.

What is the relevance of behavioral change in development management? Again, IEG said that to effectively deliver sustained services, service providers must overcome not only constraints in hard resources but also limitations in psychological resources. The latter refers to people’s mental capabilities that allow them to reach their full potential considering the different political, economic, social, cultural and other factors in the external environment. These factors shape people’s behavior- they often determine how people would behave under certain circumstances. For example, in the Philippines, people from the countryside are more concerned about their public behavior such as the public display of affection, compared to those who live in the metropolis like Makati. On the other hand, those who grew up in urban areas are more conscious about how they look, or how they dress up as compared to those who hail from the provinces. The perception of social acceptance varies from place to place, from ethnic group to ethnic group, and from community to community. Some tribes value honor and pride than others. While some put more premium on their live stocks and lands than the education of their children. This kind of diversity makes the delivery of social services such as WASH (water, health, sanitation and hygiene) more complicated and challenging than it seems.

A development manager must understand that development interventions cannot be implemented at random without understanding the community and the individuals that make it. People behave or react differently when subjected to or provided with programs or interventions. For example, encouraging people to avoid open defecation by building toilets for them could be positive for some, but can be misconstrued by others as interfering with their way of living. Sometimes, tailor-fitting or customizing programs to suit the needs of the people or certain sectors of the community brings out better results. As such, development managers must strive to understand the dynamics in the target community as part of their planning process. A thorough stakeholder analysis must be complemented by an equally comprehensive needs analysis and assessment to correctly determine what is or are needed by whom, and why.

Social Marketing Research and Behavioral Change in the Military

Social Marketing and Behavior Change are both familiar disciplines in the Philippine defense and military sectors especially the Philippine Army (PA) although there might be some variations in its practice and application. The Civil- Military Operations (CMO) which is comprised of Information Support Affairs, Civil Affairs and Public Affairs, is the closest field there is when we talk about social marketing and behavior change. CMO are planned activities undertaken independently or in coordination with civilian entities to support the accomplishment of the PA mission. Its primary goal is to gain popular support and weaken the enemy’s will to fight. CMO is a vital component of PA’ operations along with Combat Operations and Intelligence. It is characterized by activities that influence the beliefs, emotions, behaviors, attitudes, and opinions of intended audiences to facilitate military operations. It establishes and maintains good relations between and among military forces and establishments, government and non-government civil authorities, and the populace or stakeholders. The Civil Affairs pillar in particular, are operations planned, supported and executed to promote public trust through cooperation, collaboration and conduct of sociological and developmental activities in order to gain popular support. It consists of activities designed to win the hearts and minds of the people; gain their willing cooperation, support and confidence; and induce their active participation in the attainment of national objectives and goals.

The Armed Force of the Philippines (AFP) Internal Peace and Security Operations Plan relies heavily on the correct employment of CMO to facilitate the participation of all stakeholders in the quest for long-lasting peace and sustainable development in what is called the ‘whole-of-nation” approach. It is hinged on the Filipino tradition of “Bayanihan” or helping each other. To encourage the active support and involvement of all stakeholders, the AFP and the entire government must be able to understand the behaviors, attitudes, perceptions and beliefs of all sectors of the Philippine society towards peace and development, and all underlying issues that prevent the country from attaining it. Due to the country’s diversity, a “one-size-fits-all” solution doesn’t simply work to hammer out peace and usher in development. A comprehensive study- a social marketing research is needed to understand the people’s goals and aspirations vis-à-vis their apprehensions concerning peace, security and development. Many programs and interventions in the past fizzled out because they failed to factor in the different socio-political and socio-economic impacts on the target beneficiaries and communities. Most of these interventions were directed only at symptoms and not the root causes of the problems. They targeted only what was visible and failed to unearth the essential ones. They addressed only the observable manifestations of behavior and overlooked what is underneath. As a result, the problem continues to follow a vicious cycle. The government and the military ought to learn how to address issue using behavioral change lens- in a more dynamic, inclusive, consistent and sustainable manner.

---

[i] http://samucommunications.com/why-cant-you-sell-brotherhood-and-rational-thinking-like-you-can-sell-soap/

[ii] The Future of Social Marketing by Olivier Serrat. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/27593/future-social-marketing.pdf

[iii] https://www.amsrs.com.au/about/definition-of-market-and-social-research

NEGOTIATION 105

So far, I have learned that negotiations are not always a walk in the park, and it is not for the faint-hearted.

