Thursday, October 28, 2010

用人之道

在管理学上,往往教人最为頭痛的莫過于“控制”二字。

为上者,有時為了下属常常自作主张而忧心,唯恐那日会因不受控制而闯出個大禍来。
若下属是属能干者型,那就叫人更為忧心了。那怕他有日会自起炉灶,当起对手來。

为下者,卻常因为老板处处拑制,而無所有用武之地而感到灰心。若不信我,又何用我之?
另有例者,老板對下属過于放纵,过多的自由导致懶散,然后開始迷迷糊糊过日子,迷失方向。

曹操有言道,疑人不用,用人不疑。對我而言,這是用人之上策,也是用人之道的第一招。

首先,若對自己的将领有疑,而不能尽信,那則肯定兵敗無疑当然,为上者,必须拥有阅人的眼光。若你能像伯乐般能分辨好马与孬马,那当然是最好,但起码,我觉得,你也必须拥有刘备之阅人之能力,从而能人用之。

常言道,将在外,君命不受。相信自己的眼光,该放手时,就放手让他好好地干吧。

在三国里,英雄与好领袖如云。但我觉得,若要谈用人之道,则非谈曹操与刘备不可。

众人皆知,曹操是奸雄。那一句“宁我负天下人,莫叫天下人负我”已充分地表现出其性格。但,野心满满的奸雄曹操却是手下将领如云,也没多少人背叛曹操另奔他营。这是为何?

曹操做事果断,也来的残忍。徐州城一事就是最好的例子。但这也是其成功的地方。我觉得,许多人肯为他出生入死除了是他魅力过人及有着一统天下的能力与野心,也因为他非常爱才。人说曹操惜才如命是没错。你可说是识英雄,重英雄,但你也可说是曹操知道,若要成大业,明主得须很多英才辅助才能成事。

曹操的成功告诉我们,为上者,若要成功,你得必须拥有成大业之决心。然后,你得将之付诸于行动,随之人们才会肯追随你。
其二,你得有阅人之能力及相信自己的眼光。若你觅得人才,但却对之有所顾虑或怀疑,那么,他们是不会在你手下干的长久,也不会对你忠心耿耿。

你得先相信别人,别人才会对你回于信任。

说到忠心,就会想到刘关张三兄弟深厚的感情。关羽及张飞对刘备的信任及忠诚,简直是深厚的连曹操也妒忌及羡慕。那,刘备到底有何过人之处能让如此厉害的强人在他旗下做事呢?

无可否认,魅力及其为人之原则是刘备最大的本钱。他贯彻性地对汉室忠诚,使得他就算是掠人城池,取人性命也来得振振有词。除此,我觉得,在刘备旗下做事,感觉上会比在曹操营中轻松。因为,相比之下,刘备似乎比较容易相处。但,若你问我,要成大事的话,我宁可放手一搏,追随曹操。为何?

在刘备旗下,你知道纵使你再强,刘备最亲的,仍是关羽及张飞。所幸的是,关张二人乃属能人,要不然刘军早就散了。但在曹营,只要你是有能力者,天下就是你的。这是很重要的分别。

现实中,你得让你的下属知道,只要他肯努力及好好表现,那他就能爬的多高,走的多远。你得让他知道在你未来的宏图计划中有他的存在,然后也得与其分享取得天下之后,他会有什么样的回报。

更重要的是,你得让他知道到底何时会得到回报。为何?在这日新月异的年代,没人会肯为你痴痴地等,痴痴地干。为上者,也总喜欢能拖得一时就拖吧,那可省下点工钱,也别让年轻人得意的太早。

你我皆非草木。我们每天都需要去打拼的原动力。为上者或为下者皆一样,免不了都会被钱利所动。

用人之道之要诀,往往都是一个“信”字。但也别忘了“利”也甚重要。

Friday, October 15, 2010

Marketing Strategy: Presence and Reason

one thing i learn from marketing is, the success of a brand building campaign does not solely depend on how loud you shout, but on the way you shout.

imagine, when you walk into a shop, and you see a big-ass display of product in front of you, under normal circumstances, people will either be attracted to it ("wah! new product, let's check it out!'), or merely just acknowledging its existence. ("oh, new product huh. ok...but the display is ugly lah, let's go grab my chips instead")

you can have bright yellow or pink or green backdrop or funky packaging, coupled with a big banner on top saying "Buy 1 free 10" or something. These might catch the attention from some people, especially those that are on limited budget, but it might not work for some. This is because to inform the shopper about something is easier than to convince them to buy one. Why?

