CMMA gives my column on billboards the nod

The Catholic Mass Media Awards recently gave me a Special Citation for Best Business Column for a piece I wrote for The Manila Times last July 2008 on the use of sexual themes in billboards.   This troubling issue continues to demand attention. 
 

Sex and billboards

by Ben Teehankee

Managing for Society

The Manila Times

July 1 and 8, 2008

 

Recently, a billboard for a garment retailer went up along EDSA featuring a model with no upper clothing with her back to the camera.  This would have been just another in the long series of billboards showing partial nudity along the main highway except for one thing: the actress is a prime time star with a rather wholesome image.   Expectedly, some critical comments went the round in the Internet, prompting the manager of the actress to defend the billboard as simply a matter of   " fashion", "classy", and a sign of the actress' growth.

 

The critical comments are not surprising given the popularity of this actress among the young.   While we have seen the steady increase in body exposure in billboards in the past years, a topless female youth figure in a billboard crosses a clear line that deserves careful evaluation.   Of course, any nudity in this most public of mass media should be the subject of critical discussion in the public interest.  Images of such size which even young people in passing cars can see should be subject to scrutiny if only to ensure that they are not offensive to community norms of propriety.   

 

The Outdoor Advertising Association of the Philippines (OAAP) acknowledges this fact.   Its Code of Ethics states that "being an integral part of mass media, we are cognizant of the powerful influence of outdoor advertising on society".    Surprisingly, though, a search through the Code will not show any occurrence of the words "community", "norms", "appropriate", or even "decency".   

 

The Code does call for the screening of "materials that show partial or total nudity or skimpy attire or any visuals/copy/elements that suggest sexual stimulation or satisfaction or gratification."   The use of the verb "suggest" leaves plenty of room for interpretation, however, and without an overarching principle of community decency to anchor the provision, a lot of nudity can slip through. 

 

Thus, I find the Code too narrow in its ethical guidance on billboards, especially given the latter's power over the public mind.   Anyone who remembers what school was like would remember the posters that were everywhere – in classrooms and around campus.   Teachers use visual displays to communicate important messages related to personal values, virtue, attitudes and even behaviors .   Psychologists have long established the powerful impact of such visual messages on people, especially the young.

 

What ethical issues arise from the use of sexual images in billboards?   The first relates to the major purpose of advertising itself which is to inform the public about the features and benefits of particular products and services.   In fact, it is this "right of the public to know" which gives fundamental protection to all mass media in a democratic, free-market society.   Consumers need truthful, relevant and timely information to make rational decisions about purchases.   When sexual images such as nudity are used in billboards, in what sense do they inform the public?

 

In most cases, sexual images are not used to inform at all but merely to persuade and influence, not through rational means but through subtle implication.   Researchers Lambiase and Reichert have identified three ways that sexual messages are integrated in advertising in order to influence consumer thinking: sexual attractiveness for the consumer, likely engagement in sexual behavior, and feelings of being sexy or sexual. 

 

The trouble with such persuasive uses of sexual images is that they discourage rational decision-making and amounts to little more than psychological manipulation.   Obviously, advertisements which manipulate consumers do not deserve the protection of mass media which are supposedly meant to

inform the public.

 

 

PART 2

 

As I argued in last week's column, the first problem with sexual images in billboards is that they are essentially not informative and, worse,

psychologically manipulative.   Thus, they fail to meet the requirements of legitimate advertising and mass media.

 

Plato has been quoted as saying that "the body intrudes … into our investigations, interrupting, disturbing, distracting, and preventing us from getting a glimpse

of the truth."   More recently, psychologists have been analyzing the impact of psychological manipulation in sexual advertising or what they neutrally term as "sex appeals".   They have found that while sex appeals improved the viewers' positive thoughts about and recall of the advertising message, this came at a price to the viewer.  Sex appeals tend to interfere with thoughts about the product and the message as well as inhibit counter-arguments in the mind of the viewer .   In short, sex appeals short-circuit the mind's natural rationality and replace this with positive feelings associated with sexual imagery.   

 

A second issue that has been raised against sexual images in advertising, and which applies more strongly to billboards, is that they send essentially

unnatural and, as a result, demeaning messages.  Business ethicist John Cohan argues that such ads "redefine attractiveness from something natural to an unattainable ideal".   The utter artificial flawlessness of human bodies in 50-foot billboards implies an essentially demeaning and manipulative message. 