In Luna Pen, I learned how difficult it is to negotiate with another party especially when you are miles apart and not negotiating physically, belong to different cultures, have a wide age gap, different organizational positions, and of different genders. Culture plays significant role in the entire negotiation process, and therefore on the outcome itself. It is not enough that you know what your BATNA or WATNA is. It is equally important to know how you play it from the beginning to end. Both your strategy and tactic will be observed, countered, and worse, may be even used against you. Knowing who the other side of the table is and WHAT he represents is vital.

Multi-party negotiation is nth times messier and more complicated than a bilateral negotiation. Its complexity rises exponentially as the number of parties involved increases. Each one of them brings their own position and interests and they can kill you with a thousand and one combinations of options available to them. If you are to enter or manage a multilateral negotiation, you have to be prepared to deal with each negotiator’s real positions and interests, not to mention their idiosyncrasies. Finding out who is aligned with whom, who is at odds with whom, who is the naysayer and who is out there to kill whatever deal is hammered out is more challenging than it appears to be. Those who seem to be on the same page as you all throughout may turn out to be the guy who will sell you out in the end.

Coordination is crucial in multi-party negotiations because of the numerous layers of opinions and interests on the table. The first challenge at hand is finding a common time and place to negotiate. The timing and venue of multilateral negotiations could have significant implications to many especially when building alliances or coalitions is the name of the game. Also, establishing the process including the necessary protocols is a huge challenge. It may take months or even years to develop an acceptable framework of negotiation alone because it can make or break the entire negotiation process. A negotiation cannot successfully proceed without a tangible, clear and concrete framework.

It is not enough that you know who you are negotiating with because “what is important may be invisible to the eye”. A more thorough stakeholder analysis is a must to learn the interests, views and positions of the other parties. A link analysis may also be useful to determine the polarities of the parties involved. Sometimes it is not always the official but the personal and human touch that spells the success of a negotiation (remember the story of how Manila became the ADB’s HQ? Sensing is critical because the best technical solutions may not always be politically acceptable. On the other hand, political solutions may not always work out so learn how to crunch the numbers especially during crunch time.

It is always desired that you walk out of a negotiation with a genuine smile. You may not have achieved your optimum goal but you shouldn’t miss the opportunity of brokering new relationships and strengthening existing ones.

NEGOTIATION 104

In essence, the Luna Pen case was another eye opener for me not just on my negotiation skills but on how I look at negotiation as a whole. It also revealed my own lack of understanding on culture and gender, and its role in negotiations.

The Luna Case taught me that strategy without tactics is lame, and tactics without strategy is blind. Both cannot exist without the other. Seasoned negotiators always think big. They think of strategy, miles before reaching the negotiating table. Being across the table itself is already part of strategy. Should he negotiate or not? Should he defer it, push for it, or kill it altogether? Strategy tells the negotiator when to push or pull, exert pressure or slacken a bit, wait and see or rush ahead. It tells him which among his tricks should he use to get the deal he wants.

But seasoned negotiators know too well that he cannot survive with strategy alone. Knowing the game rules is different from actually playing it. He needs to know how to do the moves. He needs to know when and how to draw the sword, and when and how to sheath it without hurting himself or the other party unnecessarily. Tactics matter, and it matters a lot. Tactics means knowing what is in your arsenal of options and weapons, and knowing when to unpack and unleash them. The negotiator is always on the look-out for the right timing because drawing too soon may forewarn the other side and allow for an easy counterattack. Drawing too late may let the other party run circles around him. Negotiation is about thrusting, and parrying attacks without losing sight of the objective. As I have observed, it is quite easy to get lost amidst the clinks and clanks of offers and counter offers, and miss the whole point. Be in a careful hurry.

One’s choice of tactics is often dictated or influenced by culture that is why it should never be taken out of the equation. Who are you dealing with? Where does he come from? What is his affiliation, politically, religiously, ideologically? What values does he espouse? One or two, or a combination of these things can spell out the outcome of the negotiation. It can shape how the whole process is going to take place and end up. How your thrusts and parries are judged significantly depends on the culture of the guy at the other end, and you better know how he will respond.