When you talk about soda drinks, there's always a brand that will pop up in your mind immediately. Coke? Pepsi? Dr. Pepper?

ok, let's think of diapers. Which brand pops up?

how about, beer, which brand is it?

how about instant noodle, which brand pops up first?

the funny thing about human mind is, image normally comes up first, then your brain will send the signals to the other parts of your body, then, for some reasons, you can almost certainly taste or smell the product you want to buy (not diaper of course, but you might be able to recall how soft/hard/expensive it is).

i.e. we normally store images & experiences in our creative-part of the brain, whereas the rational & logical side of brain will store info like "is it healthy? how expensive is it comparing to the others? will my friend think that i'm a loser if i drink this soda instead of the others?" etc.

so it's like a left brain vs right brain war. And normally the war is quite intense when you go shopping.

how about convenience store? think about it, what drives you to go to a convenience store? to buy a cigarettes? grab a drink? buy newspaper? ATM? grab a pain killer?

The subconscious motive of going to a hypermarket vs convenience store is inherently very different for shoppers. When you plan for your trip to hypermarket with family, you know you want to do grocery shopping, maybe will buy some food...but not sure what yet. In fact, most of the time, we are hoping that the hypermarket can surprise us with good deals or value buys.

However, before you step into a convenience store, most often than not, you already know that one item or two that you want to buy.

it's essential to understand the motives of shoppers before you can plan for anything in the world of FMCG marketing. You can bang table, shout all you can about how great is your brand, but, if this is not what the shoppers want, their reaction will just be merely "acknowledging" your presence, and will not convert into sales.

It's not wrong to have a marketing campaign just to create "Presence". Especially for new brands, you need to have presence then only people know there's a new kid on the block.

But, there are times, you need a marketing campaign to tell the consumers "the Reason" to buy. If this is successful, you will see sales growing healthily across time.

Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying that Reason is more important than Presence, nor the other way around. It's just merely using different strategy for different phase of the product marketing cycle. But i must say that creating a "Reason" marketing strategy is harder than a "Presence" one.

if you have enough marketing budget, then you just need to buy some block displays at high traffic outlets, do some TV ads, competition, or maybe celebrity endorsement then consumers will know about your product. Knowing is one thing, but to make it the first brand that pops up in your mind when you think of that category is another.

Sometimes to create a deeper impression, the product will have a very funny or funky TV ads. You had a good laugh, and you share it on Facebook, but, can you recall the brand after 2-3 months? You might, maybe, but will you rush to the shop right away to buy the product? Or will you purposely look for the product when you are in shop the next time?

Reason-type of marketing will be different. It could be the power of association (i.e. when people see me with this product, then they will think that i am cool) or words of mouth (if you want to drink soda, buy coke), or it could be influenced by the product positioning strategy (if you're thirsty, think of coke or drink coke with hot pot, shiok ah!)

so next time around when you're thirsty or eating hot pot, you will be like "hey, i feel like having a bottle of coke". Isn't it fattening? But you do have a reason to have coke at that moment.

"Because, [i was told that] coke is the perfect match for hot weather!"

there you go. Reason-type marketing is largely based on the Product Positioning marketing strategy. Once you position your product to be of certain price or quality range, then you will need to crack your head to think of the reason for consumer to choose you. Some says it's actually differentiation strategy. I say no. Differentiation is just being different from the others, but it does not convert consumer from A to B.

