We had an interesting article get submitted to our site that is pushing for a movement to stop unsolicited delivery of Yellow Pages. I have blogged a couple of times over the last year or two making the point that the Yellow Pages of the 21^st century are the Search Engines. This post showed how this is the year when searches on local businesses were done more via the Search Engines than even print yellow pages — Marketing experts: “Reallocate at least 50% of your Yellow Pages budget”

I also posted one where the end of Yellow Pages was predicted -  Bill Gates on local advertising: Yellow Pages gone in 5 years. Despite being well aware of these stats, I was stunned with one datapoint from the 3^rd party research we commissioned on our audience. That is, with the SunValleyOnline audience which makes up a healthy chunk of the valley’s populace plus many 2^nd homeowners they stated that huge majority of them didn’t use the print yellow pages at all.

The reality is that the yellow pages industry is facing the most formidable competition possible. If it weren’t enough that Google was out to eat their lunch but Yahoo and Microsoft are investing massive sums of money to compete with Google. The yellow pages industry is simply collateral damage. The convenience and effectiveness of the search engines is improving dramatically. Call 800-GOOG411 (800-466-4411) and check it out yourself. It’s free and will connect you to the business and/or text message the details including a map of the businesses location. As phones such as the iPhone become ubiquitous and have GPS built in, this only accelerates the trend. I hardly know a person over 15 who doesn’t have a mobile phone on them at all times.

The local ordinances this movement is recommending (see article link above) sound pretty onerous. I wonder if they’ve gotten any traction. Has anyone heard about this movement and know if they are having any success? I have a hard time seeing too many cities taking this on right now with the other challenges facing cities but maybe I’m wrong. What do you think is the yellow pages future? I’m curious what business owners think.

Just had to pull in a line from “Purple Haze” by Jimi Hendrix on this chilly night (actually, it’s relevant to the subject matter of this note in an oblique way, I think)…

comment-1-final-vesion

comment-2-final-version1

comment-3

On Friday, 1/5, I wrote sent off two sets of comments to the P&Z and Editor of the Express addressing the Warm Springs hotel project. See the above attached .pdf files. The third comment went to P&Z only. I hope someone with good verbal skills who attends the meeting will bring up this third issue specifically.

Any thoughts on these comments are welcome. I will not attend this meeting due to more pressing projects, but wanted to share what I sent out. Consider it a verbal “drive-by” shooting.

Thanks very much.

Andrew Fitzgerald

E: fitzgerald.andrew.nelson@gmail.com

To definitively resolve once and for all the matter and merits of the consolidation of Sun Valley and Ketchum police and fire departments and consolidation of the two cities into one new city called Sun Valley, an advisory referendum could be held for Sun Valley voters. Dave Chase is in a position to put the matter of such a referendum before the Sun Valley city council. Should the city council reject a referendum, Dave Chase could initiate a petition for an initiative election on the same matters.

The referendum would ask three separate questions: 1) Shall the Sun Valley and Ketchum police departments be consolidated into one police department? 2) Shall the Sun Valley and Ketchum fire departments be consolidated into one fire department? 3) Shall the cities of Sun Valley and Ketchum consolidate into one new city called Sun Valley?

Once a referendum election was set, the points, discussions, and campaigning on the matters and merits could begin in earnest in Sun Valley and in Ketchum for the benefit of Sun Valley voters. The city council would act accordingly on the results of the election.

This is one of those funny times when my comments are coming both from the vantage point of an elected official and a regular, common-sense citizen. I have striven to keep the common-sense citizen viewpoint as much as I can even while I’m officially a government official.  This post represents both viewpoints - citizen and elected official.

The paper reported an idea I floated at last week’s City Council meeting that several people have said I should also post a blog about. I prefaced my council comments with the fact that it was simply an idea that I thought was worthy of exploration to see whether it had merit or not (as opposed to a formal proposal). In a nutshell, despite being a congenital optimist, I think it would be imprudent if the government didn’t plan for the worst. It’s easy to “recover” if the worst doesn’t happen but the reverse isn’t true. Thus, I think we should plan as though we are heading for an Economic Iceberg. I have been floating various ideas to stimulate the tourism economy with the CVB but there’s one assumption in those ideas — we’d have to spend money to make money. Where does one find that money?