What does a negotiator do when he is caught in the middle of a chaotic negotiation process, or when he is caught in an endless loop? He stops, briefly, and goes to the balcony. He pauses for a while and lets his sensing abilities take over. He detaches himself from the melee for a moment and looks at it from the top, from another perspective, to see what angles or approaches can be pursued? When the position is unassailable, does he keep on assailing it? When his position is untenable, does he keep defending it? When his interests are compromised, what options does he look into? How fast can he generate another option? How will he choose which option to pursue? All of these are quickly processed inside his mind and before he goes down from the balcony, he is ready for his next move.

NEGOTIATION 103

I have always thought that being a talent manager is such an intriguing and exciting job. You are around the most popular stars and you get to interact with them all the time. And the best part is, that you get to speak on their behalf which means you play an important part in their lives.

However, after representing Susanah, I felt like being a talent manager is a really tough job after all. You got to have the guts to shoot for the stars without sounding or looking so eager. You have got to ask for heaven without directly saying so. You have got to look down on your toes without losing your track and focus on your goal. And you have got to keep your ambitions high (for your star and yourself) without being arrogant. It is such a complicated job which involves more than just ordinary people skills but something that requires a combination of analytical, financial and technical competencies. How do you maintain a nice reassuring smile in front of the people you are dealing with even if they are offering such a cheap bargain? How do you tell them subtly that you are displeased with the offer without annoying them? How do you establish your position and communicate your interests without revealing too much about what your client wants?

Being a talent agent [for a moment] taught me a lot of things about negotiation. First is to know who you are representing. What are his or her strengths and weaknesses? What leverage can you use on her behalf? What can the opposite side (and other interest groups) use against him or her? Second is to know the audience- the people on the opposite corner. Knowing the audience means knowing their position and interests, and analyzing the options available to them. In the case of APCC, the position and interest of the head was unknown, and it would take a lot of probing into his agent or representative to bring this to fold. If we do not have a means of getting to know him, then we should be able to find out as much information as we can from his representative. His words and deeds might reveal something about who he is representing so it is important to carefully listen to subtle hints. In my case, I always try to calculate the person opposite me first by gauging his handshake because it often reveals how warm or engaging (soft) he is, or how firm and difficult (hard) he would be.

Third, it is important to determine what outcome we want to derive out of the negotiation- based on the intent of our client and the firm we belong to. Coming to the negotiating table with the representative of APCC, I felt my preparation was not solid enough and I did not know what exactly I wanted for my client other than landing the role and getting paid with whatever amount. This should never happen in “real life” negotiations where it is critical to know what your mission is because it will tell you when to “assault” or when to “retreat and reorganize” and fight another day. Knowing when to pause and assess the process gives you the opportunity to determine whether you are playing it fairly and squarely, and whether you are taking advantage or being taken advantage of by the other party.

While bagging a handsome deal is the immediate goal, it is also important to remember that the whole process is actually an exercise on relationship-building. The process and outcome of the negotiation determines whether you will be able to build a relationship and develop partnership, or nip it right away. The kind of impression that we give to other party during the meeting will somehow determine whether it will be the last or the first of many engagements in the future. First impression matters more often than not. We must remember that we are dealing with human beings and not just representatives of the other party. Human as we are, we will always have our biases even before going to bargaining table, hence, it is important to project a positive unassuming personality. We must learn how to separate the person from the issue or problem at hand. On the other hand, we should also remember that at the end of the day, we are accountable to our client, to our firm and to ourselves.

Lastly, listening and observing is crucial in a negotiation. As we negotiate, we should never get drowned in the volume of our own words. The best negotiator must be a detective- an intelligence operative who remembers what he hears and sees, and uses it at the precise moment. We can maximize learning from the other party just by listening to them. They may even unknowingly share with you their own negotiation techniques which will come handy in the future.

NEGOTIATION 101

NEGOTIATION is not for the faint-hearted. Anybody who wants to negotiate must come to the table prepared- physically, mentally and emotionally. Preparation is the key, that is why homework was invented. In the military, it is called “Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield”. A negotiator must know when and how to push it or hold back, to win some and lose some, to give in and strike back. While the ideal is to find a way for both parties to find a “win-win” solution, he must also be prepared to deal with the loses and how to cut it. A great general knows when to use his reserves and the aces in his sleeves. When one prays for the rain, he must be prepared to deal with mud too. 