Jacobson and Mazur argue that "by inviting women to compare their unimproved reality with [such] … perfection, advertising erodes self-esteem, then offers to sell it back – for a price."

 

Thus, this style of advertising dissuades against the cultivation of inner beauty.   Not surprisingly, such ads have cultivated the desire of women to aspire for mythical standards of beauty which are often only possible through costly, and sometimes dangerous, surgical intervention.   The reported cases of

disfigurement, injuries and death related to cosmetic surgery operations in the country is an inevitable result of this obsession with an unattainable physical

beauty propagated in part by sexual advertising.

 

A third ethical objection against sex-oriented billboards is that they erode traditional conventions of virtue and modesty among women and, therefore,

slowly undermine the country's social fabric.   Women, because of their tender qualities and crucial nurturing roles in the family and in the community have always been afforded a high level of respect in Philippine society.   Although we have come a long way from the Maria Clara ideal, Filipina women are still raised in the exercise of virtues such as modesty and  prudence .   These are not trivial considerations for a society which values the family and the raising of

upright children.   By extolling immodesty in the highways of the land, these billboards are conditioning the young generation to forget traditional community values.

 

A final and practical problem is that these billboards pose a safety threat to the motoring public.   Billboards, of course, rely on their ability to attract attention and, therefore, send a message.   But sexual images attract attention much longer than necessary for the message to be sent.   The driver who understandably lingers too long to take in the alluring images may find himself in a collision before he knows it.   These billboards are found in highways, after all, where high speeds are to be expected.   Shouldn't considerations of public safety override the commercial interests of companies?

 

Companies should take care not to let their pursuit of profit override their basic sense of decency and concern for the community.  Perhaps, in specific contexts and for exclusively mature audiences, nudity has a place in advertising.   But it doesn't belong in billboards.

Detoxifying the workplace

Detoxifying the workplace
Ben L. Teehankee
(from BusinessWorld, July 5, 2007)

Recently, my wife and I celebrated our anniversary by visiting a spa together. And what a great experience it was! The pampering and soothing experience made me understand why spas have become so popular even in a warm country such as ours. Of course, the other reason is that market pressures and ambitious organizational goals have raised work stress to such high (some say toxic) levels that people yearn for the relief that the spas provide.
But why should workplaces be so "toxic" anyway? Is it a law of nature that work should be such a grinder for most people? Or is it possible to turn workplaces to soothing, spa-like enclaves, too? Managers can learn many lessons from spas to help them “detoxify” the workplace.
Attention

In a spa, the staff greet you with warm smiles, making you feel important and welcome. In many workplaces, greetings are a thing of the past, and warmth just seems too much to expect from people. But the little civilities are what make the hustle and bustle of modern living tolerable. Greeting co-workers is a small effort to make the workplace friendlier. And using the person’s name makes it even more special: “Good morning, Carol. How are you this morning?” Of course, if there are just too many people to greet with words, there’s always a look in the eyes with a smile and nod of the head.

When I would ask questions of spa staff, I noticed how they paid attention to every word I said. In today’s fast-paced, technology-enabled workplace, attentive listening is becoming a precious commodity. When someone is sharing thoughts or ideas, it’s important for co-workers, whether superiors or colleagues, to listen attentively. It sends a clear message of respect and importance. Let’s put our cell phones and PDA’s aside for a while and invest our precious attention on the people we work with.

Consideration

A steam bath can be excruciatingly hot. So the spa attendant advised me on how to do it just right based on how much heat I could take. In many organizations, work tends to flow down the hierarchy and across departments with little thought about the load of the people receiving the work. Workers can’t be blamed for sometimes feeling like they have been buried under a landslide or departments for feeling they’re being hit by mortar fire by a distant enemy. Lack of consideration or insensitivity breeds resentment and resistance. People learn to fire back, whether openly or secretly, and stress levels go up all around.

Workplace stress can be reduced by showing sensitivity to people’s workload. If giving additional work to someone is absolutely necessary, a discussion with the person on lead times and needed support would make the burden more manageable.