I’m quite certain that all municipalities can sharpen their pencil to find money but I noticed one opportunity that I thought we shouldn’t let pass without at least a discussion. That is, Ketchum’s police chief position is open. It struck me that Sun Valley has a very seasoned, competent and respected police chief — Cam Daggett. The idea I floated was to have the Mayor test the waters with Ketchum to see if they’d be amenable to some kind of collaboration such as having Cam run a combined department. One of the principal reasons is that the money not spent on another police chief (recruiting, relocation, salary & benefits) could be redirected towards tourism development or other worthy purposes including reducing taxes, balancing budgets, etc..

I was pleased that the Sun Valley Mayor and most of the council were open to the idea of floating this by our Ketchum counterparts. They didn’t render a verdict one way or another — just that it should be explored. One thing I know for sure. We are in extraordinary times and things that once might not have been possible may now be possible. I’ll let you know as things progress. Naturally, there are a bunch of details that would need to be worked out but if the Federal Government can pull together a $700B bailout in a couple weeks, assessing the merits of this idea or some variation is well within our capabilities.

What do you think?

Update: One of the most prominent pundits discussing the mix of professional journalism with citizen journalism (Jeff Jarvis) writes a column for The Guardian in the U.K. I’ve excerpted a portion of his column below. Note: Editorial writers are referred to as “leader writers” or “leaders” in the Queen’s tongue so though Jeff is an American, he uses the Brit’s descriptor.

My belief is that political endorsements are an artifact of the buggywhip days that are destined for extinction or at least must evolve from the newspapers’ current paternalistic, opaque and antiquated approach.

I believe news organizations regardless of medium (TV, newspaper, Internet) should stick to the news and provide as much information as they can to inform the electorate. They can serve a valuable function if they do their job well by shedding light on where candidates stand on a variety of issues as well as investigating their track record. For some reason, unlike other media, newspapers have felt they had to have an “editorial agenda” including one that tells people how to vote. Simply on the basis of being an independent thinker, it has always rubbed me the wrong way when they attempted to tell me how I should vote. However, after becoming media savvy through working in the media business (getting inside the sausage factory, if you will), I became more disturbed at how newspaper management typically operate. I want to make the distinction clear between newspaper management and the journalists working at newspapers. I’ve had the pleasure of getting to know many newspaper journalists who are very diligent and are of high integrity. Unfortunately, they often work in flawed organizations where their management is pushing their personal agenda in an opaque manner.

The fundamental issue I have is a lack of transparency. Most news-gathering organizations demand transparency in the subjects they report upon, however they aren’t transparent themselves. Frankly, I’d prefer how Fox News operates where there’s no mystery they have an agenda Karl Rove agrees with. It’s easy to view their reporting and know what filter they are pouring their news through. In contrast, papers put on a charade of objectivity when in fact they are far from objective. It would be OK if a paper was transparent with their owner’s agenda and thus practiced what they preached when it came to transparency but that’s not the case today. I’ve suggested a better approach below.

These are the key questions I think any media organization should answer if they are going to put out editorial endorsements (some of these ideas are borrowed from noted pundits Jeff Jarvis and Dan Gillmor who are 20-30 year veteran magazine and newspaper journalists who are now leading thinkers in the “citizen journalism” world):
1. What exactly is their stated “editorial agenda”? I’m certain they have one but I don’t see it published in each edition of their paper.
2. Who is on their editorial board that makes endorsement decisions?
3. What business are those people in?
4. What political affiliations do they have (or not)?
5. Have they made political campaign donations?
6. How have they voted in the past?
7. What political donations have been made by the corporation?
8. If more than one person is making endorsement decisions, what were the individual votes if there wasn’t unanimity.
Add your thoughts below if I’ve missed any important questions.