The exercise began on a good note with each “competing” group excited about outwitting each other to gain a favorable contract. It started with strategizing as groups (representing the two opposing countries) established their respective objectives. Was it about kicking the other water company out of business, or was it about forging a solid and mutually beneficial relationship “against” the client country? Both sides tried to play it nice and easy during the first round. Everyone was sensing what the position of the other side would be. They were both trying to figure how the other side thinks, decides and moves. When the die was cast, both sides discover that their expectations are so much different from reality. They both wanted to play it nice but ironically, both of them also felt that the other side will not. They tried to reach an agreement through informal talks hosted by a non-actor. Everyone was hopeful the other would honor the result of the talks but alas, one of them reneged with the agreement- to the dismay of the other. When shots are fired, and blood is drawn, there is usually no turning back. Both parties wanted to give silver for a gold which turned the negotiation into a brawl. The other side was out for the blood of the other and soon enough, they were on each other’s throat until someone had the guts to say “stop, look, listen, talk”. The game ended with an air of bitterness. It was supposed to be “trabaho lang, walang personalan”- focus on the issue and not on the individual. One was disappointed that trust was broken instantaneously. Why can’t they play nice? The other was equally disheartened. Why can’t they lose with grace? When negotiations collapse, who is there to blame? Was it the winner- a no-nonsense player who would do everything for their country’s survival but at the expense of the other? Was it the loser who was trying to play nicely to forge an “unlikely partnership” but naive to the other side’s intentions? Was it the water consumer who seemed to have played the two countries, knowing the long-standing bitterness and animosity between them? What benefit would it bring the consumer if the two suppliers played it rough against each other?

The exercise brought into light the importance of a third party in the negotiation (in this case another country other than the three actors). Hosting negotiators of opposing sides in one’s turf is not an easy task. Aside from the strain it puts on a country’s resources, it also puts its reputation on the line, and puts its own citizens at risk. Opposing parties are sometimes extremely hostile to each other. Hosting them both might bring hostilities in one’s territory. Third parties must have the credibility, tenacity and wherewithal to endure long, tedious, arduous, controversial and complicated negotiations. Back channel talks are important. This is where emissaries- trusted people of both sides come into play. They either bring home good news or carry with them bad ones but they are instrumental in brokering important deals. [In my case, it is our daughter who does track 2 negotiations when I am in trouble with my wife. And she is good at it.]

Negotiations are often misunderstood by many (including me) hence the following questions: What does it take to successfully negotiate with an opposing party? Is negotiation needed with a neutral camp? What are the consequences of failed negotiations aside from the obvious (disappointment, possible hostilities/animosity)? What is the next step after a failed negotiation? To what extent should we pursue negotiation with, say, an extremely aggressive party? When do we stop and say enough?

PERSONAL BRAND: YOUR BEST CAREER TOOL YET

Branding is one of the most common entrepreneurial and marketing jargons nowadays. While many downplay it, practitioners consider it as a key component of individual and business success. With the growing usage of digital technology particularly the internet, branding has become an even more important tool to boost online presence.

Branding is not just about companies, products, goods and services. It has become a powerful for individuals who are seeking to be noticed, to stand out and to get their “dream” jobs. Personal branding experts say that in the digital technology era, the online community creates a brand for you especially if you are active online. You are creating your personal brand based on how you communicate, the stories that you share, the pictures that you pose or the videos that you watch in whatever internet media platform available to you. As such, it would be to your best interest to go ahead and create your own and promote it among the so-called netizens. By all means, you have the right to enhance, harness the potential, and manage your personal brand.

Personal Branding is a process. It enables you to establish your personality among your target audience through a purposive communication of your beliefs and values. It allows you to communicate what you desire to achieve, and what you can give out or bring in to your audience. It entails knowing whose attention you want to capture and to whom you are offering your services. It allows you to distinguish yourself from all the rest who might be offering the same services or possessing the same set of skills. Big companies invest huge resources in creating and promoting their brands. They pay huge sums of money for celebrity endorsers, print, radio and television advertisements because they believe that branding is useless unless it is communicated to its target audience. You do not need to the same because modern technologies allow you to convey your own brand online.