Affirmation

A massage by an expert masseuse is soothing and invigorating. The sensitive and knowledgeable application of just the right pressure on the right muscle makes worries fade away. To a worker, nothing is more soothing to self-esteem than sincere affirmation – knowing that one’s work is valued. Managers can massage self-esteem by pointing out how a person’s strengths help the company. “Excellent presentation, Susan! Your fresh data and analysis will help us improve our strategy.”

Colleagues are important sources of affirmation. A quick text message costs a peso and thirty seconds but can be priceless to the recipient: “Thanks for the lead on what the client needed. It helped us bag the contract!” And yet, too many times, we miss seizing such opportunities.

Celebration
My wife and I went to a spa to celebrate our years of marriage – no mean feat. Similarly, many spa habitués know that no matter how demanding the work becomes, they deserve to celebrate and feel good after their struggle to deliver on tough goals. Sometimes, they just celebrate for having survived another week!

A celebration reenergizes the spirit. It doesn’t even have to be grand or to be held for a major accomplishment. Completion of small milestones deserves fanfare, too. After a positive progress review meeting, a manager can surprise his hardworking team with a cake (ok, sugar-free) with the members’ names and the words, “Thank you for being in my team!”

Are market pressures going down anytime soon? Are managers going to learn to temper their ambitions? I doubt it. But that’s no reason to make the workplace a living hell. It’s time to learn from the spas and say goodbye to the toxic workplace. Let’s be more attentive, affirming, and considerate while never forgetting to celebrate!

Ethics and Innovation

I wrote a column in BusinessMirror last year on the need to get out of false dilemmas that businessmen often trap themselves in. I began:

"Is there a tradeoff between ethics and making money? We often think so. Therefore, unless there is enough fear that legal punishment or negative public opinion cannot be avoided, decisions will likely favor the financially rewarding, even if ethically dubious, course of action."

The column continues at http://www.businessmirror.com.ph/0524/oped06.php

The recent government decision to spend P1 billion on anti-poverty programs smacks of a knee-jerk reaction to a complex problem. While I'm willing to assume it's well-intentioned, I think that it has to be very well thought through. Otherwise, all that money will tempt the unscrupulous to come out of the wood work for their "share" and the poor will be no better.

Again, we need to avoid a false dilemma: Either we help the poor by large amounts of direct assistance OR we don't help the poor. Obviously, there must be other ways to help the poor.

Innovative solutions to helping the poor will have to involve improving the poor's capacity to help themselves. The economist David Ellerman (connected with the World Bank for some time) has written about "Helping People Help Themselves: Towards a Theory of Autonomy-Compatible Help" where he essentially argues that help which develops people must recognize that:

1. help must start from the present situation of the doers—not from a "blank slate",

2. helpers must see the situation through the eyes of the doers—not just through their own eyes,

3. help cannot be imposed upon the doers—as that directly violates their autonomy,

4. nor can doers receive help as a benevolent gift—as that creates dependency, and

5. doers must be "in the driver's seat"—which is the basic idea of autonomous self-direction.

Ellerman's lecture on this topic at the Paris Uplift Academy in April 27, 2006 is available at YouTube below.

Of course, as a Christian, I believe that helping as benevolence (Ellerman's #4) is really an act of love even if it doesn't necessarily lead to self-sufficiency. Acts of love can sometimes "spoil" people, as any parent knows.

Business and social inequality

On the recent debate about the state of hunger in
the country, the President is quoted by PDI (through
Cerge Remonde) as saying: "As long as there's one
person who is hungry, the government should do
something about it." I pray to God that she
actually said that because those are the words of a
leader. Which prompts me to post a short version
of a lecture I recently gave at De La Salle
Professional Schools. Business corporations can do
a lot to address the social inequality that continues
to plague our country.



Building Humanistic Corporations
Dr. Benito Teehankee
De La Salle Professional Schools

Corporate growth for whom?

The financial indicators from the corporate sector of
the country have been quite impressive in recent
years. BizNews Asia reported that the ten most
profitable corporations of 2005 together netted P219
billion compared to P86 billion in 2004 -- an increase
of more than 150%! The Philippine Stock Exchange
reports that the stock market return last year as
measured by the PSEi was higher than 40%, an
impressive increase from the -30% the index registered
in 2000. The PSE also reports that total market
capitalization has grown from under P3 trillion in
2000 to more than P7 trillion by the end of 2006.