If they aren’t willing to answer those reasonable and simple questions, it’s clear they have something to hide or else they would readily offer up answers. On the other hand, they may be private which I have no problem with…they just shouldn’t do political endorsements. What you may find ironic is that I am pretty sure I have agreed with more endorsements I’ve read in various newspapapers than I’ve disagreed with. For me, it’s not a matter of disagreeing with their view. Rather, I may agree with the “End” but the “Means” are intentionally deceptive taking us for fools. If they continue with the status quo, you can assume they think their readers are fools, sheep or worse. I would hope a media organization would think more of its audience. What do you think?

In Part 2, I will answer the question, “what about SunValleyOnline?” That is, how does it think about this issue? In addition, I outline why newspapers haven’t updated a practice that goes back to the buggywhip days when it may have made sense. In the meantime, if you have questions you want to ask candidates via Gary Stivers, you can suggest questions here.

Here’s a section of Jeff Jarvis’ column:

The irony of leader writers is that they commit the sins usually attributed to bloggers: they rarely report and mostly just opine and pontificate - that is, they leech off the work of other journalists. And they work anonymously. Leaders speak as the voices of institutions, issuing opinions from the mountaintop, hidden by the cloak of distance. Yet today, in our connected society, we do not trust institutions. We demand transparency. We expect conversation.

When I wrote this on my weblog, I heard the pained squeals of American leader writers. Frank Partsch, retired editorial-page editor of the Omaha World-Herald, published an op-ed in another newspaper defending the form: “An editorial, in its purest sense, is an institutional opinion, representing the views of the owner or investors - people willing each day to stand behind the leadership of the editorial page even at the risk of attracting the ire of the community and putting their investment at risk,” Partsch said, adding: “A blog entry is no more an editorial than is graffiti.”

This is particularly paradoxical in America, where journalists insist that they are objective and that they and their institutions have no point of view. And besides, newspaper owners in America are rarely members of the community anymore; they are usually shareholders in distant media conglomerates.

Full article without registration is here.

In the case of our local newspapers, they have owners in Iowa, Indiana and Canada based upon what I’ve read in their masthead and histories so they don’t have the kind of accountability one would hope for.

Later: I posted a follow-up on SunValleyOnline’s Political Endorsement Point of View

Update:I originally wrote this July 2006. As a result of my recent (and new) involvement with some economic development activity, some have suggested that I circulate this again as they hadn’t seen it. It’s also been pointed out to me that though many of us don’t live in Ketchum, it’s the economic engine of the valley. Someone said, “if Ketchum catches a cold, Hailey gets pneumonia”. That may not be as true as it was 10-20 years ago but I’d imagine it still applies.

As a result of my earlier piece on the virtues of housing density, Gene Dallago asked me to be on his show discussing how to revitalize Ketchum. The show ran on KSVT-13 in the evening. Despite my protestations that I’m no expert on economic development of municipalities, I guess he thought I had something to add given my experiences of having enjoyed the benefits of housing density (in Japan and European mountain towns) as well as having experienced the deleterious effects of sprawl (in Seattle) — a major driver for moving here. I am a believer in the fact that you can often learn things from people in seemingly unrelated fields so perhaps my business marketing experience might be of benefit to the people driving these issues. One of my favorite business success stories is Southwest Airlines. Rather than try to improve upon what United or American did when it came to gate turnaround time (i.e., the time it takes to get a plane unloaded, cleaned and ready for another flight), they studied NASCAR pit crews. Rather than improving over the old-line carriers by a few percentage points, they cut the gate turnaround time in half.

Joining me on the program was Rebekah Helzel, founder of ARCH. I was concerned when the program started and Gene started to ask questions about affordable housing as Rebekah has forgotten more about affordable housing issues than I know, but I reminded myself Gene didn’t invite me on as an affordable housing expert. Rather, he wanted a perspective from an average citizen and businessman about revitalization. Affordable housing is certainly a piece of the puzzle, however I thought I should focus on the issue as if I was the Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) of the city of Ketchum (if such a role existed) since marketing and media is an area of expertise of mine. Sometimes naivety about a subject (i.e., I’ve never been involved in city politics, chambers of commerce and the like) can be a benefit as it can provide a fresh perspective. I’ve always found that when I bring on new people into my organizations, I encourage them to keep a fresh perspective as long as possible. Questioning the status quo is often where breakthrough ideas come from. Hearing a fresh perspective can often spur ideas from the existing team that wouldn’t have otherwise been thought of. Successful organizations embrace this mindset in their culture.

