Brand New View

Not Directly About the Olympics...

...but an amazing athletic story nevertheless. MSNBC has a photo story of Claire Lomas, a paralyzed UK chiropractor who just completed the 2012 London Marathon 16 days after the event began by wearing a special bionic 'rewalk' suit. Without a doubt, she has the heart and dedication of an Olympian.

P&G Olympics Video...

A key part of the appeal of the Olympics is emotion. As fans, we love the tug of our heartstrings as athletes push their limits in their quest to succeed. We rally around our favorite teams and sports in the hope they will win, but we also are amazed by the surprises when unknowns rise to the top. We feel a sense of pride as our national athletes (whichever country that may be) compete against the best from other countries. We feel uplifted as the intangible sense of awe and expectation unfolds from the Olympic Opening Ceremonies. And sadness overtakes us as the Closing Ceremonies end each Olympics, as we wish it could go on. TOP sponsors try to tap into this emotion with their sponsorship activitation tactics. P&G signed on to become a TOP sponsor after the 2010 Vancouver Olympics when they had successful results from their domestic sponsorship efforts. Many of you have seen the video at this link, but for those that haven't, P&G captures the spirit of the Olympics. Cynics will of course describe this as nothing more than a blatant effort by a for-profit company to get you to buy their products. Without question, TOP sponsors do want the Olympics to benefit their business by getting you and me to prefer their brands over rivals. At the same time, developing and nurturing brand preference is a complicated combination of science and art. The science includes creating marketing activities that lead to increased market share and enhanced brand value. The art involves the creative execution that hopefully conveys authenticity. The Olympics won't significantly change a TOP sponsor's performance overnight, but over time the potential for positive change is strong. And don't forget that without sponsor support, the vast majority of the athletes from the 200+ countries and territories that compete in the Olympics could not afford to participate.

London Goes Green With State of the Art Olympics Design

The 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics were considered the first host city to embrace green design in the construction of its Olympic venues (in fairness, previous host cities in recent years have incorporated improved efficiency in energy usage and venue portability as well, but Vancouver took it to another level), and London is taking green design further still, as discussed in an article in Construction Source. Part of London's ambition for the 2012 Olympic Park is not to just create usable green space, but to foster long-term behavioral change among the users after the Olympics are over. Among the objectives: to eliminate all waste that goes to landfills by 2025. The sheer effort London is making to create an Olympics that celebrates athletes and international goodwill while also leading the way in sustainable design is impressive, at least as it is described in their plans. Inevitably there will be implementation challenges, but London organizers have a thoughtful post-Olympics plan that suggests the Games really are seen as not a one-time event, but the beginning of a lifetime of positive change.

Drug Testing for London 2012

The BBC reports that there will be 5,000 random drug tests conducted at the 2012 London Olympics to detect for banned substances, nearly half of the 11,000 athletes expected. The number of tests has risen in recent years, from over 3,600 tests at the 2004 Athens Olympics and nearly 4,800 tests in Beijing in 2008. 26 positive tests were discovered in Athens and 20 in Beijing, suggesting that athletes are either cleaning up or they are finding clever ways to get around the tests. The answer is probably a combination of the two. In The Olympic Games Effect I discuss athlete controveries, including the use of banned substances to enhance athletic performance. Athletes seeking advantage over competitors by using performancing enhancing substances are not unique to the Modern Olympics. There were athletes in the Ancient Greek world that used hallucinogens, wines, herbal compounds, and even ground rhinocerous testicles in the hope that these substances would give them an edge. Scientific testing did not exist in the Ancient Greek world, but if cheaters were discovered, they would be subjected to beatings, or fines, or both. They would also have to pay for a statue that lined the pathways leading to Olympic venues, inscribed with a description of what they did wrong. This was a visible way to shame the transgressor particularly since it was a permanent reminder of that athlete's character, or more accurately their character flaws, sending a powerful message at a time when virtue and honor were considered society's most important qualities. Today's drug tests, as imperfect as they are, help reinforce society's expectations that the Olympics are supposed to represent the very highest levels of athletic integrity. Any victories earned through the use of banned substances diminishes the athlete's accomplishments and forever places an asterisk next to their names and also tarnishes the reputation of the Olympics. Such performances are not authentic, and authenticity is one of the vital ingredients required to create a truly valuable brand.

Common Sense vs. Nonsense

The East Coast of the US, Russia, and parts of Europe are enduring significant heat waves. Poor nations, perpetually struggling with a wide range of issues, will be increasingly endangered by chaotic weather events.  2010 is on track to be the hottest year in history. The issue of global warming isn't going away. There really shouldn't be a debate anymore about this issue, yet there remain vocal opponents that continue to dispute both compelling scientific evidence and even sheer common sense. Such strange defiance in the face of overwhelming data is nonsense.

Ann Florini, a professor at the National University of Singapore, offers an interesting perspective on how to get the world focused on clean energy. China is aggressively embarking on its own clean energy initiatives. This is not about the US vs. China, or any other country, for that matter (although I would be thrilled to see the equivalent of a clean energy 'arms race' in which both countries invest in outdoing the other for developing new clean energy technologies). This is about global common sense.

Why is there resistance in the U.S. to overwhelming evidence about global warming? Ideology is part of the answer. Protection of the status quo is another part. The status quo includes vested energy interests in oil and coal (in particular). Fears of new regulations and potential profit and job losses if a climate/energy bill is passed further fuels the anti-global warming crowd's beliefs. But isn't the potential for new technology and new jobs more compelling? Common sense suggests so.

Today's NYT opinion piece by Thomas Friedman summarizes the situation here in the U.S. clearly: we will be sorry if our elected officials cannot pass an energy/climate bill. Without U.S. legislative action, there can be no global collective solution. And that means nonsense wins.

