Podcast appearances and mentions of Michael J Sandel

高雄美術特區3-4房全新落成，《惟美術》輕軌C22站散步即到家，近鄰青海商圈，卡位明星學區，徜徉萬坪綠海。 住近美術館，擁抱優雅日常，盡現驕傲風範！美術東四路29號 07-553-3838 https://sofm.pse.is/7m4234 --

Michael talks with political philosopher Michael J. Sandel, the Anne T. and Robert M. Bass Professor of Government at Harvard University. He says Vice President Kamala Harris, needs to (among other things) reconnect the Democratic party with working class voters. Original air ate 31 July 2024.

Do you ever wonder what binds our society together in the pursuit of something greater than ourselves? Elijah Emery joins me on an intellectual expedition to dissect the layers of political philosophy, scrutinizing the enigmatic notion of the common good through the critical lens of Michael J. Sandel. Together, we venture into the historical intricacies of democracy, expertise, and the challenges that arise when professional politicians and a growing bureaucracy claim to represent our collective interests. We confront the conservative and reactionary stances on the 'good' and delve into the prevailing currents of legal originalism and leftist hermeneutics, all while tracing the conundrums of meritocracy and the evolving identities within the American political landscape.As we navigate the societal upheavals of our time, from the redefinition of traditional marriages to the rise of ideological incels, we illuminate the critical shifts in community dynamics and the therapeutic roles that have emerged to fill the voids of modern life. The conversation turns to the replication crisis in psychology, the tangled web of gentrification and political allegiances, and the undercurrents of dissatisfaction that course through the veins of meritocratic institutions. Witness how our discussion cuts through the complexity of these social issues, shining a light on the intertwined strands of class, identity, and ideology that shape the fabric of contemporary America.Our journey culminates in a provocative examination of the paradox that lies at the heart of democratic governance: how do we reconcile the necessity of expertise with the foundational principles of democracy? We grapple with the role of randomness in societal sorting, consider the shifting perceptions of the military's place in our society, and reflect on the role of political dynasties in shaping our nation's narrative. Join us for this compelling foray into the labyrinth of governance, meritocracy, and the relentless quest for a fair and just society, as we lay bare the paradoxes and possibilities that define our collective search for a common good. Support the showCrew:Host: C. Derick VarnAudio Producer: Paul Channel Strip ( @aufhebenkultur )Intro and Outro Music by Bitter Lake.Intro Video Design: Jason MylesArt Design: Corn and C. Derick VarnLinks and Social Media:twitter: @skepoetYou can find the additional streams on Youtube

Andreas Stavropoulos, a venture capitalist and entrepreneur, came to the United States from Greece at 18 and has been in the United States ever since. His big moves include marrying his high school sweetheart, arranging their lives around graduate school, medical school, business school, and moving to California. He is now 55-years-old and is excited about the third act of his life, where he can choose where to spend his time more than he used to. A Career as a Venture Capitalist Andreas started his career as a venture capitalist in 1999 and has been doing so for over two and a half years. He has stopped making new investments in this endeavor and is now spending most of his time back to nonprofit public service and helping his country. He is increasingly spending more time back in Greece. In the third act, Andreas is considering the empty nest and choosing where to spend his time. He is now in the third act phase, where he is stepping back from full-time work, focusing on what he chooses to do with his 20+ 25+ productive years. This involves stepping back from full-time work, reducing board load, and not chasing after new deals. A View of the Business Landscape in Greece Andreas talks about his decision to pursue public service in his third act. He gives a brief overview of the crisis Greece has experienced since the 1980s. The crisis was ushered in after a short, populist five-year phase of trying empty promises. However, in 2019, a new generation of moderate, business-friendly leaders emerged, inoculating voters against the empty promises of populism. Greece is now a leader in this regard, showing the rest of Europe how a post-populist society and governance model can look like. The generation of leaders in power is younger and more business friendly, making them an opportunity to help the country catch up with Western Europe. He is also working on a board of a private company that manages large privatization and public-private partnerships in Greece, such as airports, ports, and highways. Another area of focus is AI. He is on an advisory committee to the prime minister on topics related to artificial intelligence, and he talks about the influence of Greek diaspora. On the Board of a Privatization Entity Andreas discusses his experience on the board of an entity that manages privatization. The board includes seven independent members. The nominating committee has combined complementary skills, providing a sound foundation of skills in various areas. The finance side of the board includes working with portfolio companies to mature them for financing, going public, or getting sold. The board also oversees state assets that are not ready for deal-making, designing business plans and leveraging them to create something attractive to private investment while maintaining upside for the state. The board also involves working with bankers and consultants to do transactions, as well as fiduciary duties. They also work with assets to maximize value and develop eco-friendly tourism activities. The advantage of being on the board is learning about the country's large construction projects and local opportunities efficiently. Additionally, working with local players, such as large investors and consultants, allows the board to build a network that allows them to understand data and the players in a relatively small economy. Managing and Motivating People Andreas shares his insights on the business world and the way things work. He explains that talented people, particularly project managers, can be difficult to unleash due to non-meritocratic and bureaucratic processes. For example, Greece's promotion system was purely seniority-based, based on degrees and years of service. However, this approach has led to a loss of motivation for people to go above and beyond. Andreas has learned the importance of thinking about reward systems and what drives human motivation. He believes that humans are rational and evaluative maximizers, constantly processing inputs and making decisions.  Third Act Pursuits and Dharma as a Guiding Principle Andreas discusses his personal portfolio, including his involvement in public service, sailing, and travel. The couple plans to focus on their children and professional responsibilities, with Andreas' wife aiming to maintain her FTE at Stanford. He and his wife have also been involved with education, serving as chair of the board and treasurer at their children's school. He is currently president of the Alumni Board for Harvard Business School and has recently joined the board of a nonprofit that provides policy recommendations for the diaspora of Greece.  Andreas believes that leaving professional firms is intentional and requires planning and commitment. He has had to tell his partners about entering a new phase, which involves changing their brand and deciding who will be in and who will not. Andreas discusses the concept of Dharma, which translates to  roughly "destiny, duty, purpose.” Meditation, a spiritual element that began about 567 years ago, helped him understand their essence and purpose in life. The COVID-19 pandemic forced him to reevaluate and rethink his beliefs. He suggests that the Dharma concept is not prescriptive, but rather a gradual, intentional approach to life. He suggests that by focusing on the essence of their goals and leaving a mark on the world, they can evolve in the right way.  Lessons Learned in Hiring Talent  Andreas shares his lessons in hiring people who are not just like him, but also have different backgrounds, approaches, and styles. He emphasizes that having diverse people around you can lead to better outcomes overall. The biggest lesson learned is to stop thinking about hiring people based on their appearance or experience. Instead, focus on having people with different backgrounds, approaches, and styles that work well together. It's not about being friends or building a nice place to work, but about creating fair and purposeful environments. Another important lesson learned is the importance of communication and truthfulness in venture capital. Building a reputation goes beyond single interactions, and it's never about a single moment. Instead, it's about building value over multiple years, and in many cases, those same founders or employees will go on to other companies. Instead of being transactional, it's crucial to be upfront about what you stand for and what you can help with. Being upfront and admitting that you don't know is difficult, but it's essential for long-term success. Influential Courses and Professors at Harvard Andreas discusses his courses and professors at Harvard that continue to resonate with him, whether it's professional or side interest. He highlights Justice with Michael J. Sandel as the most relevant course, and his computer science classes on algorithms have taught him the ability to think systematically and break down problems in a way that works for him. He plans to spend a chunk of his third act living in Greece, despite being away for nearly 35 years, and he believes that the culture, business outlook, and family connections are all factors that lead to better quality of life.  Timestamps: 02:56 Life phases and prioritizing personal choices in the third act 07:22 Greece's economic crisis and potential for growth 14:06 Board experience and diaspora contributions 19:07 Government work, talent, and motivation 25:10 Human behavior and personal interests 27:58 Personal growth and planning for a successful third act 33:44 Intentional exit from professional firm after 10+ years 39:31 Selecting and working with talented individuals in the venture capital industry 45:28 Retirement, quality of life, and family ties in Greece Links: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/andreasstavropoulos/  

Michael J. Sandel argue que pour surmonter les crises qui bouleversent notre monde, nous devons repenser les attitudes envers le succès et l'échec qui ont accompagné la mondialisation et l'augmentation des inégalités. Sandel montre l'arrogance qu'une méritocratie génère parmi les gagnants et le jugement sévère qu'elle impose à ceux laissés pour compte. Il propose une autre manière de penser le succès - plus attentive au rôle de la chance dans les affaires humaines, plus propice à une éthique d'humilité et de solidarité, et plus affirmant de la dignité du travail.

