What Has The Richest Man in the US Travel 3000 Miles to Say 300 Words

3000 Miles, to Speak for 3 Minutes and Say 300 Words!

What would possess the richest man in the US, Bill Gates, to do that?

This is what he said, "This week, I am heading from Seattle to New York to speak for 180 seconds. I will be talking at a United Nations meeting about the fight to eradicate polio. I am very passionate on the subject, and I usually prefer to discuss it for hours at a time. In this case, however, I am happy to stop at three minutes. Because the reason my time is short is that so many people are committed to eradication we can barely all squeeze into the program. More..."

And, as another expression of the possibility he sees for the end of polio, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are sponsors of GlobalCitizen.org, the Global Citizen Festival and The Global Poverty Project who organized the Festival Concert.

This is an exquisite example of possibility in action.

Can You Imagine What 20 Generous Billionaires Collaborating...

Here are 20 Billionaires Making a Difference

Can you imagine what would be possible if these 20 Generous Billionaires were to join forces and take on a project together? If they were to pool their leadership knowhow, leverage their influence and connections and work together on something bold and transformational?

We know what the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are doing - that gives a flavor of the possibility of aligning vision, commitment, leadership and financial resources.

This last weekend, September 29, 2012 we saw what Global Citizen.org pulled off in Central Park, New York – 60 thousand people committed to making a difference. Can you imaging if they can be continually stoked to stay in action. That is the commitment of the leaders of the Global Poverty Project, the organizers of the concert – or better said, the geniuses behind the concert.

It seems like there is a palpable yearning to make a difference on the part of so many people – Global Citizens, with Global Leaders, aligned behind a shared set of outcomes. The prospects are awesome.

Change Staircases' Designs to Fight Obesity

I am a student of architecture. I love great building design and am frequently in awe of the creativity and imagination that architects drawn on in designing great spaces.

So, not surprisingly I was excited to see Renzo Piano's new wing for the Art Institute of Chicago. It is extraordinary, and part of how come Piano is considered to be one of the finest architects in the world.

In my professional life, on the other hand, I work with leader's of organizations, or I could just as easily say the architects of organizations, helping them express their own creativity in furthering their vision and commitments for their organization. In the process I encourage leaders to expand the arena in which they look to solve problems - go outside your industry, look at what is happening in other fields you can co-opt. I even encourage them to formulate new problems, as a context or catalyst for their creativity. Problems that will forward their businesses when the problem is solved.

So not surprisingly I was fascinated to see the possibility of architects having a hand in contributing to a breakthrough in one of the most troubling conditions of our time - obesity. I could see a fruitful collaboration between architecture and healthcare in this headline on Twine, "Change staircases' designs to fight obesity", from the Times of India. Like all insights, obvious after the fact.

If staircases were more accessible, and more attractive, we would be more likely to use them. And, if we used them more, as just one of the things we do in this culture, we may well be less obese.

I wonder how many ideation sessions on reducing obesity, or promoting healthier lifestyles, included asking architects to make stairs more enticing, more easy to find, more part of the fun experience of moving from one level of their buildings to another?

Now that would be a breakthrough.

Change staircases' designs to fight obesity - Health - Health & Science - The Times of India

On Our Buggy Moral Code

In a captivating TED talk which he called our buggy moral code behavioral economist Dan Ariely tells us about the studies he has conducted to discover some of the bugs in our moral code: the hidden reasons we think it's OK to cheat or steal (sometimes). His clever studies help make his point that we're predictably irrational -- and can be influenced in ways we can't grasp.

For example, he conducted some simple experiments. In one he would pass out a sheet of paper with 20 simple math problems that everyone could solve, but would not give them enough time, yet he promised to pay a dollar for every solved problem. He also set up the experiment tempting some to cheat. In his talk he explains, captivatingly, what happened.

Ariely tells us that in economic theory, cheating becomes a very simple cost-benefit analysis - what's the probability of being caught? How much to I stand to gain by cheating?And how much punishment would i get if caught? And then we weigh the options and decide whether it is worthwhile to cheat or not.

What he learned is that:

• A lot of people can cheat
• When reminded of their morality we cheat less
• When we get a bigger distance from cheating, from the object of money, for example, people cheat more
• And when we see cheating going on around us, particularly if it is part of our in-group, cheating goes up

This last point goes a long way to explain the greed, cheating and corruption that has been so rampant in recent years from Enron, to Worldcom, Global Crossing and the numerous examples that are part of the recent financial and banking meltdown and part of the decision making and policies that has led to the current financial crisis.

