A nudge towards independence

Once again Cicero is going to allude to the wee stramash that is currently going on to the north of the Wall of Hadrian. For there is much that many of us who reside to the south can learn.

And by the time you get to read this, the result may be known, but whether Eck Salmond and his acolytes have won the debate or not, the learnings remain relevant.

As you know Cicero is a great fan of behavioural science or ‘nudge’ as it is known to some. And it would appear that Eck is a keen student of this approach also. Unlike Posh Dave and the Two Caesars.

You might think that a referendum question is easy to formulate.

No.

The same question can be asked in a variety of ways. Dependent on the answer that is required. And Eck knows for sure exactly what answer he wants. Do the Two Caesars?

For example the voters of the Celtic clans are going to be asked ‘Should Scotland be an independent country? Yes or No.’

It could have asked ‘Do you want Scotland to remain as part of the United Kingdom? Yes or no?’

Same question. Same outcome. Or so you might think.

But here Eck played a blinder and in a vote where every vote might count, an understanding of behavioural science might end up nudging Eck over the line and the Celtic tribes into independence and freedom.

No matter the question, yes is positive, it is constructive, it is optimistic. No is the exact opposite. Everything that is good about saying yes is as bad when we say no.

We want to say yes. We don’t want to say no. Sales people learn this with their mother’s milk and if you listen carefully to their patter will try to get their mark into a yes frame of mind as early and as often as they can in the conversation.

And Eck is a great salesman, whatever you might think of his political patter.

Thinking about it is no wonder that the ‘No’ people have been struggling to paint an optimistic vision for the the northern clans and tribes staying with the two Caesars when they start out with one hand tied behind their back and their legs tied together.

The ‘Aye’ or ‘Naw’ question being asked may not be the silver bullet to independence and freedom but Cicero, always a keen student and thinker of behavioural science thinks, in the tight race this is shaping up to be, might just add a few yes extra yes votes to the pile and might end up in rUK needing a new flag.

Have a great week.

Sis felix. Et sis fortunatus. 

Benefit of the doubt

Last week Cicero had to call to cancel a benefit on behalf of Senex Pater

Now you would think that in this day and age with the Two Caesars committed to reducing the amount of money provided by us, the taxpayer, for re-distribution to the supposedly less deserving, this would be an easy, straightforward and unquestioning thing to do. Far from it.

As always with these things Cicero had to speak to a script reading Apparatchik via the telephony device. And as always said Apparatchik was struck mute when the conversation deviated from the script.

Firstly it seems that the benefit was being cancelled a day early and supposedly could not be cancelled until and not before the change of circumstances happened ‘just in case something prevented it happening, sir.’

Does it matter? Does it really matter?

Seemingly this is vitally important to the Apparatchik minions who man these call centres who want to be 100% certain that we are all getting the taxpayer funded benefits we are entitled to. And to think that there are actually people out there who think this is a heartless government motivated by nothing except delivering painful and heartless benefit cuts. Even if this were the case the message clearly has not yet got through to the lower ranks who are clearly off script on this.

And then I had to prove that Pater’s circumstances had changed to the extent that he was no longer entitled to the benefit. It is right that people have to prove that they are entitled to taxpayer provided largesse but one would have thought that the Apparatchiks would be rubbing their hands in glee at saving a few bawbees. 

Why did they need proof?

Naturally Cicero questioned the efficacy of such a process. But seemingly these procedures have been personally put in place by one or either or even both of the Two Caesars. Yes, she genuinely and really did believe that our Two Caesars have enough time on their hands and even the inclination to develop such policies and practices. These days one of them might have time on his hands but the other most certainly does not.

Cicero did not have the heart to put her right.

Sis felix. Et sis fortunatus.

Power to the people

Cicero is feeling guilty. And fears he may be giving his devoted and loyal readers the wrong impression. And he would like to make amends.

You may from recent posts be left with the impression that Cicero has something against this country’s Apparatchik class and that in his eyes these people can do no right. But in this post Cicero would like to suggest that those working to create wealth can at times be prone to much silliness too.