Para qué discutir, ¡si su amigo Eduardo Mendoza ha dicho que la amnistía no le parece un escándalo tan grande! Es habitual que los políticos ignoren el fondo del Proceso, pero los intelectuales deberían ser más cuidadosos: el problema moral de todo aquello fue que un gobierno instó a unos ciudadanos a levantarse en contra de otros ciudadanos, aquel gusano reptando. Es natural que una empresa privada como El País, por muy socialdemócrata que sea, despida a quien quiera. Incluso, que censure, y al respecto tiene varios ejemplos él mismo. Pero que no hablen de deslealtad. Despedir a Fernando Savater es un acto de censura. Lee que Alabama va a aplicar la pena de muerte a un Smith con el que falló el año pasado la inyección letal. Una atrocidad sobre otra, y solo por ella merecería el perdón: ¿Cómo van a matar ustedes a un hombre dos veces, porque la primera vez no le encontraron la vena? Un país como Estados Unidos no merece tener pena de muerte, como tampoco merece a Trump. Los votantes de Trump se parecen a los de Sánchez: ahora sí saben quién es Trump. Recomendó el nuevo libro de Sophie Coignard contra el de Michael J. Sandel y lamentó haberse perdido el concierto en Madrid de Mayte Martín. Y fue así que Espada yiró   Bibliografía: -       Fernando Savater: Carne gobernada -       Sophie Coignard: La tiranía de la mediocridad. Por qué debemos salvar el mérito -       Stephen King: Mientras escriboSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Radhika Dutt is a renowned author, entrepreneur, and product leader who advises high-tech startups and government agencies on building radical products that drive fundamental change. Join us in our conversation with Radhika as we discuss vision-based goal-setting in the Product field. This episode dives into key topics: (00:17) OKRs in Radical Product Thinking (16:01) Aligning Vision, Strategy, and Measurement (25:51) Clarity in Vision and Motivation Factors (37:32) Radical Product Thinking and Online Resources Highlighted books: *""Atomic Habits"", James Clear: https://jamesclear.com/atomic-habits *""The Tyranny of Merit"", Michael J. Sandel: https://www.amazon.com/Tyranny-Merit-Whats-Become-Common/dp/0374289980 *""Attack Surface"", Cory Doctorow: https://www.amazon.com/Attack-Surface-Cory-Doctorow/dp/1250757533 *""Invisible Women"", Caroline Criado Perez: https://www.amazon.com/Invisible-Women-Data-World-Designed/dp/1419729071 *""Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?"", Philip K. Dick: https://www.amazon.com/Androids-Dream-Electric-Sheep-inspiration/dp/0345404475 Where to find Radhika Dutt: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/radhika-dutt/ Get the free radical Product Thinking Toolkit: https://www.radicalproduct.com/. Where to find us: Website: https://productized.co/ Newsletter: http://bit.ly/3aMvWn2 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/school/produ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/productized.co/ Where to find Margarida: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/margarida-cosme-pereira/

Recibimos a Michael J. Sandel, Premio Princesa de Asturias en Ciencias Sociales 2018, considerado como uno de los filósofos y analistas sociales más prestigiosos de nuestros días en una conversación con la periodista y escritora Berna González Harbour. Con este encuentro arranca del ciclo “El futuro que queremos”, una iniciativa de Fundación Telefónica que nace con la mirada puesta en la celebración del centenario de Telefónica que se celebrará en 2024. Además, forma parte de "Atrévete a Pensar", una serie de conversaciones promovido por las editoriales Taurus y Debate, que pertenecen a Penguin Random House Grupo Editorial, en el que colaboramos en favor de la divulgación del pensamiento crítico. #ImaginaelFuturoQueQueremos #ElFuturoQueQueremos #AtréveteAPensar Puedes verlo en nuestro canal del YouTube en: CASTELLANO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIl8ho6eris INGLÉS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-uRB6TUoCk Más información en: https://espacio.fundaciontelefonica.com/evento/atrevete-a-pensar-el-futuro-que-queremos/ Un nuevo espacio para una nueva cultura: visita el Espacio Fundación Telefónica en pleno corazón de Madrid, en la calle Fuencarral 3. Visítanos y síguenos en: Web: https://espacio.fundaciontelefonica.com/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/EspacioFTef Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/espaciofundaciontef Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/espacioftef/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/CulturaSiglo21

Mamileiros e mamiletes, o que inspira o Mamilos Cultura de hoje é o livro A Tirania do Mérito, de Michael J. Sandel. As democracias liberais estão em risco. E, de acordo com o filósofo Michael J. Sandel, o princípio do mérito, um de seus pilares básicos, é o responsável por esse cenário. A tirania do mérito propõe que para existir uma ética diferente e dignificadora, o sucesso deve ser compreendido em prol da coletividade. Indica que uma alternativa de pensamento guiado pela humildade, pela compreensão do papel do acaso na vida humana e pela criação real da oportunidade poderá ser, então, a melhor bússola para a democracia, para o bem comum. O livro foi publicado no Brasil pela editora Civilização Brasileira em 2020. Pra conversar sobre as reflexões inspiradas pelo livro, Ju Wallauer recebe o advogado e professor Thiago Amparo. Dá o play e vem com a gente! _____ NOVALGINA Se você estiver sentindo aquela dor forte intensa ou febre, não precisa ficar sofrendo esperando passar. Para esses momentos, vale ter Novalgina 1 grama em casa. Ela combate a dor intensa e a febre em minutos. Novalgina é um medicamento à base de dipirona de dupla ação, é analgésico e antitérmico. Além de ser uma marca de confiança, que há mais de 100 anos ajuda a cuidar das famílias brasileiras, é também a mais recomendada pelos médicos. É uma escolha certeira: vale o que custa, vale cada comprimido Acesse novalgina.com.br pra saber mais NOVALGINA® (dipirona monoidratada). Indicação: analgésico e antitérmico. M.S.: 1.8326.0351. O USO DO MEDICAMENTO PODE TRAZER ALGUNS RISCOS. Leia atentamente a bula. SE PERSISTIREM OS SINTOMAS, O MÉDICO DEVERÁ SER CONSULTADO. Junho/2023. MAT-BR-2303214. “combate a dor intensa e a febre em minutos”: 1- Bula Novalgina - profissional de saúde. *Início de ação de 30 a 60 minutos. 2- Ajgaonkar VS, Marathe SN, Virani AR. Dipyrone versus paracetamol: a double-blind study in typhoid fever. J Int Med Res. 1988 May-Jun;16(3):225-30. 3- Tulunay FC et al. The efficacy and safety of dipyrone (Novalgin) tablets in the treatment of acute migraine attacks: a double-blind, cross-over, randomized, placebo-controlled, multi-center study. Funct Neurol. 2004 Jul-Sep;19(3):197-202. “É também a mais recomendada pelos médicos: 4- IQVIA GPS FY'22 – Valores RX – Mercado de Analgésicos OTC _____ FALE CONOSCO . Email: mamilos@b9.com.br _____ CONTRIBUA COM O MAMILOS Quem apoia o Mamilos ajuda a manter o podcast no ar e ainda participa do nosso grupo especial no Telegram. É só R$9,90 por mês! Quem assina não abre mão. https://www.catarse.me/mamilos _____ Equipe Mamilos Mamilos é uma produção do B9 A apresentação é de Cris Bartis e Ju Wallauer. Pra ouvir todos episódios, assine nosso feed ou acesse mamilos.b9.com.br Quem coordenou essa produção foi Beatriz Souza. Com a estrutura de pauta e roteiro escrito por Cris Bartis e Ju Wallauer. A edição foi de Mariana Leão e as trilhas sonoras, de Angie Lopez. A coordenação digital é feita por Agê Barros. O B9 tem direção executiva de Cris Bartis, Ju Wallauer e Carlos Merigo. O atendimento e negócios é feito por Telma Zenaro.