Building your personal brand is essential because as mentioned, it will exist or will be created for you unless you create it yourself. If you do not manage it personally, somebody else from the online community will.

Your online activity reveals a lot about your personality especially to people who read it, hence, it is important to be conscious about this all the time. You reveal aspects of your personality to the people who read you through your social media posts or comments. You subtly tell them your preferences or tastes, views and opinions personally and professionally. You develop your personal brand unconsciously as you go about your routine online. If you want to have control over your personal brand, it would be smart to be deliberate, to be purposive whenever you are engaged digitally. Show the audience what you want them to see, tell them what they want to hear, and share with them only what you want them to have. If possible, avoid sharing without purpose, or giving away any information that is of no value or significance to the audience. Oversharing or posting something that has no purpose or meaning, makes you a common commodity and loses your premium. There is added caveat to this. You should be able to project genuineness, because the audience is smarter than you think. If they are indeed interested with your brand, they have a way of verifying whether you are a real deal or just another fake news.

Creating your personal brand is tricky if you do not know yourself and what you want. Knowing your audience is also as critical because you might be projecting yourself to the wrong people. Instead of developing your reputation and enhancing your brand you might actually hurt it with carelessness. It is important to note that you can only share what you have, and you can only educate based on what you know.

Knowing yourself is critical. You must be able to confidently say that you are different from others because of a particular trait or skill. You should be able to tell your audience what differentiates you from the rest of the pack. A stand out personality, skill or characteristics is what attracts your audience to you. But knowing yourself and what you are best at is not enough. You should be able to express this, to say this in the most effective manner. Knowing what to say and knowing how to say it are two different things.

Believing in yourself as a brand is equally important. If you do not believe in your abilities and in what you stand for, do not expect others to do so. You are a brand the moment you step inside a room, the moment you walk in in the lobby, the moment you click the log in button. Now as to what kind you are or what you want to be entirely depends on you. You might feel that you and your organization or business are one and the same but the truth you will always be your own brand. Know your strengths and weaknesses. Be in touch with your inner self. Acknowledge what you know and what you don’t. Embrace your own, live it and be the first one to believe it. Be authentic.

Building your network is important to develop your personal brand. Interaction with other industry players will help you enhance your own brand. Competition might be in the air but there is no substitute with the interpersonal relationship that you develop with your peers. Their feedback about your brand is crucial if you want to further develop or customize your brand. You can reinvent yourself anytime you want should you wish to take on a different path or arena, and you can use the feedback from your network for this purpose.

Personal branding allows you to become more accessible to people or entities that might be interested in you. You become more visible to your online audience hence there is a greater chance that you will be noticed. But it can be a little bit scary or even creepy for some, knowing that a huge part of your life is exposed to the public. As such it is important to share only what is essential to them. You must also be able to know your boundaries or limits and learn to communicate it accordingly.

Personal branding enables you to build your own network. Having a solid personal brand allows you to develop partners and establish links with industry experts and potential customers. If you have existing clients, it validates their belief, trust and confidence in what your brand stands for. and existing customers. This network can become a huge asset when it comes to growing your business. The potential for audience expansion and reach grows exponentially once you are able to create and communicate your brand.

Personal branding makes you more distinct and identifiable. People usually equate others with traits, skills, or characteristics. Branding makes you worth a space in their memories. It will make you more recognizable not just online but physically as well. The more recognizable you become, the bigger the potential for personal and professional success is.

Personal branding not only develops an individual’s brand but also improves that of others. This is achieved if you collaborate say for example in creating a product or delivering a service with a partner. Both of your personal brands are enhanced if you are able to successfully deliver on your commitment together.

Maintaining and sustaining relationships might be more difficult if you have not established your brand. If you have a recognizable, reliable and solid personal brand, expect customers to keep searching and coming back for you. Solid networks are built with solid branding. Networks are built gradually. Networks build networks. Networks create and bring in more opportunities which you can harness and propagate. It paves the way for more avenues of growth and success. In the end, it will build your confidence to take on bigger challenges and responsibilities. It will embolden you to recreate and reinvent your brand, or stick to the tried and tested formula. As you build you credibility, you gain control of how you project your image and make your audience still follow you.