With that in mind, when I was thinking about what I might say on the program, I thought about it in terms of a CMO tasked with revitalizing a brand. In this case, the brand is Year-round living in Ketchum with the underlying goal being to revitalize Ketchum. It doesn’t hurt to get “caffeine hits” from new events such as the Hemingway Festival — that can certainly help. That said, my perception is the focus of many of the efforts in Ketchum of late have been trying to fix the symptom, rather than the underlying cause of the issue. In the short-term, it’s easier to address the symptom and I’m certain local businesses have been happy when a new event is created. However, long-term, I’m convinced only an expanded year-round base of full-time residents will fix the underlying cause of Ketchum’s decline. To that end, I thought of areas I’d focus efforts to address the long-term health of the community which entails stepping back.

[Please note that I think quite a bit of this has been done or is underway with the Ketchum Master Plan. My thoughts may just add a wrinkle or two to what has been underway. The presentations I’ve seen have been well thought through from a structural perspective. My thinking may just add a bit in terms of how to market what has been coming together in the planning process.]

With the above caveats in mind (i.e., I’m not an expert, there’s lots of great work underway, etc.), I’ll go out on a limb with a few ideas of how I’d tackle the marketing challenge of Ketchum’s revitalization leaving the structural facets of the Master Plan to the experts. The notion of trying to attract people to the valley may be antithetical to some but I’d reframe the debate as one of who you want buying up real estate. People who’ll contribute greatly to the vitality or just buy real estate and occupy it a few weeks a year. My impression is that Ketchum has an occupancy problem — there’s lots of housing/real estate but it’s been the type that sits empty most of the time. Like a hotel, Ketchum needs to figure out how to fill the space we have and consider what type of development is likely to spur year-round occupants that would address the root of the issue that leads to the issues that are being discussed around town.
1. Think like a business and segment your “customer base” (i.e., the people who’d make up a desired year-round base of residents). In a marketing segmentation exercise, you identify who are your desired targets and what matters to them. I can think of at least four segments that I would think Ketchum would want. The first three of these don’t necessarily require subsidies, mandates, etc…just good marketing. Many of these people live in places where the cost of real estate is the same (or higher) than Ketchum so the cost of real estate isn’t a barrier.

a. The so-called “Creative Class” – a group of 38 million people who have portable careers. Many of these people already live here doing their jobs remotely as architects, tech industry people, financial managers, etc.

b. Active retirees – the first boomers turned 60 this year. Many of them are young at heart and would enjoy all of the recreational and cultural opportunities Ketchum offers. In many locales, they are moving into condos as they don’t want to hassle with household maintenance tasks.

c. Families – if there are ample playgrounds, arts/kids/cultural activities, etc. what kid would prefer sitting in a car vs. getting out and being involved in these activities offered by great non-profits like the Sun Valley Center for the Arts, YMCA, Community Library, etc. as well as all the year-round recreational opportunities in and around Ketchum that many of us moved here to enjoy. As I mentioned in the virtues of housing density post, some families would prefer a more compact home with little or no commute if the home/development was designed for a family.
d. The people addressed by affordable housing efforts (teachers, nurses, emergency responders, etc.) that ARCH is focused on. There’s no lack of demand in this category so no need to focus marketing energy here.