If something is "good" is that good enough? Who decides? In this episode, Bill and Andrew discuss how people define "good," what interchangeability has to do with morale, and the problem with a "merit-based" culture. Bonus: Learn how Americans became the first to use the French idea of interchangeable parts in manufacturing. Note: this episode was previously published as Part 5 in the Awaken Your Inner Deming series.  TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.3 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with Bill Bellows, who has spent 30 years helping people apply Dr. Deming's ideas to become aware of how their thinking is holding them back from their biggest opportunities. The topic for today is, Deming Distinctions: Beyond Looking Good. Bill, take it away. 0:00:30.4 Bill Bellows: Funny you mentioned that. You remind me that I've been at this for over 30 years, and coming up in July, I'll be celebrating 40 years of marriage. Like 30 years, 40, where do these numbers come from? 0:00:44.5 AS: Okay. Yeah. Who defines quality in a marriage, Bill? 0:00:47.0 BB: Alright. 0:00:50.8 AS: Okay, we won't go there. Take us, take it away. 0:00:52.2 BB: We won't go there. So we are gonna talk about who defines quality, and to get into "beyond looking good." As I shared with you, I've listened to each of the podcasts a few times. And before we get into who defines quality, I just wanna provide clarification on some of the things that came up in the first five episodes. And so, one, and I think these are kind of in order, but if they're not in order, okay, well, I made reference to black-and-white thinking versus shades-of-gray thinking. And I called black-and-white thinking - black and white data - category data, and the word I was searching for that just wasn't coming out was attribute data. So for those who are keeping score, attribute data is probably the most relevant statistician term in that regard. 0:01:44.9 BB: Attribute data versus variable data. And what I've made reference to, and we'll talk more in a future session, is looking at things in terms of categories. And categories are black and white, or it could be red, yellow, green, that's three categories, or looking at things on a continuum. So I'm still excited by the difference that comes about by understanding when we're in the black-and-white mode or the category mode or the attribute data mode versus the variable mode, and still have a belief that we can't have continuous improvement or continual improvement if we're stuck in an attribute mode. 0:02:22.9 BB: And more on that later, that's one. I talked about Thomas Jefferson meeting Honoré Blanc and getting excited about the concept of interchangeable parts. And I had the date wrong, that was 1785, if anyone's keeping score there. He was ambassador to France from 1785 to 1789, but it was in 1792 that he wrote a letter to John Jay, who was a...I think he was a Commerce Secretary. Anyway, he was in the administration of Washington and shared the idea. I was doing some research earlier and found out that even with the headstart that Blanc had in France, 'cause back in 1785, Jefferson was invited to this pretty high level meeting in Paris where Blanc took a, I guess, like the trigger mechanism of 50 different rifles. Not the entire rifle, but just the...let's just call it the trigger mechanism with springs and whatnot. And he took the 50 apart and he put all the springs in one box, all the other pieces in their respective boxes and then shook the boxes up and showed that he could just randomly pull a given spring, a given part, and put 'em all together. And that got Jefferson excited. And the...what it meant for Jefferson and the French was not just that you can repair rifles in the battlefield quickly. 0:03:56.9 BB: Now, what it meant for jobs in France was a really big deal, because what the French were liking was all the time it took to repair those guns with craftsmanship, and Blanc alienated a whole bunch of gunsmiths as a result of that. And it turns out, Blanc's effort didn't really go anywhere because there was such a pushback from the gunsmiths, the practicing craftsmanship that jobs would be taken away. But it did come to the States. And then in the early 1800s, it became known as the American System of Production. But credit goes back to Blanc. I also made reference to absolute versus relative interchangeability. And I wanna provide a little bit more clarification there, and I just wanna throw out three numbers, and ideally people can write the numbers down, I'll repeat 'em a few times. The first number is 5.001, second number is 5.999, and the third number is 6.001. So it's 5.001, 5.999, 6.001. And some of what I'm gonna explain will come up again later, but...so this will tie in pretty well. So, what I've been doing is I'll write those three words on the whiteboard or throw them on a screen, and I'll call... 0:05:28.9 AS: Those three numbers. 0:05:31.4 BB: A, B, and C. And I'll say, which two of the three are closest to being the same? And sure enough people will say the 5.999 and the 6.001, which is like B and C. And I say that's the most popular answer, but it's not the only answer. People are like, "well, what other answer are there?" Well, it could be A and C, 5.001 and 6.001, both end in 001. Or it could be the first two, A and B, 5.001 and 5.999. So what I like to point out is, if somebody answers 5.999 and 6.001, then when I say to them, "what is your definition of same?" 0:06:14.9 BB: 'Cause the question is, which two of the three are close to being the same? And it turns out there's three explanations of "same." There's same: they begin with five, there's same: they end in 001. And there's same in terms of proximity to each other. So I just wanna throw that out. Well, then a very common definition of "quality" is to say, does something meet requirements? And that's the black-and-white thinking. I've also explained in the past that requirements are not set in absolute terms. The meeting must start at exactly 1:00, or the thickness must be exactly one inch. What I've explained is that the one inch will have a plus or minus on it. And so let's say the plus and minus gives us two requirements, a minimum of five and a maximum of six. Well, then that means the 5.001 meets requirements and the 5.999 meets requirements. 0:07:15.4 BB: And so in terms of defining quality, in terms of meeting requirements, A and B are both good. And then what about the 5.999 and the 6.001? Well, those numbers are on opposite sides of the upper requirement of six. One's just a little bit to the left and one's a little bit to the right. Then I would ask people, and for some of you, this'll ring - I think you'll be smiling - and I would say to people, "what happens in manufacturing if, Andrew, if I come up with a measurement and it's 6.001?" Okay, relative to defining quality as "meeting requirements," 6.001 does not meet requirements. So what I'll ask people is, "what would a non-Deming company do with a 6.001?" And people will say, "we're gonna take a file out, we're gonna work on it, we're gonna hit it with a hammer." And I say, "no, too much work." And they say, "well, what's the answer?" "We're gonna measure it again." 0:08:25.7 AS: Until we get it right. 0:08:27.7 BB: We will measure it until we get it right. We will change the room temperature. We will take the easiest path. So then I said, get people to realize, they're like, yeah, that's what we do. We measure the 6.001 again. Well, then I say, "well Andrew, why don't we measure the 5.001 again?" And what's the answer to that, Andrew? [laughter] 0:08:51.5 AS: 4.999. [laughter] 0:08:54.7 BB: But what's interesting is, we'll measure the 6.001 again. But we won't measure the 5.001 again. We won't measure the 5.999 again. And so to me, this reinforces that when we define quality as "meeting requirements," that what we're essentially saying in terms of absolute interchangeability, what we're pretending is that there's no difference between the 5.001 and the 5.999. At opposite ends, we're saying that Blanc would find them to be interchangeable, and putting all the things together. I don't think so. 0:09:36.7 BB: I think there's a greater chance that he'd find negligible difference between the 5.999 and the 6.001. And that's what I mean by relative interchangeability, that the difference between B and C is nothing, that's relative interchangeability. The closer they are together, the more alike they are in terms of how they're integrated into the gun, into the rifle, into the downstream product. And I just throw out that what defining quality as "requirements" is saying is that the first two are...the person downstream can't tell the difference. Then I challenge, I think there's...in terms of not telling the difference, I think between 5.999 and 6.001, that difference is minuscule cause they are relatively interchangeable. The other two are implied to be absolutely interchangeable. And that I challenge, that's why I just want to throw that out. All right, another thing I want...go ahead, Andrew. 