A few weeks back Little Ed, to much gnashing of teeth and beating of breasts from the Two Caesars and their acolytes, promised when speaking to the Last Lot, that should the Last Lot become the Next Lot after the Two Caesars have sought the judgement of the Vulgar Mob, that they would pass a law to cap energy price rises. A very relevant topic given the inflation busting price increases that our energy companies have just announced.

Now clearly such a law is more beneficial than debating and legislating to tax carrier bags to save the odd polar bear. Even if it will have the same effect as Canute as trying to stop the waves. You can’t buck the market. You can’t nationalise capitalism by getting them to pay for it. You really must stop listening to and reading the works of Pater, Little Ed.

Now such nonsense is bad enough. But it was trumped by the nonsense of one of those affected. A classic case of shooting yourself in the foot. 

Little Ed’s Marxist cant, while loved by the Vulgar Mob not unnaturally, was received with distinct unenthusiasm by those whose job it is to risk their capital to extract the oil and gas from the ground and to transport this vast distances so that we might keep our lights on, homes warm, and our offices and factories working at full stretch. Freezing prices artificially for 2 years will destroy investment, destroy jobs, destroy the economy. You might win some cheap votes, they warned, but such a policy will lead to blackouts, food riots and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

And while Cicero might agree with the sentiments, such dire warnings might have been a wee bit over the top.

And no sooner had their apocalyptic warnings started when, in a brazen piece of marketing cheek, and it was not a bad piece of marketing, one of their number announced that it was not possible to fix your energy prices not for two years, which would clearly result in the end of civilisation, but for 4 years.

The Marketing Head Honcho who signed off this campaign clearly was not cc-ed into the Armageddon memo.

So silliness is not just an Apparatchik monopoly.

So re-arrange these words into meaningful sentences. Pot black calling kettle. Left right hand doing not what hand knowing. Billy a who’s silly.

Sis felix. Et sis fortunatus. Semper. 

On the right track?

Last week Cicero spoke, and spoke so eloquently, about motorways. This week we are going to speak about trains and about one train in particular, HS2. This will be the last time for a while we will be communing about transport issues. Promise.

As we mentioned in my previous post Cicero is currently plying his trade and sharing his wit and wisdom with the lucky folks in the heart of this Green and Pleasant Land, pretty close to its supposed heart, in fact.

In this corner of the world the Angles and other tribes who have pitched their tents here are much vexed with the Two Caesar’s plans to build a high speed rail track through their gardens and fields. This plan has produced a highly contagious outbreak of Nimbyism for which there is at present no known cure though the finest scientific minds are currently looking into this. And naturally they are mightily displeased with the Two Caesars and their plans even though the plans were originally initiated by the Last Lot.

Now Cicero has many talents and skills and a wide spread of knowledge on very many topics but he would be the first to admit he is no transport expert. But this does not stop him from pronouncing and sharing his thoughts on this topic or any other with which he has scant knowledge.

Given this it is worth stating at the outset that to date Cicero has avoided succumbing to the outbreak of Nimbi’s and can this take a more detached view of the of the rights and wrongs of this issue for I have no skin in the game, other than as a taxpayer who will no doubt be funding this construction extravaganza. And possibly as a potential traveller who might choose to use the service to sojourn to the Big Smoke from time to time.  

My starting point in this debate is to admit that I know nothing about the topic, whether it economically stacks up though when did that last stop us doing things our Caesars wanted to do; whether or not we need the capacity that it is claimed we need; or whether there are better things we might do with the apparently obscene amounts of money it will take to build this Hornby Train Set.

But, and this is not something few realise, other than HS1 which links the Big Smoke with the land where Johnny Foreigner lives, we have not built any new train track in this country since the 19^th century which is even before Downton Abbey. So surely if we are going to build a new train line it is only right that we build the best, most up to date and most modern we can afford? After all if we were setting out to buy a new car we wouldn’t be looking to purchase a Model T Ford, would we?