The recent years’ rosy corporate numbers combine with
media reportage to romanticize corporate wealth in the
public imagination. Time magazine’s cover of February
23, 2004 showed Henry Sy and his children with the
banner “The Families that Own Asia”, implying, almost
subliminally, that the corporate wealthy can indeed
“own” a country or even a region. The recent
announcement by Forbes magazine of the country’s
wealthiest, namely, Henry Sy ($2.6 billion), Jaime
Zobel de Ayala and family ($2.6 billion) and Lucio Tan
($2.3 billion), shows the link between corporate
control and tremendous levels of personal wealth.

The pressing question is: Why is the growing
corporate wealth not benefiting the average Filipino?
Based on the National Statistics Office’s (NSO) Family
Income and Expenditure Survey, the country’s income
gap increased from 31.6% in 1997 to 31.8% in 2000.
This means that in 2000, the income of those below the
poverty threshold would have to increase by 31.8% to
surpass the poverty threshold. The latest government
statistics still places the poverty level at around
30%.

Most writers on corporate governance would not see a
problem in this situation. They would reason that the
stock market is simply rewarding the efficient
allocation of financial resources by equity owners to
their most valuable uses, that is, to the corporations
which are best able to meet the demands of the market
and to produce the best profitability. Besides, the
reasoning continues, ordinary people benefit when
corporations expand their range of quality products at
ever cheaper prices.

This is a narrow and misleading view. In the first
place, the stock market directly benefits only a
small fraction of the country’s citizens, perhaps
around 10,000, by some estimates. Secondly, this view
erroneously reduces a person’s welfare to his ability
to purchase consumption goods. Human welfare cannot
be reduced to consumption in the same way that human
dignity cannot be reduced to the ability to purchase
the latest cell phone. Corporations must play a
deeper and more significant role if these are to
improve the lives of ordinary Filipinos: these must
provide decent work which gives fair and living wages,
security of tenure, adequate social protection and
meaningful participation. Unfortunately, the trend
towards minimum wage violations, contractualization
and union membership reductions among many
corporations is leading to deteriorating quality of
work lives for many corporate employees.

What does Catholic Social Teaching say about
corporations and human dignity?

As entities existing in a predominantly Catholic
country, Philippine corporations can be usefully
guided towards becoming more humanistic social
institutions by the teachings of the Church. Catholic
Social Teaching (simply referred to as CST) refers to
the formal teachings of the Catholic Church on social
and economic issues as expressed in papal and
conciliar documents. The major documents of modern
CST include a number of open letters from the Popes –
papal encylicals. The first CST encyclical is
generally considered to be Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum
Novarum (“Of New Things”) which was issued in 1891.
The Pope argued, among others, for family living wages
as a response to the rampant poverty of the day
despite growing industrialization. The Pope
explained that “…working for gain is creditable, not
shameful, to a man, since it enables him to earn an
honorable livelihood; but to misuse men as though they
were things in the pursuit of gain, or to value them
solely for their physical powers -- that is truly
shameful and inhuman.” A hundred years later, Pope
John Paul II issued the encyclical Centesimus Annus
(“One Hundred Years”) to argue against the creeping
consumeristic greed in the new knowledge economy. He
acknowledged “the legitimate role of profit as an
indication that a business is functioning well” but
cautioned that “it is possible for the financial
accounts to be in order, and yet for the people — who
make up the firm's most valuable asset — to be
humiliated and their dignity offended.”

As the quotes above show, CST has always emphasized
that the pursuit of business profit can be a good
thing as long as it does not lead to the
dehumanization of people. Unfortunately, the tendency
to deprive employees of adequate compensation and to
promote unbridled consumption exists in many
Philippine corporations even today. According to CST,
these practices are to be avoided. Instead, the needs
of human development should be the focus of
businesses. Pope John Paul II clarified the purpose
of the business firm as “not simply to make a profit,
but is to be found in its very existence as a
community of persons who in various ways are
endeavouring to satisfy their basic needs, and who
form a particular group at the service of the whole of
society.”