0:10:38.3 AS: One of the things I just highlight is, I remember from my political science classes at Long Beach State where I studied was The Communist Manifesto came out in 1848. And Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were talking about the alienation of the worker. And what you're talking about is the kind of, the crushing of the craftsmen through interchangeable parts that was a lot like AI coming along and destroying something. And after 50 or 60 or 70 years of interchangeable parts, along comes The Communist Manifesto with the idea that when a person is just dealing with interchangeable parts, basically they're just a cog in the wheel and they have no connection to the aim of what's going on. They don't have any connection, and all of a sudden you lose the craftsmanship or the care for work. And I think that the reason why this is interesting is because that's, I think, a huge part of what Dr. Deming was trying to bring was bring back...it may not be craftsmanship for creating a shoe if you were a shoemaker, but it would be craftsmanship for producing the best you could for the part that you're playing in an ultimate aim of the system. 0:12:02.6 BB: Yes. And yes, and we'll talk more about that. That's brilliant. What you said also reminds me, and I don't think you and I spoke about it, you'll remind me. But have I shared with you the work of a Harvard philosopher by the name of Michael Sandel? 0:12:24.3 AS: I don't recall. 0:12:27.0 BB: He may be, yeah, from a distance, one of the most famous Harvard professors alive today. He's got a course on justice, which is I think 15 two- or three-hour lectures, which were recorded by public television in Boston. Anyway, he wrote a book at the beginning of the pandemic. It came out, it's called The Tyranny of Merit. 0:12:54.0 BB: And "merit" is this belief that "I did it all by myself." That "I deserve what I have because I made it happen. I had no help from you, Andrew. I had no help from the government. I didn't need the education system, the transportation system. I didn't need NASA research. I made it happen all by myself." And he said, what that belief does is it allows those who are successful to claim that they did it by themselves. It allows them to say those who didn't have only themselves to blame. And he sees that as a major destructive force in society, that belief. And I see it tied very well to Deming. Let me give you one anecdote. Dr. Deming was interviewed by Priscilla Petty for The Deming of America documentary, which was absolutely brilliant. 0:13:49.8 BB: And she's at his home, and he's sharing with her the medal he got from the Emperor of Japan, and he's holding it carefully, and I think he gives it to her, and she's looking at it, and she says to him something like, so what did it mean to you to receive that? And he said, "I was lucky. I made a contribution." He didn't say I did it all by myself. He was acknowledging that he was in the right place at the right time to make a contribution. And that's where Sandel is also heavily on, is don't deny the role of being born at the right time in the right situation, which is a greater system in which we are. Well, for one of the college courses, I was watching an interview between Sandel and one of his former students. 0:14:48.1 BB: And the point Sandel made that I wanted to bring up based on what you just said, he says, "what we really need to do is get people dignity in work." And that's what you're talking about, is allowing them to have pride in work, dignity in work instead of as they're making interchangeable parts, having them feel like an interchangeable part. And I'm really glad you brought that up because when we talk later about letter grades, I would bring back one of the reasons I find Deming's work astounding, is that he takes into account psychology in a way that I hope our listeners will really take heart to in a deeper way. 0:15:30.2 AS: And so for the listeners out there, just to reinforce, the book is called The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good. Published in 2020 by Michael Sandel. And the ratings on Amazon is 4.5 out of five with about 2,446 ratings. So it's a pretty well-rated book I'd say. And looks interesting. Now you got me wanting to read that one. 0:15:57.0 BB: Oh what I'll do is I'll send you a... Well, what I encourage our listeners to do is find the interview... Harvard Bookstore did an interview in 2020, 2021, with Michael Sandel being interviewed by his former student by the name of Preet Bharara. [laughter] Who used to be the... 0:16:24.3 AS: SEC... 0:16:24.4 BB: Head of these...no, well, he prosecuted a number of people for SEC crimes, but he headed the Justice Department's long oldest district, which is known as SDNY or the Southern District of New York. And so he was a...in one of the first classes his freshman year at Harvard, Preet Bharara's freshman year at Havard was one of Sandel's first years. And so they had an incredible conversation. So I would encourage the listeners to... 0:16:51.8 AS: Yeah, it's titled: Michael J Sandel with Preet Bharara at Harvard. And the channel is called Harvard Bookstore. 0:16:58.6 BB: Yes, absolutely. All right. So another topic I want to get to in terms of clarification and key points, last time we talked about tools and techniques and what I'm not sure I made much about.... First of all, I just wanna really reinforce that tools and techniques are not concepts and strategies. Tools are like a garden tool I use to dig a hole. Technique is how I go about using it, cleaning it, and whatnot. Not to be confused from a concept...and what is concept? We talked about last time is a concept is an abstract idea and a strategy is how do we apply it? So tools and techniques within Six Sigma quality could be control charts, could be design of experiments. And all, by the way, you're gonna find those tools and techniques within the Deming community. So it's not to say the tools and techniques are the differentiator. 0:17:50.8 BB: I think the concepts and strategies are the differentiators, but I don't wanna downplay tools. Lean has tools in terms of value streams, and you won't find value streams per se in Dr. Deming's work. Dr. Deming looks in terms of production viewed as a system. In a later session, I want to talk about value streams versus Deming's work. But I just wanna point out that I find it...it's easy to get lost in the weeds with all we find within Lean, Six Sigma, Deming and whatnot. And this is why last time I wanted to focus on tools and techniques as separate from concepts and strategies. And what I think we did speak about last time, again, for just as a reminder, is what's unique that we both enjoy with Dr. Deming's work is that KPIs are not caused by individual departments, assigned to individual departments. 0:18:46.0 BB: KPIs are viewed as measures of the overall system. And if you assign the KPIs across the organization and give every different function their own KPI, what you're likely to find - not likely - what you WILL find is that those assigned KPIs are interfering with others' abilities to get their KPIs met. And in the Deming philosophy, you don't have that problem because you understand that things are interdependent, not independent. And so I just wanna close by saying what I find in Deming's work to be most enlightening is this sense of "what does it mean to look at something as a system?" And it means everything is connected to everything else. When you define quality in terms of saying "this is good because it meets requirements," what you've just said is, "this is good in isolation." Whether it's the pass from the quarterback to the wide receiver, saying the pass met requirements. 0:19:52.0 BB: What I think Dr. Deming would ask is, "is the ball catchable?" [laughter] And yet, what I've seen in my aerospace experience is parts being measured for airplanes in Australia that they meet requirements because the measurements are taken early in the morning before the sun has had a chance to heat the part up. And we get the 6.001 is now 5.999. You know what that means, Andrew? It's - we can now ship it. [laughter] 0:20:23.9 BB: And send it off to America for some airplane factory. 0:20:26.2 AS: When we shipped it, that's what it was. 0:20:28.9 BB: Exactly. And so, again, interdependence is everything. Go ahead, Andrew. 0:20:34.6 AS: I wanted to point on, there's a company in Thailand that really has gotten on the KPI bandwagon, and I was talking with some people that work there, and they were just talking about how they've been rolling out the KPIs for the last couple of years and down to the number of seconds that you're on the phone and everything that you do is tracked now. And then I just witnessed that company basically use that KPI as a way to basically knock out a whole group of people that they were trying to get rid of by coming in with tight KPIs and then saying, "you're not keeping up with 'em and therefore you're out." And I just thought...and the manager that was involved I was talking to, you could just see, he saw how KPI can just be weaponized for the purposes of the senior management when you're doing KPIs of individuals. And the thing that I was thinking about is, imagine the CEO of that company in a couple of years, in a couple of months, they happen to listen to this podcast, or they pick up a book of Dr. Deming and they think, "Oh my God, what did I just do over the last five years implementing KPIs down to the individual level?" [laughter] 0:21:48.5 BB: Oh, yeah. And that's what we talked about last time is...as I told you, I had a friend of a friend who's worked for Xerox, and he said there wasn't a KPI that was flowed down that they couldn't find a way to beat. And that's what happens, and you end up getting things done, but what's missing is: at whose expense? All right. So we talked about...now, let's get into beyond looking good, Deming distinctions. Who defines quality? Well, from Philip Crosby's perspective, quality's defined by the...it could be the designer. The