Rebalancing...the Many Linkages and Risks

A recent article in the Financial Times states that China's exports rose 17.7% and imports climbed 55.9% in December, the first such increases in exports in 14 months. Several economists agree that the export growth is one of many factors that may lead China to allow a gradual appreciation of the Yuan, which would help other countries (since a rise in the Yuan's value will make foreign goods cheaper, increasing imports...). At the same time, many western economies, notably the U.S., need to boost domestic savings rates as well, if global rebalancing is to occur. Rebalancing, in the current context, would mean that debt-laden countries reduce consumption and increase individual savings as well as investment in R&D and production, while countries in surplus increase consumption. Among the key strategic areas poised for such investment in the U.S.: energy and efficient (clean) technologies. President Obama faces a sizable political challenge ahead with the coming mid-term elections, because any new energy legislation will be spun as a tax on industry and an affront to individual freedom by the opposition. The risk to politicians supporting energy legislation is not insignificant: they may be voted out of office (this has been exacerbated by the recent epidemic of 'foot in mouth' disease by many Democrats in Congress). Yet the importance of providing government incentives to spur investment in clean technology cannot be overstated. Part of any energy legislation ought to be a gas tax to force a behavior change among the population. Of course, this is not a popular idea, and there is little doubt such a proposal would cause Glenn Beck to cry on national TV (sadly, such cheap theater seems convincing to many Americans). But the US needs to pay closer attention to the underlying factors that are going to make China even stronger in the years ahead, as compared to us. China is investing heavily in clean technology, including nuclear power.  At the same time, China, with its surpluses, must find ways to redistribute some of its growing wealth to encourage increased domestic consumption. One of the challenges is convincing China to allow a more rapid rise in the Yuan to accelerate this effort. The other challenge is for President Obama to convince the U.S. Congress that a truly substantial national energy bill will reap enormous rewards for decades (particularly in terms of remaining a competitive global economic force), even if the passage of such a bill leads to short-term political losses.

Thomas Friedman and Global Weirding

Today's International Herald Tribune had an opinion piece about global warming by one of my favorite writers, Thomas Friedman, author of the best seller 'The World is Flat'. Referring to a few highlights of the challenges confronting Earth, one of the key points is the newly confirmed data that global warming is happening much faster than thought as recently as a couple years ago. The UN's IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) now concludes that the next 2-3 years are pivotal. In other words, the time for action is now, not some distant date in the future. As Friedman enthusiastically discusses, despite the Bush Administration's utter disregard over global warming, other parts of the US are taking matters into their own hands. He cites the work of MIT students who have put together the Vehicle Design Summit (http://www.vehicledesignsummit.org/website/), with the specific goal of creating a hyper-efficient car within the next 5 years. 25 universities and student design teams from around the world are involved. As the MIT team states on their website, "We are the people we have been waiting for". This is an incredibly exciting and important group, demonstrating once again why universities play a pivotal role in society. Get involved with the Vehicle Design Summit, or some other action-oriented effort on global warming. Why wait? Unless you think someone else will fix it...and that's not likely.

China, Japan and Global Warming

The current summit talks between China's Wen and Japan's Abe are important for reasons ranging from historical animosity and regional stability to global warming. Regarding the latter, China has agreed to engage in talks with Japan on global warming. Just the prospect of talks alone is encouraging. According to the Wall Street Journal, China produces 18% of the world's greenhouse gases, second only to the US's 21%. By 2010, China is projected to overtake the US as the world's number one greenhouse gas producer. In years past, China was concerned about the economic impact of accepting caps on carbon. No longer. Over the last few months, Beijing has grown increasingly concerned about the myriad economic and social challenges that could derail growth if pollution remains unchecked. I have written about global warming before with respect to China (and whether it would literally choke to death before economic prosperity can be fully realized) and California (where Governor Schwarzenegger has become a national leader in the US for ambitious global warming legislation). The US federal government has been relatively silent on this issue for years. But with China and Japan now agreeing to discuss this issue, perhaps it will be the catalyst that brings the US to the table as well.

Schwarzenegger

The latest Newsweek Magazine has a cover story about Arnold Schwarzenegger and his efforts to make California the greenest state in the US. His legislative efforts to date have been excellent, with important laws limiting CO2 (greenhouse) gases among his key accomplishments. He is also working on legislation that encourages investments in alternative energies. He has a growing base of support in the US (this is refreshing, especially in the face of the Federal government's paralysis) and around the world, notably Tony Blair. Arnold is also pushing 'green' vehicles--but not just your typical hybrids, like the Toyota Prius. For example, he appeared on MTV's 'Pimp My Ride' to have a gas guzzling Chevy Nova transformed into a green car. And his Hummer runs on biofuel. His point? Innovation can help make previously believed impossibilities possible. The car examples are symbolically powerful. But there is more than symbolism in Arnold's efforts. He knows the power of celebrity and he has built a sizable chunk of political capital and credibility since becoming governor in 2003. The most appealing aspect of Arnold's efforts is his centrist sensibility. While he is a Republican, he certainly does not adhere to strict Republican principles, much to the consternation of right wing conservatives. Yet he is also not embracing the more extreme elements of the Democrats. Blindly following political dogma may sound 'principled', but it is often impractical and insensitive, substituting convenience for reason. I have heard hard-core Democrats and Republicans tell me that they always vote the party line. But why? It seems intellectually lazy. I like Schwarzenegger's independence, particularly at a time when both parties appear increasingly irrelevant to most Americans. Schwarzenegger shows that you can be more than a label. I hope his legacy inspires similar thinking, both in the US and around the world.