2. Learn from others who’ve had great success with vital and vibrant communities with Ketchum’s attributes (i.e., scenery, recreation, cultural, etc.). These include the mountain towns I highlighted in the “virtues of density” post (i.e., Cortina, Chamonix, Zermatt, St. Moritz, Kitzbuehel, etc.). Is it a case of “build it and they’ll come” or did they do unique things to make that vitality happen? Particularly, in the age of the Internet, my hunch is a lot of it has been driven by word of mouth and some savvy PR (both of which are viewed as more credible than traditional advertising in the mind of a consumer…advertising is best as a reminder or when you don’t have a brand story that lends itself to PR). The publisher of Forbes magazine wrote a book entitled “Life 2.0 – How people across America are finding the Where of their Happiness” (I’m sure the friendly folks at Iconoclast can find this book if you give them a call) that talks about the phenomena of people picking locations first and careers second. The way to get PR coverage is to be “on trend”. For example, I heard that Ketchum is laying fiber around town that will make high speed Internet even more accessible or I heard the entire town is a wifi hot-spot. There are probably health and safety reasons for this but that could also be leveraged to appeal to telecommuters (not to mention tourists).

3. I would assume the Ketchum Master Plan will give people a variety of choices that will appeal in different ways to the segments mentioned above. Ketchum needs to not only market the benefits associated with in-town living but also be clear on how it’s different or better than the alternatives. For example, what could be done with the saved hundreds of hours of commuting if you could avoid that? More time recreating, family time, enjoying the vast cultural events, etc.

Undoubtedly, there are challenges facing Ketchum but I like the adage that “challenges are opportunities in work clothes”. A lot of what makes a successful brand is the story telling around the brand. Hopefully this gives the story tellers a few thoughts that will help their efforts. What are your thoughts? I’m very confident the collective intelligence of our valley can address this issue.

In the first part of this two-part post, I outlined the opaque and paternalistic practice of newspaper editorial endorsements that should go the way of the dinosaurs and suggested an approach that would better serve its audience. So you might ask, what about SunValleyOnline? We addressed this in “Our View” if you’d like more detail on why we don’t do political endorsements. In fact, it was the very issue of political endorsements that spawned SunValleyOnline’s blogs to begin with. Roughly a year ago, I was informally advising SunValleyOnline while I was consulting on Tracy Lotz’s travel business when the issue of political endorsements came up (they were about to make their endorsements). Though I didn’t have a “vote”, they were very receptive to my feedback that I thought the whole political endorsement process was flawed and antiquated not to mention unique to newspapers.

In the information age, it’s relatively easy to get information to the electorate unlike the buggywhip days when newspaper endorsements began. Perhaps it made sense when information flow was so restricted. In contrast, I was seeing the rapid rise of “citizen journalism” embodied in blogging that was having a dramatic effect on the national scene and suggested SunValleyOnline invite candidates and citizens to exchange information in an egalitarian manner. This would mean everyone gets an equal voice, not just the powerful/connected. Little did SunValleyOnline know that the blogs would strike such a chord where people who had been stifled by old media finally had an opportunity to be heard. This would be a nice complement to the professional journalism as practiced by Gary Stivers.

From time to time, people look at SunValleyOnline through the traditional media lens and say “gee, isn’t having Tracy Lotz blog just like what the paper is doing?” My answer is a big N-O. Why? [Update: Tracy Lotz sold his stake in SVO in September of 2007 a year after this was written]

1. Tracy gets exactly the same visibility as any other blogger (it’s worth noting that he’s written only about 5% of all posts on the SunValleyOnline blogs). For that matter, commenters on more than one occasion have ripped Tracy. When is the last time you saw an unedited letter directed at the owner of a local paper? [Hint: Never] Tracy has yet to delete one of those comments that shredded him. If more people read him, it’s simply because people find him entertaining or he has struck a chord. His blog shows up just like the 70+ other bloggers down the lefthand side of this page.
2. Tracy is very, very transparent about his political beliefs, business affiliations, etc. For example, you’d have to be seriously clueless to not know that he has previously been a leader within the Idaho GOP and there’s little mystery how he has and will vote (he’s already weighed in on the commissioner race). You can choose to buy into what he’s saying or not but there’s no secret where he stands. He willingly breaks bread with others not sharing his political views such as at the pizza gathering last week.
3. As I’ve stated on numerous occasions, every blogger is their own “editor” that can establish their own guidelines. There is no overall editor of the blogs. The byproduct of that is the dialogue is unfiltered and sometimes raw. Like the TV remote, if you think a particular blogger is full of it, you can ignore them. The feedback has been overwhelming that people prefer we keep things unfiltered including blogs related to political races.