In the early 80s, the Bishops-Businessmen’s Conference
on Human Development argued similarly when it
developed its Code of Ethics for Business which
asserted that “the modern manager must be a strategist
for human development, and … the business is to build
an enterprise oriented to the development of man.”

Helen Alford and Michael Naughton, in their book
“Managing as If Faith Mattered”, explained that
integral human development within businesses should
consider physical, cognitive, emotional, aesthetic,
social, moral and spiritual aspects. Using their
framework, I like to represent a person as a flower,
with the center of the flower representing essential
material goods, and seven petals representing each
aspect of human development. A flower cannot be said
to be fully developed if some of its petals are
stunted or are missing altogether. It would be good
for corporate managers to regular evaluate how their
employees are developing as human beings. After all,
persons are not simply replaceable commodities in the
corporate books.

The role of the corporation in the 1987 Philippine
Constitution

The CST expectation that corporations be mindful of
the needs of human development and the common good are
completely consistent with the expectations of the
Philippine Constitution and that of the Corporation
Code. The fundamental law, in fact, mentions the
common good no less than 14 times! In particular, the
article on National Economy and Patrimony states, with
emphases added, that: “The use of property bears a
social function, and all economic agents shall
contribute to the common good. Individuals and private
groups, including corporations, cooperatives, and
similar collective organizations, shall have the right
to own, establish, and operate economic enterprises,
subject to the duty of the State to promote
distributive justice and to intervene when the common
good so demands.”

Thus, while the right to private property of corporate
shareholders is fully recognized, such a right is not
absolute. It is always subordinate to the mandate for
all economic entities, such as corporations, to
support the development of all and to share with
others their just share of the fruits of production.
Certainly, high on the list of people whose
development the corporation should support and who
should share in the fruits of production are its own
employees.

How can corporations be more humanistic?

There are a number of ways Philippine businesses can
be more attuned to CST while also being more faithful
to the intent of the Constitution for businesses to
preserve human dignity and to diffuse wealth equitably
among as many people as possible.

The first way is to pay decently and share the
profits. Oscar Chan of San Jose Kitchen Cabinets has
been implementing a 50% profit sharing system with his
employees for almost twenty years. The result is
loyalty and commitment to long-term productivity among
employees.

A second way is to encourage creative participation in
productivity. Yoling Sevilla of The Leather
Collection keeps her employees involved in the value
creation work of the company through continuous
training and weekly meetings which enable even the
rank-and-file workers to be aware of the strategic
directions of the company.

A third way is to develop the business acumen of
employees. Richard Lim of Time Depot aims to develop
the career path of his employees such that they can
become future managers and even franchisees of his
business. This is his way of sharing business success
with his employees.

Corporate managers who take CST and the Constitution’s
principles to heart can similarly come up with
creative humanistic management strategies.

Meaningful corporate growth

The current situation of the country, where so few
have ever-increasing corporate wealth while so many
languish in poverty, will not be addressed by waiting
for the market to distribute benefits while the people
wait. It will only improve when more corporations
fulfill their duty, as prefaced to the Corporation
Code, to be “effective partners of the National
Government in spreading the benefits of capitalism for
the social and economic development of the nation.”
Such is the role of humanistic corporations.

(Note: This article is an edited version of the
author’s Sen. Benigno S. Aquino, Jr. professorial
chair lecture on corporate social responsibility and
governance delivered last March 17, 2007 at De La
Salle Professional Schools.)

Christmas thoughts

I wrote the following for BusinessWorld in December 2001. Five years later, I still feel the same.

Social capital and the spirit of Christmas (December 20, 2001)

There are many things I like about our country. The weather is temperate. The cuisine is tasty. And the people are friendly and know how to have fun. Christmas in particular brings all the best things out of Filipinos. This is when we have the most fun. And this is when we are nicest to each other in general and, in particular, especially nice to people we care about. Christmas is, therefore, a great time to build and strengthen ties with people.

Now, why am I making a big thing about being nice to each other, having fun and building ties? Because I think that these are practices that we Filipinos are so good at and yet have not made full use of, whether in corporations or as a nation. Organizational researchers have a special term for high-trust networks of relationships which allow people to work together towards a common goal – social capital.