designer puts a set of requirements on the component, whatever it is. The unit, the requirements have latitude we talked about. They're not exact. There's a minimum of six, a maximum of...or a minimum of five, maximum of six. 0:22:48.8 BB: There's a range you have to meet, is the traditional view of quality. And in my 30 years of experience, I've not seen quality defined any other way than that. It has to be in between these two values. Sometimes it has to be five or below or six or above, but there's a range. But also what we talked about last time is Dr. Deming said "a product or service possesses quality if it helps someone and enjoys a sustainable market." But what I found profound about that definition, it is not me defining quality and saying, "Andrew, the parts met requirements when I threw it. Now, it's your job to catch it." It's me saying, "I've thrown the ball and you tell me, how did I do? You tell me how did I do?" And if you said, "Bill, if you throw it just a little bit higher, a little bit further out, a little bit faster," that's about synchronicity. Now, I'm realizing that my ability to throw the ball doesn't really matter if you can't catch it. So if I practice in the off season, throwing it faster and faster, but don't clue you in, until the first game, how's that helping? So I've got a KPI to throw it really, really hard. And you're thinking, "how's that helping?" So that's... 0:24:19.9 AS: And can you just go back to that for a second? Quality is on a product or service, you were saying that how Dr. Deming defined that, it helps someone... 0:24:26.7 BB: Yeah. Dr. Deming said "a product or service possesses quality if it helps someone and enjoys a sustainable market." And so my interpretation of that is two things. One is, it's not me delivering a report and saying the report met requirements. It's saying, "I get the report to you, and I ask Andrew, how did I do?" And then you say to me, "I had some problem with this section, I had some problem...." But the important thing is that you become the judge of the quality of the report, not me. And it could be information I provide you with in a lecture. It's you letting me know as a student that you had a hard time with the examples. And I'm thinking, "well, I did a great job." So it's not what I think as the producer handing off to you. It's you giving me the feedback. So quality is not a one-way...in fact, first of all, quality's not defined by the producer. It's defined by the recipients saying, "I love this or not." And so that's one thing I wanna say, and does it enjoy a sustainable market? What I talked about in the past is my interpretation of that is, if I'm bending over backwards to provide incredible quality at an incredible price, and I'm going outta business, then it may be great for you, but it may not be great for me. So it has to be mutually beneficial. I just wanna... Go ahead, Andrew. 0:26:03.1 AS: You referenced the word synchronicity, which the meaning of that according to the dictionary is that "simultaneous occurrence of events which appear significantly related, but had no discernible causal connection." What were you meaning when you were saying synchronicity? Is it this that now you're communicating with the part of the process ahead of you, and they're communicating back to you and all of a sudden you're starting to really work together? Is that what you mean by that? 0:26:33.1 BB: Yeah. When I think of synchronicity, I'm thinking of the fluidity of watching a basketball game where I'm throwing blind passes to the left and to the right and to the observer in the stands are thinking: holy cow. That's what I'm talking about, is the ability that we're sharing information just like those passes in a basketball game where you're...I mean I cannot do that without being incredibly mindful of where you are, what information you need. That's what I meant. That's what I mean. As opposed to - I wait until the number is less than...I'm out there in the hot sun. I get the measurement, 6.001, no, no, no, wait. Now it's five. Where's the synchronicity in that? Am I concerned about how this is helping you, or am I concerned about how do I get this off my plate onto the next person? And I'd also say... 0:27:32.6 AS: Yep. And another word I was thinking about is coordination, the organization of the different elements of a complex body or activity so as to enable them to work together efficiently. You could also say that the state of flow or something like that? 0:27:48.7 BB: I'm glad you brought up the word "together." The big deal is: am I defining quality in a vacuum, or am I doing it with some sense of how this is being used? Which is also something we got into, I think in the, one of the very first podcasts, and you asked me what could our audience...give me an example of how the audience could use this. And I said you're delivering a report to the person down the street, around the corner. Go find out how they use it. I use the example of providing data for my consulting company to my CPA, and I called 'em up one day and I said, "how do you use this information? Maybe I can get it to you in an easier form." That's together. I mean relationships, we talked earlier about marriage, relationships are based on the concept of together, not separate, together. Saying something is good, without understanding how it's used is not about "together." It's about "separate." 0:28:54.1 BB: And so what I find is, in Lean, we look at: how can we get rid of the non-value-added tasks? Who defines value? Or I could say, and Lean folks will talk about the...they'll say this: "eliminate things that don't add value." My response to them is, if you tell me that this activity does not provide value in this room for the next hour, I'm okay with that. If you tell me this activity doesn't add value in this building for the next year, I'm okay with that. But if you don't define the size of the system when you tell me it doesn't add value, then you're implying that it doesn't add value, period. 0:29:43.4 BB: And I say, how do you know that? But this is the thinking, this is what baffles me on the thinking behind Lean and these concepts of non-value-added, value-added activities. I think all activities add value. The only question is where does a value show up? And likewise in Six Sigma quality, which is heavily based on conformist requirements and driving defects to zero, that's defining quality of the parts in isolation. What does that mean, Andrew? Separate. It means separate. Nothing about synchronicity. And so I'm glad you brought that point up because what I...this idea of "together" is throughout the Deming philosophy, a sense of together, defining quality in terms of a relationship. 0:30:31.1 AS: And I remember when I was young, I was working at Pepsi, and they sent me to learn with Dr. Deming. And then I came back, and what I was kind of looking for was tools, thinking that I would...and I came back of course, with something very different, with a new way of thinking. And then I realized that Dr. Deming is so far beyond tools. He's trying to think about how do we optimize this whole system? And once I started learning that about Dr. Deming, I could see the difference. Whereas, you may decide - let's say that you wanna learn about Lean and get a certification in Lean or something like that. 0:31:15.5 AS: Ultimately, you may go down a rabbit hole of a particular tool and become a master in that tool. Nothing wrong with that. But the point is, what is the objective? Who defines the quality? And Dr. Deming clearly stated in the seminars that I was in, and from readings that I've read, that the objective of quality isn't just to improve something in...you could improve something, the quality of something and go out of business. And so there's the bigger objective of it is: how does this serve the needs of our clients? So anyways, that's just some of my memories of those days. 0:31:52.4 BB: Yeah. But you're absolutely right. And the point I'm hoping to bring out in our sessions is: I'm not against tools and techniques. Tools and techniques are incredible. They're time savers, money savers, but let's use them with a sense of connections and relationships. And I agree with you, I've done plenty of seminars where people are coming in - they're all about tools and techniques. Tools and techniques is part of the reason I like to differentiate is to say....and again, I think people are hungrier for tools and techniques. Why? Because I don't think they've come to grips with what concepts and strategies are about. And I'm hoping our listeners can help us...can appreciate that they go together. Tools and techniques are about efficiency, doing things faster, doing things cheaper. Concepts and strategies are about doing the right thing. Ackoff would say "doing the right thing right." And short of that, we end up using tools to make things worse. And that's what I'm hoping people can avoid through the insights we can share from Dr. Deming. 0:33:05.4 AS: And I would say that, would it be the case that applying tools, and tools and techniques is kind of easy? You learn how they work, you practice with them, you measure, you give feedback, but actually going to figure out how we optimize this overall system is just so much harder. It's a complex situation, and I can imagine that there's some people that would retreat to tools and techniques and I saw it in the factory at Pepsi when people would basically just say, "well, I'm just doing my thing." That's it, 'cause it's too much trouble to go out and try to negotiate all of this with everybody. 