It surely is not possible to run a modern 21^st century economy able to compete with modern and fast growing economies like Brazil, India and China (and possibly even Scotland once it discards it colonial shackles next year)  on a 19^th century infrastructure. Maybe those with Nimbyism think we can.

Finally we elect our leaders to lead, for good or ill, that is the strength and weakness of democracy, but we pay the Two Caesars to lead. So get on with it. You have looked into this and decided that this is the best thing for us to do. You have had experts with brains the size of planets to examine the issues and you still think we should do this. So in the words of my old friend, Aristotle, albeit in Greek, ‘lead on and just frigging do it’.

Those of you with higher active listening skills may have discerned Cicero’s previous subtle pronouncements that he is not usually favour of the Caesars spending his bawbees on State business but indubitably the Two Caesars will be relieved to know that this plan has Cicero’s blessing.

But what do you think? Have you a bad case of Nimbyism? Or even worse Ludditism?

Sis felix. Et sis fortunatus. Semper.

You turn if you want to

Well, thank god that the huge extravaganza that was the Jubilee is over. Maybe now we can get back to doing some work and help get Your Queen’s nation back on its feet. Someone has to.

I am not going to prolong the monopolisation of our media by this orgy of obsequious fawning but instead respond to some recent political happenings.

And maybe it’s only me...but I do prefer to be governed by people who listen.

In recent weeks we have seen the Two Caesars, and their Money Man, change tack on tax on pasties, charities and caravans. And every change of tack has been greeted with howls of derision from the Last Lot and accusations of making a u-turn as if this was a very bad thing to do.

The intention to change the tax regime on these items was announced in the Budget and then having listened to the concerns of those affected, the Two Caesars and their supporters decided that these changes would cause more harm than good.

Now maybe it’s only me but I think that is a good thing. It shows that we are governed by people who listen.

So unlike the Last Lot who ploughed on regardless of the damage inflicted by their policies. And boy did they cause some damage. We are in fact still paying for their headlong pursuit of policies on which they believed they were right and everyone else was wrong.

Now it could be argued that maybe those in charge of the tax policy on pasties and the other things should have done their consultation beforehand. How could they? If they had done this, as sure as eggs, their thinking and proposals would have leaked and been attacked by all sorts of crusading lobby groups. Budgets are like sausages and it is not edifying to know how they are made, to mis-quote Bismarck.

Instead they did the right thing. Sharpened their thinking and proposition behind the scenes, as any business developing a new product might, and then road tested the policy with those most affected. Is this not the right way to do things?

If you are out in the car and you come to a dead end. What do you do? Plough on and write off the car? Or U Turn? Surely turning round is the right thing to do in this instance. And no one would criticise you for doing this.

And in my humble opinion our political process and our democracy are better served when listening and responding to the electorate is to be applauded rather than characterised as a humiliating climb-down.

As Maynard Keynes once said ‘’When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?’’

Hear hear.

Have a great week.

Sis felix. Et sis fortunatus.

Oranges aren't the only fruit

Is it only me...but surely this is not good use of David Cameron’s time.

It is with some incredulity that I read a recent interview with Ed Miliband, the Dippy One, when he criticised The One Caesar, Mr Cameron, for failing to stop the sale of half price chocolate oranges in WH Smith’s. Really, Mr Miliband, maybe here there is a clue here as to why you and your obsolete party are lagging in the polls.

At this point, let me declare an interest-I like chocolate oranges and I especially like cut price chocolate oranges.

It seems that when in Opposition The One Caesar made a speech promising that when he became Caesar he personally would make the sale of cheap chocolate illegal-or some other similar promise. Now maybe, Mr Miliband, you might want to take a long hard look at the campaign promises made and subsequently broken by the previous leaders that you actually served. Believe me I can assure you that banning the sale of cut price chocolate is a mere trifle compared to what your lot said when you were trying to win and stay in power. Student tuition fees, need I say more?

But there is a more important issue at stake here than who promised what to whom and when.