I’ve often wondered why, despite the vaunted talent of the Filipino, we are conspicuously trailing many of our neighbors in achieving development goals. At the micro level, this kind of underachievement is true even in many otherwise excellent organizations. My theory is that we have run very low in social capital. We have slowly squandered our reservoirs of trust, goodwill and sense of collective fun until we have become in many organizations, and as a nation, socially bankrupt.

Watching the evening news is a daily habit for me and it’s a habit I may have to stop if only to keep from getting depressed. Not a day goes by without a politician leveling the most horrible accusation at another on national television. More recently, a lady from a cause-oriented group deplored how excluded her group felt about the recently held economic summit. A government leader, one of the organizers, explained that they did take the group’s concerns into account during the summit.

And as I watched the exchange on television, I had that strange combination of feelings I often get nowadays: lucky, on the one hand, to have such committed and talented individuals taking the cudgels for our country and sad, on the other hand, that these individuals will never get their act together. Then it hit me. We can’t get our act together because we don’t trust each other. We don’t even like each other. It’s no wonder this country isn’t going anywhere!

How did we get this way? How did a country known for its patient and hospitable people ever get to a point that we have made putting each other down a national pastime and a gladiator sport? How did a country that has produced – and continues to produce – some of the most talented individuals become the collective cellar dweller in the drive towards genuine national development?

It’s the little things, I think. It’s the insistence on being right and the other being wrong. It’s the refusal to really listen and let the other person finish a sentence before we say our piece. It’s the little judgments we make about another person not being one of “us” and, therefore, not being trustworthy. It’s the focus on “me” instead of the “us.” In other words, it’s the fatal mistake of forgetting that in the journey of life, we are all in it together.

But this is history, and Christmas signals the coming of a new year and a new beginning. If we have run out of social capital, we can certainly build it up again. First, we need a collective goal and we certainly have one – the uplift of the dignity and standard of living of the majority of our countrymen. We need to accept that our fates are intertwined; that we cannot truly succeed while others plod along in life. Second, we have to put our talents for niceness and caring to very good use – on each other – and not just during Christmas but all year round.

This will begin the building of collective trust. But it will take time because it will need the establishment of an ethical climate where we, whether as citizens or as members of organizations, act beyond self-interest. And this is only possible if relationships are allowed to build over time. There are some specific steps that we should consider seriously. In companies, this means selecting people more carefully and trying to keep them longer. If as a manager you are considering moves that will result in too many losses of jobs, rethink it. If it looks good on the balance sheet and gives a twinkle in your investment banker’s eye, rethink it even more. You may be profiting by displacing people who have toiled hard on the very strategies you asked them to pursue, only to toss them out when these strategies fail. Is there a more humane way of recovering from the mistake? A fairer way? Can you share in the consequences and the pain? Avoiding the short-cut solution will earn you tremendous trust points (not to mention pogi points) with your people and build company social capital. The next time mergers are considered, managers should look at how much social capital will be lost as people are let go and as relationships are destroyed.

As countrymen, we can start by giving each other more benefit of the doubt, especially on contentious issues. The horrific attacks on the World Trade Center had one good effect – they triggered a global interest in understanding why many Muslims feel so left out. While the President’s declaration of the last day of Ramadan as a national holiday wreaked havoc on my personal schedule, I applaud her intention and hope for more efforts to reach out to our brethren in the South.

Three of my siblings, who long ago migrated to the US, often ask me why I stay. I always say that I love being here. I like the weather, I like the food, and I still like the people. This Christmas, let’s all reflect on how we can begin a new year of rediscovering what makes us special as a people. Who knows – I may even convince my siblings to come back. I’m an optimist.

Merry Christmas, everyone!

Praying for the Common Good

So it's the day before the CBCP-organized prayer rally at the Luneta. The bishops have called the rally to "watch and pray" for the good of the country, especially after the House majority passed the controversial Constituent Assembly resolution in the wee hours of the morning.

Below are postings I made in Manolo Quezon's blog clarifying the need to seek a common ground for dialogue on the current issues and the need to promote the common good:

On the need for Dialogue based on a Common Ground

"I think [with respect to the CBCP Luneta prayer] it’s also possible that people of faith are realizing that a collective appeal to a higher being is a more constructive response to the deterioration they see in the behavior of legislators than an escalation of angry rhetoric or personal attacks. Although I’m a Catholic, I haven’t made up my mind about going on Sunday because I’m not sure how much prayer there can actually be in such a large crowd.