All of these things are a sharp contrast to how most papers operate. That said, SunValleyOnline is always evolving based upon the feedback we get. Just in the last week, a noted community leader gave us feedback that we might be inadvertently stifling them from participating in the “conversation”. Since that is the polar opposite of SunValleyOnline’s goal, that feedback was taken to heart. I can guarantee you we’ll make some mistakes or stumble every once and awhile. Getting this right will be a journey, not a destination. We look forward to you letting us know privately or in this open forum when you think we’ve stumbled and how we can do a better job. As a wise person once said, “God gave us two ears and one mouth…use them in that proportion”. There’s a corollary I often state — “Silence is acceptance”. We are listening.

Share your thoughts below or email me at dave -at- [sunvalleyonline) - dot {com}. You can also call me at (208) 578-4042.

As a card-carrying tree hugger, I was appalled at the wasted energy/brouhaha during the tree girdling incident a couple months ago. These sort of ham-handed efforts by so-called environmentalists give a bad name to real environmental efforts that actually make a difference. With a little work, I bet we could come up with a list 100 more impactful things that could benefit the environment with the same level of energy particularly when compared to “saving” a few trees that are neither native to that location nor appropriate as street trees (deciduous trees are much more beneficial for providing shade in the summer and dropping leaves in the winter so there’s not an ice rink under the evergreen).

Meanwhile, I give credit to the city of Sun Valley for working on building codes, etc. that will actually have an effect on the environment and address the development that has a disproportionate effect on the environment as well as energy and water availability (ever growing issues). I got ahold of memos that are circulating amongst the Sun Valley leaders and staff (why they don’t post these on their website is a different issue — what does that take? 30 seconds or so??). I had hoped to excerpt from the memo but the documents don’t allow you to cut and paste. [I know most of the leaders of the city read the SVO blogs -- if you can copy some salient sections to the comments below, that would be greatly appreciated -- e.g., the "Standards & Education" section] In a nutshell, they focus on the largest structures (>3,500 sq ft) and have a mix of focusing on education on best practice materials for building and mandatory standards for energy and water consumption. Incidentally, much of what is being put in place comes from experiences around the country in Texas, California, Missouri, Colorado and Wisconsin. This is wise.

One of the elements I like is how the requirements being discussed scale with size of the structure. For example (quoting from the memo),

“California adopted a 3,500 square foot home as the starting point for energy compliance. Marin County has gone a step further, requiring an additional 8 percent in efficiency for every 500 square foot over 3,500 in a home and the County has included solar installation credits.”

Mayor Thorson has smartly suggested a similar approach to water use where there are higher fees for more water consumed (a common practice in many municipalities ). Another smart approach is avoiding micromanagement of how to achieve efficiency standards as there’ll be tremendous innovation in energy conservation technologies. Again quoting from the memo…

“the approach allows the owner/builder to configure how best to meet the BTU allowance thereby greatly increasing autonomy, best available technologies implementation and personal energy use decision trade-offs.”

It looks like they are thinking broadly by addressing landscaping’s role in not only water consumption but also fire safety. They address water consumption through xeriscaping and fire safety (particularly appropos as I look out the window at a smoke-filled valley) through Firewise plants.

In a recent post, the headline read I hope local mayors ignore the Flat Earthers. It appears that at least one mayor is — hats off to Jon Thorson and the SV City Council for taking steps that will help ensure energy independence and promote economic development in Idaho and the U.S. My opinion reminds me of the “boiling frog” story where the “temperature” is slowing increasing on water and energy use. It’s more affordable to pay now vs. pay later when issues are “boiling”. For example, with the focus on the largest structures, the people disproportionately using resources (and most able to pay) should be the first to take action before we have a water crisis simply due to mimicking golf courses (i.e., monstrous lawns at homes that aren’t even occupied most of the time).