So if you have this concept at the back of your mind, then you can easily identify which campaign does not fit your marketing strategy. If i want you to buy my potato chips, i will tell you that our product is healthier, tastier, cheaper blah blah blah, and all i need to do is to feed you with info and make sure that you will be convinced. Sometime, being different is just not good enough.

If you have a good "Give me a Reason to Buy" marketing strategy, then, it is almost like having a top insurance agent selling to the consumers on a 24/7 basis.

some food for thoughts.

Monday, October 11, 2010

Edison is Back!

I have always been a big fans of Edison Chen, of his talents and entrepreneurial spirits. Check out his label / company here. CLOT Inc. That's the name.

Here's his latest song, "Mr. Sandman"


Personally i think this lyric is quite cool. check it out

"他不想当宅男, 要当就当豪宅男"

Lyrics :
歌词

他每天上班 下班 加班

吃不下饭

穿衬衫 打领带

黑皮鞋 黑眼袋

黑棉猜

太阳好大 好碍眼

晒得他好邋遢

他看着101

幻想着有天他也会发达

就算是一辈子

也买不起栋房子

就算买了也会累死

他到底干嘛要这样子

他不想当宅男

要当就当豪宅男

这种梦比登天还难

他到底应该要怎么办

mr sandman

Bring me a dream

make it the cutest that i've ever seen

give him the tips

like roses in clover

then tell hom that his lone some nights are over

mr sandman

i'm so alone

don't have nobody to call my own

please turn on

your magic beams

mr sandman bring me a dream

她是個Young lady 會被老闆吃吃豆腐

牵牵手

摸摸屁股

点头论足她穿的衣服 oh

他討厭他的BOSS

有苦难言

她很O

虚伪的面具到处都有

乾脆辞职说了就GO

她是要去哪咧 她到底搞清楚了没

她觉得未来的路是黑 为何她不顾是非

需要点勇气

需要多点lucky

或许爱她的Honey

或许多一点money

他自己也搞不清

Oh mr

sandman

请给他一个梦想

Oh mr sandman

请给我一个梦想

Oh mr sandman

mr

sandman

我叫做陈冠希

和你一样

我有痛苦和压力

也想过要放弃

没私人飞机

过海关也会被哔哔

我假装笑嘻嘻

假装日子一样

bling bling

我的生活

像是一场马戏团的show

跳来跳去下一关

我想试试Super Mario

oh

no

我的父母告诉我

这世界属于我

当时我怀疑

这到底是对还是错

醉生梦死

多少次

对着镜子问着

why me

mr sandman please

请你帮我把梦快递

和你一样

其实我和你一样

mr sandman

请你带给我们一个希望

mr sandman

bring me a dream

make it the cutest that i've ever seen

give hm the tips like roses in clover

then tell him that

his lone some nights are over

mr sandman

i am so alone

don't have nobody

to call my own

please turn on your magic beams

mr sandman bring me a dream

Friday, October 08, 2010

Eulogy by Mr. Lee Kuan Yew to his beloved wife

Mrs. Lee Kuan Yew, Mdm Kwa Geok Choo passed away recently.

At the funeral service at Mandai Crematorium, Singapore Minister Mentor Mr. Lee delivered his eulogy entitled "The Last Farewell to My Wife", as below:

Source: Channel News Asia

Ancient peoples developed and ritualised mourning practices to express the shared grief of family and friends, and together show not fear or distaste for death, but respect for the dead one; and to give comfort to the living who will miss the deceased.

I recall the ritual mourning when my maternal grandmother died some 75 years ago. For five nights the family would gather to sing her praises and wail and mourn at her departure, led by a practiced professional mourner.

Such rituals are no longer observed. My family’s sorrow is to be expressed in personal tributes to the matriarch of our family.

In October 2003 when she had her first stroke, we had a strong intimation of our mortality.

My wife and I have been together since 1947 for more than three quarters of our lives. My grief at her passing cannot be expressed in words. But today, when recounting our lives together, I would like to celebrate her life.

In our quiet moments, we would revisit our lives and times together. We had been most fortunate. At critical turning points in our lives, fortune favoured us.