Ariely also discovered that when people thought what they were doing fell inside an honor code they did not cheat. Which makes the recent initiative of MBA students to sign honor codes so significant and offers the possibility that these future executives will not cheat. Now that would be a transformation.

Check out the honor codes:

• Columbia Business School's Honor Code
• Harvard Business School The MBA Oath
• Thunderbird School of Global Management Oath of Honor

We Should Bring Back the Draft

Today is Memorial Day.

I has occurred to me several times over this holiday weekend that we should bring back the draft. It should be part of the requirement of citizenship that everyone spend some time in the military services. New immigrants should, anyone who aspires to run for public office should, corporate execs should, media execs should - everyone should.

Furthermore, everyone should spend time, even a week, in a combat zone, in a military hospital, in a rehabilitation center and a psych ward, then maybe, just maybe, Memorial Day would mean more than a day at the beach, a trip to the sales at the mall or an occasion for the first BBQ of the summer.

And, if we had all done our tour of duty, we would be less casual about sending our fellow citizens into war in the first place.

It is fine to put the bring our troops home bumper stickers on our cars as a gesture of consumer support for the sticker manufacturer, just don't confuse it with support for troops any more that a day at the beach is a way to remember those who died in wars - especially wars that should never have been started in the first place.

Our lack of consciousness is even more alarming than our lack of respect for those the day is designed to remember.

An Ordinary Person, Or A Hero?

A hero is an ordinary person who dares to respond to a possibility bigger than themselves.

Over time we have seen many ordinary people respond to possibilities that have changed their lives and, in some instances, the lives of their community and nation.

We have all heard the stories of: Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, and Martin Luther King, Jr., and Rosa Parks - the list of ordinary people who dared is long and impressive.

However, reading their stories can be both inspiring and intimidating. It is easy to discount the possibility of us being heroes with: I am not them; I don't have that courage; or I don't have those kinds of opportunities where I live or in what I do. Being a hero is not my thing, I'm just a ... fill in the blank.

Yet as we look back on the events that led up to our current financial and economic crisis how many of us saw things that were clearly wrong, or at least suspect, and did not respond to the possibility of intervening? I know, with hindsight, I did not respond in instances where I could have.

The opportunities to be a hero are all around us. We may not make national TV or the history books, but we can be heroic nonetheless. For example, we see a friend or family member taking on financial commitments that they cannot sustain and we say nothing. We watch a TV ad that offers 3 months free that we know is a dishonest bait to switch to high monthly payments once a prospect is ensnared and we don't warn someone who wants to bite the bait, and we don't protest these dishonest practices.

How come? Well mostly because of what I call resignation. We have resigned ourselves to the fact that our intervention will not make any difference, "so what's the point?" The only answer that I think is worth while is that the point is that to be able to live with ourselves and stay healthy, we must act with integrity. Which simply means we must act consistently with our own principles and values - regardless of the outcome. It is that simple. 

The price of doing otherwise is expensive in more ways that we see at first. For example, we as a nation, and in millions of cases individually, are now paying, and will be paying for some time to come, for all the instances we passed on being heroic and passed on acting with integrity.

For example, Rosa Parks may have ended up in jail, and certainly not in the history books, for refusing to go to the back of the bus. History books or not, her actions were heroic, not because of the outcome, but because she acted with integrity.

So a way to think of being a hero is to dare to respond, consistently with our principles and values, to a possibility bigger than ourselves. To respond even when the risk of failure, or resistance, or ridicule, is high. To respond even knowing that success is uncertain, even unlikely. To respond simply because we know it is the right thing to do.

Charter for Compassion

A conversation for possibility as I distinguish it is a conversation that speaks for a new future. This new future is not a future that is predictable, like a default future - one we will get by extending our past. Nor is it just one of some available scenarios, like an optional future - we could do this, or we could choose that, kind of future.

Some people live their lives from a future they are committed to - and one that is unlikely to be realized except without a transformation. These people live their lives from the future first - they take their actions in the present informed, not by the circumstances of the moment, but by the future they see as a possibility.

One such remarkable person is Karen Armstrong. She was on Bill Moyer's Journal last night (3/13/09). If her conversation, her intentions for the Charter, gather any momentum we will live in a different world. Watch the video.