Now as I am no longer an Apparatchik charged with defending our borders, liberties and freedoms, I am no longer privy to the contents of the Two Caesar’s in box but I can guess the kind of issues that the Her Maj’s First Minister might be dealing with as I write this and you read this. These are likely to include the wars we are still fighting; the lack of growth in the economy; the possible break-up of the Euro with all its consequent implications; our constant whining and whingeing that we are not spending enough of the Taxpayer’s money on our pet causes; the need to raise more money from tax; the demand to reduce the amount we borrow; and of course the impending break up of the United Kingdom.

Did you see cut price chocolates anywhere on that list? And it is my guess that in the list of priorities in Number 10 (and hopefully No 11 too) if cut price chocolates figures anywhere above No 985, something is wrong. Indeed in the list of government priorities only Health and Safety and Wonky Weather should rank below the need to reduce the price of chocolate oranges. It would not surprise me though if somewhere in the deepest darkest bowels of Whitehall there was not a Steering Group of Apparatchiks toiling away producing reports, Ministerial Submissions and strategic legislative, policy and communication options to reduce the price of chocolate oranges at our stations.

Now I for one, and not just for reasons of vested interest, do not want one cell of The One Caesar’s brain devoted to reducing the price of chocolate oranges. I do not want one cent of my hard earned taxes being used to pay for Apparatchiks to consider how this might be done. And I do not want one minute wasted through my elected representatives debating and producing more pointless hot air on this subject.

Other than Mr Miliband, does anyone else want to see our political elite prioritising this issue? Do let me know.

Have a great week.

Sis felix. Et sis fortunatus.

I can see clearly now.....

Hello.
According to Bob Geldof who said recently ‘a blog is like an arsehole-everyone has one’. Hopefully that is not how you view these words of wit and wisdom. Or the author.

And many thanks to the many women who expressed through private back channels their support for last week’s thoughts and opinions on Mummy Leave. It is interesting that it is women who support these views and that few will go on the record or commit their opinions to paper. Wonder why? Do they think they are letting the Sisters down? Do they fear reprisals from Harry Harperson and the Guardianistas? Hopefully the Two Caesars are taking notice of the lack of support for some of the more inequitable aspects of Mummy Leave.

And if you did leave a comment, thank you. But please note it wasn’t the principle of Mummy Leave which was being attacked but the principle that even when you get back you are still entitled to the holidays you would have had if you had not been on Mummy Leave. This still makes no sense.

Last week Cicero had to get a new windscreen for his chariot.

The woman at the dreaded Call Centre was charming and helpful and without being told knew that the windscreen required had to be heated to endure the cold winter months.

A few days later the fitter turned up as arranged and guess what. Wrong windscreen. ‘We will need to re-book appointment’, explained the fitter.
Needless to say Cicero was not happy with the re-inconvenience and calmly as is his wont explained that it was he who was being inconvienced despite providing all the required information.

‘Nothing to do with me, mate, I just fit them’, was the comeback as if that was a sufficient explanation. This is exactly the response that will always infuriate Cicero to the point of exasperation.

And to add to the infuriated exasperation, Cicero was advised that this happens all the time and yet it never seemed to occur to ‘nothing-to-do-with-me, mate’ to challenge or question a process which seemed to send him out on a regular basis with the wrong chariot windscreen. This was just the way life was. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

We will not bore you with all the grisly details but after hitting and bouncing off the ceiling quite a few times while Cicero dealt with Mr Jobsworth, and after a call to said Mr Jobsworth’s Head Honcho, a new fitter was despatched to Cicero’s chariot forthwith. And this time he brought the right windscreen.

Incidents like this happen all the time. They certainly happen when Cicero is around. They must happen to you. And right now something similar will be happening near you, possibly even in your business to your customers. How can people be so lacking in curiosity? How can it be beyond the wit and wisdom of anyone not to look to solve problems that you know are going to cause your frustration? How can anyone think that ‘nothing to with me, mate’ is an adequate response to an irate and disgruntled customer?