0:33:50.7 BB: I think in part, I think as long as they're managing parts in isolation, which is the prevailing system of management, then, I agree with you. Becoming aware of interdependencies in the greater system, and I'll also point out is whatever system you're looking at is part of a bigger system, and then again, bigger system, then again, bigger system. What you define is the whole, is part of a bigger system. No matter how you define it, it's part of a bigger system because time goes to infinity. So your 10-year plan, well, why not a 20-year plan? Why not a 30-year plan? So no matter how big a system you look at, there is a bigger system. So let's not get overwhelmed. Let's take a system, which Ackoff would say, take a system which is not too big that you can't manage it, not too small, that you're not really giving it the good effort, but don't lose sight of whatever system you're looking at - you'll begin to realize it is actually bigger than that. Again, what Dr. Deming would say, the bigger the system, the more complicated, which is where you're coming from, but it also offers more opportunities. I think we're so used to tools and techniques. 0:35:14.3 BB: I don't think people have really given thought to the concepts and strategies of Deming's work as opposed to Lean and Six Sigma as being different, which is why I wanted to bring it up with our listeners, because I don't think people are defaulting on the tools. I just don't think they appreciate that concepts and strategies are different than tools and techniques. And I like to have them become aware of that difference and then understand where black-and-white thinking works, where continuum thinking has advantages. There's times to look at things as connected, and then there's times to just move on and make a decision, which is a lot easier because the implications aren't as important. But at least now we get back to choice, be conscious of the choice you're making, and then move on. All right, so also on the list we had, who defines quality? 0:36:09.0 BB: We talked about that. What is meant by good: the requirements are met. Who defines good? Again, if you're looking at Phil Crosby, who defines good? Someone has to set, here are the requirements for being "good." I could be giving a term paper and me saying to the students, this is what "good" means. Next thing I wanted to look at is, "why stop at good?" And, I'm pretty sure we've talked about this. A question I like to ask people is how much time they spend every day in meetings, discussing parts, components, things that are good and going well. And what I find is people don't spend a whole lot of time discussing things that are good and going well. So why do they stop? Why not? Because they're stopping at "good." 0:36:57.1 BB: And that goes back to the black-and-white thinking. They're saying things are "bad" or they're "good." We focus on the bad to make it good, and then we stop at good. Why do we stop at good? Because there's no sense of "better." All right. And what does that mean? So again, we have why stop at good? Why go beyond good? And this is...'cause I think we're talking about really smart people that stop at "good." And I think to better understand what that means, what I like to do is ask people, what's the letter grade required for a company to ship their products to the customer? What letter grade does NASA expect from all their suppliers? And I asked a very senior NASA executive this question years ago. He was the highest ranking NASA executive in the quality field. 0:37:50.5 BB: And I said, "what letter grade do you expect from your contractors?" And he said, A+. A+. And I said, actually, it's not A+. And he is like, "What do you mean?" I said, "actually the letter grade, your requirement is actually D-." And he pushed back at me and I said, what...he says, "well, what do you mean?" I said, "how do you define quality?" And he said, "We define quality as requirements are met. That's what we require." I said, "so you think A+ is the only thing that meets requirements?" He's like, "well, where are you coming from?" I said a pass-fail system, now we get back to category thinking, if it's good or bad, what is good? Good is passing. What is passing? What I explained to him: passing is anything from an A+ down to a D-. 0:38:38.9 BB: And he got a little antsy with me. I said, "well, the alternative is an F, you don't want an F, right?" I said, "well, what you're saying is that you'll take anything but an F and that means your requirements are actually D-." And then when I pushed back and I said, "is a D- the same as an A+?" And he said, "no." I said, "well, that's what I meant earlier" in the conversation with him. And I told him that they weren't interchangeable. So when you begin to realize that black and white quality, Phil Crosby-quality, allows for D minuses to be shipped to customers. Again, in this one way I define quality, I hand it off to you. 'Cause in that world, Andrew, I make the measurement, it's 5.999, it meets requirements, I ship it to you, your only response when you receive it is to say, "thank you." [laughter] 0:39:33.2 BB: For a D minus, right? Well, when you begin to understand relationship quality, then you begin to understand that to improve the relationship, what's behind improving the relationship, Andrew, is shifting from the D- to the A. And what does that mean? What that means is, when I pay attention to your ability to receive what I give you, whether it's the pass or the information, the more synchronously I can provide that, the letter grade is going up, [laughter] and it continues to go up. Now, again, what I'm hoping is that the effort I'm taking to provide you with the A is worthwhile. But that's how you can have continuous improvement, is stop...not stopping at the D minus. 0:40:17.6 BB: Again, there may be situations where D minus is all you really need, but I, that's not me delivering to you a D minus blindly. That's you saying to me, "Hey, I don't need an A+ over here. All I really need is a D minus." That's teamwork, Andrew. So on the one hand, and what I think is, our listeners may not appreciate it, is who defines the letter grade? So in your organization, I would say to people, you give everyone a set of requirements to go meet, what letter grade does each of them has to meet to hand off to a coworker, to another coworker, to a customer? Every single one of those people, all they have to do if they're feeling disenfranchised, as you mentioned earlier, they're feeling like an interchangeable part, well, under those circumstances, Andrew, I don't have to call you up, I just deliver a D minus. And you can't complain because I've met the requirements. 0:41:14.2 BB: So what I think it could be a little scary is to realize, what if everybody in the company comes to work tomorrow feeling no dignity in work and decides to hand off the minimum on every requirement, how does that help? And what I find exciting by Deming's work is that Dr. Deming understood that how people are treated affects their willingness to look up, pay attention to the person they're receiving and deliver to them the appropriate letter grade. So I'm hoping that helps our audience understand that if it's a black and white system, then we're saying that it's good or it's bad. What that misses is, keyword Andrew, variation in good. So the opportunities to improve when we realize that there's a range, that "good" has variation. Another point I wanna make is, what allows the Deming philosophy to go beyond looking good? 0:42:16.2 BB: Well, if you look at the last chapter 10, I think, yeah, chapter 10 of the New Economics is...like the last six pages of the New Economics is all about Dr. Taguchi's work, and it's what Dr. Deming learned from Dr. Taguchi about this very thought of looking at quality in terms of relationships, not just in isolation, Phil Crosby-style meeting requirements. And the last thing I wanna throw out is I was listening to a interview with Russ Ackoff earlier today, and he gave the three steps to being creative. This is a lecture he gave at Rocketdyne years ago. And he said, the first thing is you have to discover self-limiting constraints. Second, you have to remove the constraint. And third, you have to exploit that removal. And what I want to close on is what Deming is talking about is the self-limiting constraint is when we stop at good. [laughter] 0:43:20.7 BB: And I'm hoping that this episode provides more insights as to the self-imposed constraint within our organizations to stop at "good." What happens when we go beyond that? And how do you go beyond that? By looking at how others receive your work and then expand that others and expand that others and expand that others. And then what I find exciting is, and the work I do with students and with clients is, how can we exploit every day that idea of synchronicity of quality, and not looking at quality from a category perspective? Again, unless that's all that's needed in that situation. So I don't want to throw out category thinking, use category thinking where it makes sense, use continuum thinking where it makes sense. So that's what I wanted to close with. 0:44:12.1 AS: Bill, on behalf of everyone at The Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for this discussion. For listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'm gonna leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, and it's very appropriate for the discussion that we've had today. "People are entitled to joy in work."  