Personal branding helps in making your goals much easier to achieve. Opportunity finds you. When people know are confident with your brand, they will trust that you will always do what is right and beneficial to them. You will grain their trust and confidence, and ultimately propel you to greater heights.

HUMAN BEHAVIOR IN DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS

I have always been interested in how people act and behave- as an individual, as part of a team and as part of larger organization. As I have observed, some people’s behavior vary depending on the crowd they are with, the situation they are in, and the expectations of others around them. There are also some whose actuations are consistent regardless of who they are with, or what and where they are. Human behavior is such a huge puzzle for me. It is as intriguing as economics and as baffling as the solar system. As such, when the course Human Behavior in Development Organizations (HBDO) was opened, I had nothing on but my five senses. The entire course was like journey. It opened myself for introspection back to the immediate past, and got me reflecting about my future as a soldier, a development manager, a leader, and most importantly, as father and a husband. Questions after questions, I have had the most important realizations about my life, about my own attitude and behavior, beliefs and biases, and emotion and motivation. Answers did not come easily. Some are still left hanging. Some, I have intentionally left for me to ponder on as I continue my journey in development management.

On Leadership
Leadership is one of the most basic things I have learned as a soldier. Our trainings are replete with various lessons on leadership- tactical, operational and strategic for both combat and non-combat situations. With HBDO, I was able to revisit what leadership meant for me beyond the BE-KNOW-DO framework. I had the chance to look back and refresh myself on the military’s Principles of Leadership and assess myself how I fared on each. What kind of leader was I? What kind of leader am I now? What do I aspire to be?

I realized that I was and still am a transactional leader most of the time. I often focus on setting goals, rewarding achievements and recognizing superior performance especially when I am placed in- charge of a small unit. Proactive that I am, I try to anticipate things, constantly running scenarios in my head, and consciously developing actions and counter actions. I take immediate action when my team or unit is confronted with a situation. Victory favors the prepare, or so they say.

There are many occasions when I also practiced transformational leadership. When entrusted with leadership of a problematic or dysfunctional unit, I had to find ways on how to put it on reverse, and stir it forward along a new course. Adoptive or situational leadership also comes in handy for me when dealing with an ‘alphabet soup’ organization. Company leadership is very much different from small unit leadership. The principles may be the same but the art and science behind it are quite different. On many occasions, I had to put together a team of soldiers with diverse backgrounds and personalities. They came from various ethno-linguistic groups, had assorted cultural and religious biases, dissimilar level of skills, and most importantly, different motivation. I had to adopt my style to the team’s ‘personality’, and the task or mission at hand. Failing to recognize this kind of diversity could easily lead to the breakdown of the team. The lack of solid teamwork and camaraderie among soldiers results to mission failure, and worse, to loss of lives.

A leader’s leadership style is not developed overnight or acquired in an instant. Lt. Col. Enrique Ileto, a bemedaled Army officer said, his leadership style is a blend of that of his former commanders. I agree. We tend to adopt leadership styles practiced or embodied by persons we admire, idolize or respect immensely. Three of my former commanders were among the greatest influencers of my career. They have immensely contributed to my growth us an officer and leader and until now, I still consult them about leadership decisions, career moves and even family matters.

A big part of our personality is shaped by our environment: the family we grew up with; the circle of friends we have; the peers we relate with; the organization we belong to; and the society we live in. It is also heavily influenced by people’s expectations and institutional mandates. I have always encouraged collective decision- making because my family always consulted us when making decisions that could affect the entire family. My parents despised conflict in any form and were more into forging consensus and creating harmony among the family members. They were always willing to sacrifice anything to give us the best despite their meager resources. They were always ready to go the extra mile without expecting anything in return. When it was my turn to lead a unit, I saw to it that my men lived and worked in harmony amidst adversity and diversity. I shared to them what my parents taught me, what the academy has honed me for- to give more and take less.