There's a one-word answer to all those questions: silos.

The call centre’s job was to take the order and transmit it to the local depot. There it was the manager’s job to put the right equipment in the right van. And it was the fitter’s job to fit the windscreen. The fitter would have done a great job if he had been supplied with the right information to do his job. But he wasn’t. And so he didn’t.

Here's the problem: Our jobs are complex and interdependent, but our goals, objectives, and, most importantly, mindsets, are often siloed.

We each have a job to do — sell a service, design a product, address a customer issue — and the underlying mindset is: if I do my job well, and you do your job well, we'll achieve our organization's goals.

But it rarely works that way. People in one silo often have information needed by — but never given to — people in another silo. And, as my experience showed, if there's a problem anywhere in the organization, everyone fails. Who is responsible for fitting the windscreen? It's a waste of time to parse that one out. And it's damaging to try. The truth is, they're all, collectively, responsible.

In other words we are all responsible for each others' work. It's all about collaboration. And every organization of two or more is a collaborative effort. And we are only as strong as the weakest link in our chain.

How do we escape the silo mentality?

It helps if leadership is explicit about the cross-silo outcomes that are most important in the organization. It helps if everyone working in the business is clear that satisfying customers is their number one priority and that everyone is collectively responsible for that outcome. It helps if each person is committed to a whole that is larger than their part.

It also helps if the organization's structures and processes support collaboration. If people meet regularly to share what they are learning and are taught the skills to give and receive feedback. It helps if people are taught to communicate clearly, gently, and inoffensively with each other, avoiding blame and embarrassment, for the sake of cross-silo outcomes.

All that helps. But even with all that support, direction, and skill, it still takes one more critical ingredient. Perhaps the most critical.

Courage.

The courage of a single person willing to take personal risks for the sake of the organization's success.

Because no matter how clearly leaders reward cross-silo outcomes, it takes great personal strength to identify and help correct a mistake in "someone else's" silo and to overcome the fear of the consequences of taking responsibility for colleagues' work.

But at least Cicero can see now clearly.

Is it only me.........but please sit down.

The other day I was on a train. The train was no more than half full. It was very early in the morning after all and only early birds looking for worms are up travelling at that time in the morning. And so I easily found a seat, parked my behind and hid myself in my work and in my music. Bliss!

One stop later and a fellow early worm approached me. ‘Excuse me’, he said, ‘but I think you are sitting in my seat’. I engaged my mouth and resisted the temptation to point out that since the train was half empty he had his choice of seats but since he clearly felt he was entitled to this seat I, like the true Brit I can be from time to time, apologised and huffed and puffed and went through the mighty rigmarole of getting together my stuff and moving to one of the many empty seats strewn through the carriage like scatter cushions. Perhaps, I thought, this seat is specially designed for his back or maybe it reaches our destination a wee bit quicker than every other seat on the train.

You see the same thing when you fly. You have inadvertently sat in an aisle or window seat, got yourself settled, and someone will come up to you, block the aisle thereby stopping everyone else from taking their seat, and refuse to move until he, or she, and on this occasion I am afraid to say it usually is a he, gets the seat they have paid to get.

Whether in the air or on the tracks, a seat’s a seat. It is not going to give you a massage. You are not going to be able to take it home with you. Nor will it, like Jimmy Saville’s used to do, make you a cup of tea. It’s the same seat as the one next to it or across the aisle from it or opposite it. It’s not your personal seat. So what’s the problem?

It might only be me but why can’t people just for once apply common sense. Surely I am not the only one who takes the view that at the end of the day a seat on a plane or on a train is the same as every other seat, unless you have paid a big wedge of cash more to avoid travelling Cattle Class, and it does not matter where you sit so long as the seat is free. Why add extra hassle to everyone’s lives by insisting that you get the seat you think you have paid to rent for the duration of your journey?

Why can’t you just sit down and be quiet.

If you are one of those who insist on getting the exact seat allocated to you, please tell us why.

In meantime, have a great week.

Sis felix. Et sis fortunatus.