Sandels jetzt in aktualisierter Form erscheinender Klassiker der Neoliberalismus-Kritik aus dem Jahr 1996 ist ein Schlüsseltext für das Verständnis des wachsenden Unbehagens an der Demokratie in liberalen kapitalistischen Gesellschaften. Eine akribische Analyse der Erosion von Gemeinwohlorientierung und zivigesellschaftlichen Perspektiven in der politischen Ökonomie der USA. Rezension von Anselm Weidner. Aus dem Englischen von Helmut Reuter S. Fischer Verlag, 512 Seiten, 32 Euro ISBN 978-3-10-397498-0

If something is "good" is that good enough? Who decides? In this episode, Bill and Andrew discuss how people define "good," what interchangeability has to do with morale, and the problem with a "merit-based" culture. Bonus: Bill gives us a short history lesson on how Americans became the first to manufacture using interchangeable parts even though the originator was a Frenchman. 0:00:02.3 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with Bill Bellows, who has spent 30 years helping people apply Dr. Deming's ideas to become aware of how their thinking is holding them back from their biggest opportunities. The topic for today is, Deming Distinctions: Beyond Looking Good. Bill, take it away.   0:00:30.4 Bill Bellows: Funny you mentioned that. You remind me that I've been at this for over 30 years, and coming up in July, I'll be celebrating 40 years of marriage. Like 30 years, 40, where do these numbers come from?   0:00:44.5 AS: Okay. Yeah. Who defines quality in a marriage, Bill?   0:00:47.0 BB: Alright.   0:00:50.8 AS: Okay, we won't go there. Take us, take it away.   0:00:52.2 BB: We won't go there. So we are gonna talk about who defines quality, and to get into "beyond looking good." As I shared with you, I've listened to each of the podcasts a few times. And before we get into who defines quality, I just wanna provide clarification on some of the things that came up in the first five episodes. And so, one, and I think these are kind of in order, but if they're not in order, okay, well, I made reference to black-and-white thinking versus shades-of-gray thinking. And I called black-and-white thinking - black and white data - category data, and the word I was searching for that just wasn't coming out was attribute data. So for those who are keeping score, attribute data is probably the most relevant statistician term in that regard.   0:01:44.9 BB: Attribute data versus variable data. And what I've made reference to, and we'll talk more in a future session, is looking at things in terms of categories. And categories are black and white, or it could be red, yellow, green, that's three categories, or looking at things on a continuum. So I'm still excited by the difference that comes about by understanding when we're in the black-and-white mode or the category mode or the attribute data mode versus the variable mode, and still have a belief that we can't have continuous improvement or continual improvement if we're stuck in an attribute mode.   0:02:22.9 BB: And more on that later, that's one. I talked about Thomas Jefferson meeting Honoré Blanc and getting excited about the concept of interchangeable parts. And I had the date wrong, that was 1785, if anyone's keeping score there. He was ambassador to France from 1785 to 1789, but it was in 1792 that he wrote a letter to John Jay, who was a...I think he was a Commerce Secretary. Anyway, he was in the administration of Washington and shared the idea. I was doing some research earlier and found out that even with the headstart that Blanc had in France, 'cause back in 1785, Jefferson was invited to this pretty high level meeting in Paris where Blanc took a, I guess, like the trigger mechanism of 50 different rifles. Not the entire rifle, but just the...let's just call it the trigger mechanism with springs and whatnot. And he took the 50 apart and he put all the springs in one box, all the other pieces in their respective boxes and then shook the boxes up and showed that he could just randomly pull a given spring, a given part, and put 'em all together. And that got Jefferson excited. And the...what it meant for Jefferson and the French was not just that you can repair rifles in the battlefield quickly.   0:03:56.9 BB: Now, what it meant for jobs in France was a really big deal, because what the French were liking was all the time it took to repair those guns with craftsmanship, and Blanc alienated a whole bunch of gunsmiths as a result of that. And it turns out, Blanc's effort didn't really go anywhere because there was such a pushback from the gunsmiths, the practicing craftsmanship that jobs would be taken away. But it did come to the States. And then in the early 1800s, it became known as the American System of Production. But credit goes back to Blanc. I also made reference to absolute versus relative interchangeability. And I wanna provide a little bit more clarification there, and I just wanna throw out three numbers, and ideally people can write the numbers down, I'll repeat 'em a few times. The first number is 5.001, second number is 5.999, and the third number is 6.001. So it's 5.001, 5.999, 6.001. And some of what I'm gonna explain will come up again later, but...so this will tie in pretty well. So, what I've been doing is I'll write those three words on the whiteboard or throw them on a screen, and I'll call...   0:05:28.9 AS: Those three numbers.   0:05:31.4 BB: A, B, and C. And I'll say, which two of the three are closest to being the same? And sure enough people will say the 5.999 and the 6.001, which is like B and C. And I say that's the most popular answer, but it's not the only answer. People are like, "well, what other answer are there?" Well, it could be A and C, 5.001 and 6.001, both end in 001. Or it could be the first two, A and B, 5.001 and 5.999. So what I like to point out is, if somebody answers 5.999 and 6.001, then when I say to them, "what is your definition of same?"   0:06:14.9 BB: 'Cause the question is, which two of the three are close to being the same? And it turns out there's three explanations of "same." There's same: they begin with five, there's same: they end in 001. And there's same in terms of proximity to each other. So I just wanna throw that out. Well, then a very common definition of "quality" is to say, does something meet requirements? And that's the black-and-white thinking. I've also explained in the past that requirements are not set in absolute terms. The meeting must start at exactly 1:00, or the thickness must be exactly one inch. What I've explained is that the one inch will have a plus or minus on it. And so let's say the plus and minus gives us two requirements, a minimum of five and a maximum of six. Well, then that means the 5.001 meets requirements and the 5.999 meets requirements.   0:07:15.4 BB: And so in terms of defining quality, in terms of meeting requirements, A and B are both good. And then what about the 5.999 and the 6.001? Well, those numbers are on opposite sides of the upper requirement of six. One's just a little bit to the left and one's a little bit to the right. Then I would ask people, and for some of you, this'll ring - I think you'll be smiling - and I would say to people, "What happens in manufacturing if, Andrew, if I come up with a measurement and it's 6.001?" Okay, relative to defining quality as "meeting requirements," 6.001 does not meet requirements. So what I'll ask people is, "what would a non-Deming company do with a 6.001?" And people will say, "We're gonna take a file out, we're gonna work on it, we're gonna hit it with a hammer." And I say, "No, too much work." And they say, "Well, what's the answer?" "We're gonna measure it again."   0:08:25.7 AS: Until we get it right.   0:08:27.7 BB: We will measure it until we get it right. We will change the room temperature. We will take the easiest path. So then I said, get people to realize, they're like, yeah, that's what we do. We measure the 6.001 again. Well, then I say, "Well Andrew, why don't we measure the 5.001 again?" And what's the answer to that, Andrew? [laughter]   0:08:51.5 AS: 4.999. [laughter]   0:08:54.7 BB: But what's interesting is, we'll measure the 6.001 again. But we won't measure the 5.001 again. We won't measure the 5.999 again. And so to me, this reinforces that when we define quality as "meeting requirements," that what we're essentially saying in terms of absolute interchangeability, what we're pretending is that there's no difference between the 5.001 and the 5.999. At opposite ends, we're saying that Blanc would find them to be interchangeable, and putting all the things together. I don't think so.   0:09:36.7 BB: I think there's a greater chance that he'd find negligible difference between the 5.999 and the 6.001. And that's what I mean by relative interchangeability, that the difference between B and C is nothing, that's relative interchangeability. The closer they are together, the more alike they are in terms of how they're integrated into the gun, into the rifle, into the downstream product. And I just throw out that what defining quality as "requirements" is saying is that the first two are...the person downstream can't tell the difference. Then I challenge, I think there's...in terms of not telling the difference, I think between 5.999 and 6.001, that difference is minuscule cause they are relatively interchangeable. The other two are implied to be absolutely interchangeable. And that I challenge, that's why I just want to throw that out. All right, another thing I want...go ahead, Andrew.   