As a young man with an interrupted education at Raffles College, and no steady job or profession, her parents did not look upon me as a desirable son-in-law. But she had faith in me.

We had committed ourselves to each other. I decided to leave for England in September 1946 to read law, leaving her to return to Raffles College to try to win one of the two Queen’s Scholarships awarded yearly. We knew that only one Singaporean would be awarded. I had the resources, and sailed for England, and hoped that she would join me after winning the Queen’s Scholarship.

If she did not win it, she would have to wait for me for three years.

In June the next year, 1947, she did win it. But the British colonial office could not get her a place in Cambridge.

Through Chief Clerk of Fitzwilliam, I discovered that my Censor at Fitzwilliam, W S Thatcher, was a good friend of the Mistress of Girton, Miss Butler.

He gave me a letter of introduction to the Mistress. She received me and I assured her that Choo would most likely take a “First”, because she was the better student when we both were at Raffles College.

I had come up late by one

term to Cambridge, yet passed my first year qualifying examination with a class 1. She studied Choo’s academic record and decided to admit her in October that same year, 1947.

We have kept each other company ever since. We married privately in December 1947 at Stratford-upon-Avon. At Cambridge, we both put in our best efforts. She took a first in two years in Law Tripos II. I took a double first, and a starred first for the finals, but in three years.

We did not disappoint our tutors. Our Cambridge Firsts gave us a good start in life. Returning to Singapore, we both were taken on as legal assistants in Laycock & Ong, a

thriving law firm in Malacca Street. Then we married officially a second time that September 1950 to please our parents and friends. She practised conveyancing and draftsmanship, I did litigation.

In February 1952, our first son Hsien Loong was born. She took maternity leave for a year.

That February, I was asked by John Laycock, the Senior Partner, to take up the case of the Postal and Telecommunications Uniformed Staff Union, the postmen’s union.

They were negotiating with the government for better terms and conditions of service. Negotiations were deadlocked and they decided to go on strike. It was a battle for public support. I was able to put across the reasonableness of their case through the press and radio. After a fortnight, they won concessions from the government. Choo, who was at home on maternity leave, pencilled through my draft statements, making them simple and clear.

Over the years, she influenced my writing style. Now I write in short sentences, in the active voice. We gradually influenced each other’s ways and habits as we adjusted and accommodated each other.

We knew that we could not stay starry-eyed lovers all our lives; that life was an on-going challenge with new problems to resolve and manage.

We had two more children, Wei Ling in 1955 and Hsien Yang in 1957. She brought them up to be well-behaved, polite, considerate and never to throw their weight as the prime minister’s children.

As a lawyer, she earned enough, to free me from worries about the future of our children.

She saw the price I paid for not having mastered Mandarin when I was young. We decided to send all three children to Chinese kindergarten and schools.

She made sure they learned English and Malay well at home. Her nurturing has equipped them for life in a multi-lingual region.

We never argued over the upbringing of our children, nor over financial matters. Our earnings and assets were jointly held. We were each other’s confidant.

She had simple pleasures. We would walk around the Istana gardens in the evening, and I hit golf balls to relax.

Later, when we had grandchildren, she would take them to feed the fish and the swans in the Istana ponds. Then we would swim. She was interested in her surroundings, for instance, that many bird varieties were pushed out by mynahs and crows eating

up the insects and vegetation.

She discovered the curator of the gardens had cleared wild grasses and swing fogged for mosquitoes, killing off insects they fed on. She stopped this and the bird varieties returned. She surrounded the swimming pool with free flowering scented flowers and derived great pleasure smelling them as she swam.

She knew each flower by its popular and botanical names. She had an enormous capacity for words.

She had majored in English literature at Raffles College and was a voracious reader, from Jane Austen to JRR Tolkien, from Thucydides’ The Peloponnesian Wars to Virgil’s Aeneid, to The Oxford Companion to Food, and Seafood of Southeast Asia, to Roadside Trees of Malaya, and Birds of Singapore.

