Comments

Tom, thanks - great slides as always. I have one point of contention though:

“Not a single item in our trillion-dollar arsenal can compare with the genius of the suicide bomber—the breakthrough weapon of our time." (slide 10)

I'm not entirely sure what the context surrounding the slide was, but if it's that suicide bombers and terrorists are a real and present (as well as novel) risk to the global economy, I don't think this is true at all.

The US economy does itself no favours in propogating fear where it is undue: all the fear does is make commodity prices more irrational, depress equity prices, and ultimately endanger the franchise of the dollar by drawing attention to the war on Iraq -- subsequently ironically the US is seen as a major propogator of the violence factor. The risk suicide bombers present to our society and economy is miniscule and distinctly low on genius compared to other, more natural risks which we face. It's not particularly new, either: as much as FOX likes to think it's some recent phenomenon that's come from financially deprived middle eastern dictatorships, suicide bombers have been around for years and will be around for years more - it's just that they used to be called "martyrs".

My apologies if this was a slide illustrating some strategic metaphor for the modern organisation, but if not, I think it's time the myth of the fear of terrorism was put in its place demographically.

Posted by Daniel M. Harrison at May 18, 2006 10:52 AM

Thanks Daniel - I tend to agree - AND they are "homocide" maniac bombers rather than "suicide". Suicide would be quite economically perfect - then terror destroys itself.

Worldwide markets may have built in risk and market response to terrorist acts the past 4.5 years - that should be argued. Terror financial infrastructure and human capital is being destroyed fairly efficiently in some locales = 0 attacks on USA soil since you know when. Maybe terror risk is overrated.

Posted by Sean at May 18, 2006 12:48 PM

Hi Daniel and Sean

As one of the lucky 500 or so people present for Tom’s Masterclass in London on Wednesday I have to say the context of that slide was set very carefully by Tom.

My perception of what Tom was saying is that terrorists, through the suicide bomber, have discovered a way of disrupting every single aspect of our lives, very much including our economies, whether we like it or not and whether we agree philosophically or not. The reality is that the suicide bomber is not preventable until we become smarter in some yet unknown way. I may be wrong and would be interested in Tom’s take on it but that is how I heard it as a member of the audience.

By the way ….

The Masterclass was the most wonderful day of my professional life as well as being the most profound learning of my entire career of over 36 years. Someone asked me cynically was it worth going to London for an all-day seminar to listen to one guy. The printable part of my answer was: ‘I learned more listening to Tom Peters for 6 hours than I did listening to some of the jerks I worked with in 36 years of my career to date.’

Three absolute gems I took from Tom’s talk on the day are as follows:

Number One

“I am often asked - How long does it take to become excellent? The answer is 1 minute – excellence is a commitment to yourself”

Number Two

‘Life is too short to work with jerks’

Number Three

‘To bang your head against a brick wall once and give up means you are a quitter. If you bang our head against a wall ten times you are an idiot!'

I say Amen to all three of those profound yet simple thoughts.

Posted by Trevor Gay at May 19, 2006 3:53 AM

"Theater weekend" with my family in London. No time for the Web for a couple of days. But Trevor you got the terrorist quote context spot on.

Posted by tom peters at May 19, 2006 4:11 AM

Homocide maniacs though - labels are important - Tom & Trevor may lean left & tend to reflect liberal media syntax. "Suicide" and "insurgents" are for lessor minds.

Homocide murder and Islam-fascism yes are devious-devil-worship and shall be diminished - still think markets build in cowardly strikes - i.e. London/world markets blip last year - AND innocents' loss makes them world heroes - whereas homocide Islam families dishonored for eternity.

Posted by Sean at May 19, 2006 8:27 AM

Like Trevor I was lucky enough to be present at this event. Tom, you changed my life a decade ago and reading through the slides again the profundity hits me like an express train. Your point about terrorists (let's just call them that shall we!) just reinforces the way you turn 'conventional logic' on its head and repeatedly, brilliantly sum up the business zeitgeist.

Why else would so many business school professors et al. sit through your rants about business schools? - because, surely, they, like the rest of us, were there to be shaken out of our ruts and re-energised to go out and wage war on the sloths, the narrow-minded, the energy drains, the bureaucrats and the men who don't get that women 'are' the market!

Thank you so much for another brilliant day.

Posted by Stephen Spencer at May 20, 2006 8:57 AM

Sean, oddly, you seem to ignore the fact that the quote in question comes from a genuinely righ-leaning (Big Lean) journal???????????????????

Posted by tom peters at May 25, 2006 9:19 AM

Tom - think I follow - so much though is 8th grade reader material - new cover story on Business Week on "medical guesswork" makes a point that we tend to be too accepting ...
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/toc/06_22/B3986magazine.htm

"Immmigration issue" - or more like lazy corrupt pols selling souls to business and for votes via taxpayer dollars ...

Posted by Sean at May 25, 2006 11:18 AM

Yeah Tom, I have to say, I side with sean on this one. I get the point about how a credible right-leaning journal is making the point of terrorism fears, but even credible periodicals such as the Economist sometimes succumb to the powerful PR machines of the big governmental and corporate institutions (did anyone see that huge piece the Economist did recently on Goldman's - don't tell me there wasn't some quid pro quo there: it came right out of left field).

I just don't think the terrorism argument is all it's cracked up to be: it says more to me how comfortable our society is that it has to go and embellish the extent of a drama to create action for action's sake more than anything else.

There is something slightly more controversial however which you once hinted at and has stayed on my mind. As I understood it you once said something like "I have to be careful here but ..." and then went on to point out that if corporate organisations could somehow mimic terrorist organisations in their practices - staying small, creating efficient channels of communication and belief despite all obstacles and retaining single-minded focus on goal achievement etc. - then think how powerful they could be? This seemed to me to be the most relevant argument about terrorist organisations from an economic perspective around. Then I guess the word 'genuis' can be applied properly.

Posted by Daniel M. Harrison at May 26, 2006 5:11 AM

Hi Sean and Daniel

Mmmmm... I must ponder your comments …

Sean says ....'Tom & Trevor may lean left & tend to reflect liberal media syntax'

Do I lean left??? … Yep I am very proud to say I have always been a socialist - My beloved late Dad said everyone was a socialist until they were 30 … then they grew up. I guess I never grew up.

I heard recently someone quoted who said ‘When I feed the poor I am called a Saint … when I ask why the poor have no food I am called a communist’ … so to be called 'left leaning' is fine by me Sean :-)

The point being made by Tom in London was not an opinion about whether suicide bombers are ‘good’ or ‘bad’ just that they have found a brilliant way of challenging the 'big hitters.'

My Christian view is that it is absolutely appalling that human beings are blowing each other up and killing each other in any part of the world regardless of faith or doctrine. We all know it's about 'power' and I just don't 'get it.' I never will.

The discussion that has been caused by this topic illustrates vividly to me once more how things can sometimes be interpreted wrongly when the context is not understood. We all do that and I do it a lot!

If Sean and Daniel had been at Tom’s Seminar than they would both have understood the context entirely.

Brilliant discussion guys – have a great weekend!

Posted by Trevor Gay at May 26, 2006 6:28 AM

Trevor - simple point that "homocide" is accurate - "suicide" isn't - "insurgent" is terrorist activity with a focus on killing innocents. "Terrorists" is what they are.

"Brilliant way" is hardly the term - "perverse devil-worship" is more like it for Islam-fascism.

Feeding the poor tends to feed dictator Zurich coffers ala Bono & Geldof :>}.

Posted by Sean at May 27, 2006 5:56 PM