Frankly, if I was King for the day, I’d be more hard core on building material requirements (vs. just education) and extend the requirements to homes smaller than 3,500 sq ft. For example, there’s a concern expressed about solar panels. There is commonly used solar technology that doesn’t use traditional solar panels thus addressing that issue. Rather, it uses an unnoticeable thin film that rolls over metal roofs. In this wildfire prone area, this would also address what I heard Fire Chief Carnes discuss at a P&Z meeting articulate as a big wish of his. That is, more fireproof roofing materials than what’s currently required would make the valley much safer in the event of a wildfire. In the process, you’d have a more energy efficient home that’s not visually obstrusive to the neighbors. For an example of how appealing these sort of homes can be, check out this Built Green home located off of Buttercup Road.

Local mayors and city councils have been evaluating whether they should join the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. I’d encourage local leaders to read a quote from a German Philosopher and a leadership lesson from Colin Powell when considering whether they should join a national movement to take action on climate change.

I used this quote in an earlier post that generated several other quotes worth reading.

The 3 Stages of Truth
Arthur Schopenhauer (German Philosopher)
First, it is ridiculed
Second, it is violently opposed
Finally, it is accepted as self-evident

The “Flat Earthers” who are in denial about Climate Change (in my opinion) would like to convince you to take no action until there is absolute, 100% certainty of Climate Change. In science, business, and war, there is rarely perfect information. Those who wait for 100% certainty inevitably suffer the consequences. Colin Powell stated this well in a speech he gave on leadership.

Part I: “Use the formula P=40 to 70, in which P stands for the probability of success and the numbers indicate the percentage of information acquired.”
Part II: “Once the information is in the 40 to 70 range, go with your gut.”

Don’t take action if you have only enough information to give you less than a 40 percent chance of being right, but don’t wait until you have enough facts to be 100 percent sure, because by then it is almost always too late. Today, excessive delays in the name of information-gathering breeds “analysis paralysis.” Procrastination in the name of reducing risk actually increases risk.

For the sake of argument, let’s say that the small minority of scientists who argue that climate change isn’t taking place are right yet we take action to address climate change issues. What’s the “cost” of being wrong? We achieve much greater energy independence (see my earlier article on “Energy Independence is no myth” in response to a whiny editorial in a local paper) and create a boatload of jobs and economic vitality in traditionally economically challenged areas in rural America. In the process, the companies that we are supposedly hurting (the oil companies, primarily) have a more diversified business. Some of them are on a path similar to the railroad companies of a 100+ years ago who made the mistake of thinking they were in the railroad business vs. the transportation business. That is, they define themselves as “oil companies” rather than “energy companies”. When we intend to “protect” incumbent businesses, the effect is usually deleterious as has been seen with the U.S. carmakers who were “protected” before them.

What I find particularly interesting is how shrill voices like Ann Coulter are using scientific “evidence” to back their questioning of climate change. In an article entitled Another Climate Change Scientist Tells Skeptics: Stop Misusing My Research, the scientist details how small portions of data are taken out of context to build an argument for a political agenda. Here’s an excerpt from that article…

“Our results have been misused as ‘evidence’ against global warming by Michael Crichton in his novel ‘State of Fear’ and by Ann Coulter in her latest book, ‘Godless: The Church of Liberalism,’” Doran writes. “Search my name on the Web, and you will find pages of links to everything from climate discussion groups to Senate policy committee documents — all citing my 2002 study as reason to doubt that the earth is warming. One recent Web column even put words in my mouth. I have never said that ‘the unexpected colder climate in Antarctica may possibly be signaling a lessening of the current global warming cycle.’ I have never thought such a thing either.”

You might ask yourself, why should local leaders spend their time on matters such as this? I’m not saying they should be spending 90% of their council meetings on this issue but lending their names/cities to the cause is an important step in getting action to take place at the state and national level. Increasingly, the way to make change on a national level is to start at a local level. It’s my opinion that the cost of inaction is too great to ignore. The beauty of this issue is it’s increasingly becoming an issue that spans political stripes (see examples in my Energy Independence is no Myth article). As an unabashed capitalist, I see we’re on the cusp of a wave of business and job creation due to the transformation of the energy industry that will make the information revolution pale by comparison. The only question is will be whether America will be leaders or followers.