Barbara Kellerman in her article “Leadership- Warts and All” said that “leaders weren’t always nice”. She said Machiavelli admired “unscrupulous leaders who exercised authority with an iron fist”. Machiavelli, according to Kellerman, believes “the only truly bad leadership is weak leadership”. Perhaps she was right. Perhaps Machiavelli was correct as well. There are no perfect leaders and there are no unblemished organizations. I, for one, wasn’t always nice to my men. I generously rewarded people but I punished twice as much. I was liberal with privileges but I was hard on people when it comes to mission accomplishment. I surely made a lot of mistakes and bad decisions but one thing I am NOT guilty of, was the lack of decision. An unwise decision is better than having no decision at all. Faced with a perilous situation, soldiers always looked up to their leaders for decision. It might be not be the best decision at that moment but it is just what soldiers need, and it must come quickly. Lack of decision kills more soldiers in the battlefield than bad decisions. Soldiers would always be willing to die for something rather than fight for nothing.

Reflecting on my past, I often wonder how I did as a leader, from the perspective of the men I led. I knew I had a vision for my unit which I articulated to my men when I started my stint. But was I able to effectively and clearly communicate it them? Was I able to develop the culture of giving rather than taking in my unit? Was I able to instill pride in them? Was I able to effectively carry them to victory? Was I able to meet their expectations of me as their leader? What about my superiors who entrusted me with leadership? How about my fellow leaders?

My introspection was both humbling and eye-opening as I realize I wasn’t as good as I thought I was. Perhaps not even close. But as I look back, it also dawned on me that I still haven’t maximized my potential as a leader, and that there is bigger room for me to develop. But what kind of leader do I really want to become? Do I want to be charismatic like Obama? Inspirational like Gandhi? Or a revolutionary like Bonifacio? And what kind of organization do I want to build? What kind of organizational culture do I want to create and promote? A ‘just-do-it’ and ‘giver’ kind of place ala St John the Compassionate Mission, or a ‘to-each-his-own’/ ‘taker’ organization like Goodjobz?

On Motivation

Why do soldiers do what they do? Why do they go to battle knowing that it is always a ‘50-50’ chance- you either go home alive and unscathed, or go home lifeless or injured? Most soldiers like me would tell you that they love being a soldier. It is what we have always wanted to do. It was my childhood dream, and being in the Army is a dream come true for me. This might be a classic example of Intrinsic Motivation. We find soldiery personally rewarding. Soldiery is a hazardous profession and yet thousands are lining up to enlist. Training is literally blood-sweat-and-tears but volunteers are overflowing even for the most grueling courses.

Now this is the challenge for leaders, a test of leadership. Soldiers already have that inherent motivation to serve- the reason why they enlisted in the first place. The challenge is on how to keep this motivation going, to keep the fire burning and to keep soldiers moving forward despite adversities and challenges. Those who have lost a meaningful reason to serve, and lost someone to motivate and inspire them are usually the ones who bolt out and abandon the service first. Those have managed to keep the fire in them alive are those who survive the most dangerous missions.

What does it take to develop, maintain and sustain the motivation of soldiers? Is it enough to give them autonomy or develop their competence? In my experience, quality training along with adequate equipment are among the most crucial factors that motivate soldiers. Soldiers are competitive and competition sometimes comes at a huge price-life. As such, they must hone their skills to perfection, and continuously polish it to stay alive. Training develops their competence, and competence gives them confidence. The more confident they are the more motivated to serve they become.

However, it goes beyond the physical or material aspects. To endure the rigors of training and survive hazardous environments, a soldier must be motivated not only by his salary, not only be promises of benefits, not only by awards and medals, but more importantly by his own passion to serve and do good for the people and the country. Soldiers need to be constantly counseled as they need somebody to talk to. They have their own dreams, hopes and aspirations. Family support is as critical to keep them energized, inspired and motivated.

Meanwhile, it also goes without saying that a leader must also be motivated enough to be able to motivate others especially his subordinates. “Knowing one’s self and seeking self-improvement”; and being “tactically and technically proficient” are principles that develop a leader’s competence. He must be courageous enough to be able to set the goal for the organization, and lead toward its pursuit. He must be committed enough to inspire commitment among his subordinates. He must be competent enough to promote and build confidence among his people. And most of all, he must possess integrity to foster accountability, fairness and equality in the organization.

Over and above these attributes, a leader must have a heart to be successful in leading. He needs a big heart to have the courage to lead both in times of peace and war. He needs a bigger heart to motivate people to have equal or even greater motivation than him. And he needs an even bigger heart to be able to create an environment that promotes these values, and build an organization that opens unlimited opportunities for people to progress and succeed.