She helped me draft the Constitution of the PAP. For the inaugural meeting at Victoria Memorial Hall on 4 November 1954, she gathered the wives of the founder members to sew rosettes for those who were going on stage.

In my first election for Tanjong Pagar, our home in Oxley Road, became the HQ to assign cars provided by my supporters to ferry voters to the polling booth.

She warned me that I could not trust my new found associates, the leftwing trade unionists led by Lim Chin Siong. She was furious that he never sent their high school student helpers to canvass for me in Tanjong Pagar, yet demanded the use of cars provided by my supporters to ferry my Tanjong Pagar voters.

She had an uncanny ability to read the character of a person. She would sometimes warn me to be careful of certain persons; often, she turned out to be right.

When we were about to join Malaysia, she told me that we would not succeed because the UMNO Malay leaders had such different lifestyles and because their politics were communally-based, on race and religion.

I replied that we had to make it work as there was no better choice. But she was right.

We were asked to leave Malaysia before two years.

When separation was imminent, Eddie Barker, as Law Minister, drew up the draft legislation for the separation. But he did not include an undertaking by the Federation Government to guarantee the observance of the two water agreements between the PUB and the Johor state government. I asked Choo to include this. She drafted the undertaking as part of the constitutional amendment of the Federation of Malaysia Constitution itself.

She was precise and meticulous in her choice of words. The amendment statute was annexed to the Separation Agreement, which we then registered with the United Nations.

The then Commonwealth Secretary Arthur Bottomley said that if other federations were to separate, he hoped they would do it as professionally as Singapore and Malaysia.

It was a compliment to Eddie’s and Choo’s professional skills. Each time Malaysian Malay leaders threatened to cut off our water supply, I was reassured that this clear and solemn international undertaking by the Malaysian government in its Constitution will get us a ruling by the UNSC (United Nations Security Council).

After her first stroke, she lost her left field of vision. This slowed down her reading. She learned to cope, reading with the help of a ruler. She swam every evening and kept fit. She continued to travel with me, and stayed active despite the stroke. She stayed in touch with her family and old friends.

She listened to her collection of CDs, mostly classical, plus some golden oldies. She jocularly divided her life into “before stroke” and “after stroke”, like BC and AD.

She was friendly and considerate to all associated with her. She would banter with her WSOs (woman security officers) and correct their English grammar and pronunciation in a friendly and cheerful way. Her former WSOs visited her when she was at NNI. I thank them all.

Her second stroke on 12 May 2008 was more disabling. I encouraged and cheered her on, helped by a magnificent team of doctors, surgeons, therapists and nurses.

Her nurses, WSOs and maids all grew fond of her because she was warm and considerate. When she coughed, she would take her small pillow to cover her mouth because she worried for them and did not want to infect them.

Her mind remained clear but her voice became weaker. When I kissed her on her cheek, she told me not to come too close to her in case I caught her pneumonia.

I assured her that the doctors did not think that was likely because I was active.

When given some peaches in hospital, she asked the maid to take one home for my lunch. I was at the centre of her life.

On 24 June 2008, a CT scan revealed another bleed again on the right side of her brain. There was not much more that medicine or surgery could do except to keep her comfortable.

I brought her home on 3 July 2008. The doctors expected her to last a few weeks. She lived till 2nd October, 2 years and 3 months.

She remained lucid. They gave time for me and my children to come to terms with the inevitable. In the final few months, her faculties declined. She could not speak but her cognition remained.

She looked forward to have me talk to her every evening.

Her last wish she shared with me was to enjoin our children to have our ashes placed together, as we were in life.

The last two years of her life were the most difficult. She was bedridden after small successive strokes; she could not speak but she was still cognisant.

Every night she would wait for me to sit by her to tell her of my day’s activities and to read her favourite poems. Then she would sleep.

I have precious memories of our 63 years together. Without her, I would be a different man, with a different life. She devoted herself to me and our children.

She was always there when I needed her. She has lived a life full of warmth and meaning.

I should find solace at her 89 years of her life well lived. But at this moment of the final parting, my heart is heavy with sorrow and grief.