I agree that the religious groups have vested interests in the current situation, although that should legitimately be the promotion of peace and the common good.

I’m hoping the rally can build some bridges between the sectors at conflict and open some real, thoughtful and mutually respectful dialogue."

When a poster expressed doubt about the possibility of building "bridges", I explained:

"By bridge, I meant common ground among people in seeming conflict. For example, is it possible that people on different sides of the Cha-Cha issue may actually love this country? Or that they want a bright future for their children? Or desire the upliftment of more Filipinos? Or believe in a God of love? I think so. If so, these can be starting points for dialogue and creative problem. Who knows where things can go after that? Still, I find that more appealing than a spiral downwards to chaos, factional hatred or, dare I say, civil war.

I’m not a historian so Manolo might give his inputs here, but it seems to me that the countries we now acknowledge as stable and well-developed went through their own political crises and WORKED THEM THROUGH. It wasn’t always neat, and oftentimes it was preceded by bloodshed, but real progress occurred only when people and their leaders took responsibility for the common good, not just their sectoral interests while simply branding others. I think we can reach this level of thinking and we can really BE a nation, instead of just being co-located accidentally in 7000 islands. IMHO, common ground and dialogue are not only possible for progress, they are necessary. Especially since I presume we prefer a non-authoritarian route. Prayer and discernment can open our minds to these possibilities."

On the Common Good

When a poster questioned whether anyone could or should actually speak about the common good since good can vary among different individuals, I explained that:

"While Oxford dictionary may be right about there being no “strict” definition of the common good, may I offer for your consideration two definitions from two Johns which may be useful for our discussion here. I think that talking about the common good is important because the CBCP often speaks of the common good and a consensus on the common good is basic to nation-building — which is why the phrase appears in the Preamble of the Philippine Constitution as in “We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a just and humane society and establish a Government that shall embody our ideals and aspirations, promote the common good, …”

The definitions:

1. From Harvard philosopher John Rawls, author of A Theory of Justice: “certain general conditions that are . . . equally to everyone’s advantage”

2. Originally from Pope John XXIII in the papal encyclical Mater et Magistra (Mother and Teacher)and reemphasized in the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church: “the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfillment more fully and more easily”

The similarity between the two Johns’ definitions is striking considering that Rawls is secular while Pope John is Catholic. This indicates that there tends to be consensus on the common good.

Common examples of conditions which are part of the common good range from the physical (such as clean air and good roads) to social services (such as free basic education and social security) to institutions (such as free markets and the rule of law ), etc. A quick check of the examples against the definitions of the two Johns will clarify why they are part of the common good.

The government has the DUTY to promote the common good because it promotes the dignity and development of every citizen.

The danger in the current situation is that private good or special interest (some say “vested”) is being mixed up with or is harming the common good. This needs to be guarded against and is why the Church is against the recent acts of the House majority — these were seen as brazen acts which harm the common good, i.e., the rule of law, in this case. It is important for ALL citizens, faithful or otherwise, to understand, promote and defend the common good. It is a foundational principle of our republican democracy.

By the way, republic comes from “Res Publica” which is Latin for “the public thing” and refers to what individuals in a community hold in common or place above their self interest."

I think that the concept of the common good is critically important during these times in our country.

Main thesis of humanistic management

I tried summarizing the main ideas of humanistic management for my friend Mela Lazatin and it went like this:

The person is the most important entity in the world and therefore in any organization because Christ is in him/her. The most important purpose of any organization is to preserve the dignity and facilitate the integral human development of every person. Therefore, a manager should be a strategist for human development.

People are social by nature and attain their full potential in association with each other. A manager should be a community builder.

Therefore, work that is humane and which creates socially useful services/products is essential to human growth. A manager should be a designer of humane work in the service of society.

Unfortunately, in the absence of humane managers, organizations begin to be centers of power struggles and personal interest. Indignities are tolerated and even multiplied, wittingly or otherwise. Work becomes unduly burdensome and makes people lose balance in their lives -- even leading to health damage for many. Work atmospheres become characterized by low trust, poor communication and alienation. Products and services produced are often not socially useful, if not actually damaging to people's character or bodies.

We need more humanistic managers.