0:10:38.3 AS: One of the things I just highlight is, I remember from my political science classes at Long Beach State where I studied was The Communist Manifesto came out in 1848. And Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were talking about the alienation of the worker. And what you're talking about is the kind of, the crushing of the craftsmen through interchangeable parts that was a lot like AI coming along and destroying something. And after 50 or 60 or 70 years of interchangeable parts, along comes The Communist Manifesto with the idea that when a person is just dealing with interchangeable parts, basically they're just a cog in the wheel and they have no connection to the aim of what's going on. They don't have any connection, and all of a sudden you lose the craftsmanship or the care for work. And I think that the reason why this is interesting is because that's, I think, a huge part of what Dr. Deming was trying to bring was bring back...it may not be craftsmanship for creating a shoe if you were a shoemaker, but it would be craftsmanship for producing the best you could for the part that you're playing in an ultimate aim of the system.   0:12:02.6 BB: Yes. And yes, and we'll talk more about that. That's brilliant. What you said also reminds me, and I don't think you and I spoke about it, you'll remind me. But have I shared with you the work of a Harvard philosopher by the name of Michael Sandel?   0:12:24.3 AS: I don't recall.   0:12:27.0 BB: He may be, yeah, from a distance, one of the most famous Harvard professors alive today. He's got a course on justice, which is I think 15 two- or three-hour lectures, which were recorded by public television in Boston. Anyway, he wrote a book at the beginning of the pandemic. It came out, it's called The Tyranny of Merit.   0:12:54.0 BB: And "merit" is this belief that "I did it all by myself." That "I deserve what I have because I made it happen. I had no help from you, Andrew. I had no help from the government. I didn't need the education system, the transportation system. I didn't need NASA research. I made it happen all by myself." And he said, what that belief does is it allows those who are successful to claim that they did it by themselves. It allows them to say those who didn't have only themselves to blame. And he sees that as a major destructive force in society, that belief. And I see it tied very well to Deming. Let me give you one anecdote. Dr. Deming was interviewed by Priscilla Petty for The Deming of America documentary, which was absolutely brilliant.   0:13:49.8 BB: And she's at his home, and he's sharing with her the medal he got from the Emperor of Japan, and he's holding it carefully, and I think he gives it to her, and she's looking at it, and she says to him something like, so what did it mean to you to receive that? And he said, "I was lucky. I made a contribution." He didn't say I did it all by myself. He was acknowledging that he was in the right place at the right time to make a contribution. And that's where Sandel is also heavily on, is don't deny the role of being born at the right time in the right situation, which is a greater system in which we are. Well, for one of the college courses, I was watching an interview between Sandel and one of his former students.   0:14:48.1 BB: And the point Sandel made that I wanted to bring up based on what you just said, he says, "what we really need to do is get people dignity in work." And that's what you're talking about, is allowing them to have pride in work, dignity in work instead of as they're making interchangeable parts, having them feel like an interchangeable part. And I'm really glad you brought that up because when we talk later about letter grades, I would bring back one of the reasons I find Deming's work astounding, is that he takes into account psychology in a way that I hope our listeners will really take heart to in a deeper way.   0:15:30.2 AS: And so for the listeners out there, just to reinforce, the book is called The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good. Published in 2020 by Michael Sandel. And the ratings on Amazon is 4.5 out of five with about 2,446 ratings. So it's a pretty well-rated book I'd say. And looks interesting. Now you got me wanting to read that one.   0:15:57.0 BB: Oh what I'll do is I'll send you a... Well, what I encourage our listeners to do is find the interview... Harvard Bookstore did an interview in 2020, 2021, with Michael Sandel being interviewed by his former student by the name of Preet Bharara. [laughter] Who used to be the...   0:16:24.3 AS: SEC...   0:16:24.4 BB: Head of these...no, well, he prosecuted a number of people for SEC crimes, but he headed the Justice Department's long oldest district, which is known as SDNY or the Southern District of New York. And so he was a...in one of the first classes his freshman year at Harvard, Preet Bharara's freshman year at Havard was one of Sandel's first years. And so they had an incredible conversation. So I would encourage the listeners to...   0:16:51.8 AS: Yeah, it's titled: Michael J Sandel with Preet Bharara at Harvard. And the channel is called Harvard Bookstore.   0:16:58.6 BB: Yes, absolutely. All right. So another topic I want to get to in terms of clarification and key points, last time we talked about tools and techniques and what I'm not sure I made much about.... First of all, I just wanna really reinforce that tools and techniques are not concepts and strategies. Tools are like a garden tool I use to dig a hole. Technique is how I go about using it, cleaning it, and whatnot. Not to be confused from a concept...and what is concept? We talked about last time is a concept is an abstract idea and a strategy is how do we apply it? So tools and techniques within Six Sigma quality could be control charts, could be design of experiments. And all, by the way, you're gonna find those tools and techniques within the Deming community. So it's not to say the tools and techniques are the differentiator.   0:17:50.8 BB: I think the concepts and strategies are the differentiators, but I don't wanna downplay tools. Lean has tools in terms of value streams, and you won't find value streams per se in Dr. Deming's work. Dr. Deming looks in terms of production viewed as a system. In a later session, I want to talk about value streams versus Deming's work. But I just wanna point out that I find it...it's easy to get lost in the weeds with all we find within Lean, Six Sigma, Deming and whatnot. And this is why last time I wanted to focus on tools and techniques as separate from concepts and strategies. And what I think we did speak about last time, again, for just as a reminder, is what's unique that we both enjoy with Dr. Deming's work is that KPIs are not caused by individual departments, assigned to individual departments.   0:18:46.0 BB: KPIs are viewed as measures of the overall system. And if you assign the KPIs across the organization and give every different function their own KPI, what you're likely to find - not likely - what you WILL find is that those assigned KPIs are interfering with others' abilities to get their KPIs met. And in the Deming philosophy, you don't have that problem because you understand that things are interdependent, not independent. And so I just wanna close by saying what I find in Deming's work to be most enlightening is this sense of "what does it mean to look at something as a system?" And it means everything is connected to everything else. When you define quality in terms of saying "this is good because it meets requirements," what you've just said is, "this is good in isolation." Whether it's the pass from the quarterback to the wide receiver, saying the pass met requirements.   0:19:52.0 BB: What I think Dr. Deming would ask is, "is the ball catchable?" [laughter] And yet, what I've seen in my aerospace experience is parts being measured for airplanes in Australia that they meet requirements because the measurements are taken early in the morning before the sun has had a chance to heat the part up. And we get the 6.001 is now 5.999. You know what that means, Andrew? It's - we can now ship it.   [laughter]   0:20:23.9 BB: And send it off to America for some airplane factory.   0:20:26.2 AS: When we shipped it, that's what it was.   0:20:28.9 BB: Exactly. And so, again, interdependence is everything. Go ahead, Andrew.   0:20:34.6 AS: I wanted to point on, there's a company in Thailand that really has gotten on the KPI bandwagon, and I was talking with some people that work there, and they were just talking about how they've been rolling out the KPIs for the last couple of years and down to the number of seconds that you're on the phone and everything that you do is tracked now. And then I just witnessed that company basically use that KPI as a way to basically knock out a whole group of people that they were trying to get rid of by coming in with tight KPIs and then saying, "you're not keeping up with 'em and therefore you're out." And I just thought...and the manager that was involved I was talking to, you could just see, he saw how KPI can just be weaponized for the purposes of the senior management when you're doing KPIs of individuals. And the thing that I was thinking about is, imagine the CEO of that company in a couple of years, in a couple of months, they happen to listen to this podcast, or they pick up a book of Dr. Deming and they think, "Oh my God, what did I just do over the last five years implementing KPIs down to the individual level?" [laughter]   0:21:48.5 BB: Oh, yeah. And that's what we talked about last time is...as I told you, I had a friend of a friend who's worked for Xerox, and he said there wasn't a KPI that was flowed down that they couldn't find a way to beat. And that's what happens, and you end up getting things done, but what's missing is: at whose expense? All right. So we talked about...now, let's get into beyond looking good, Deming distinctions. Who defines quality? Well, from Philip Crosby's perspective, quality's defined by the...it could be the designer. The designer puts a set of requirements on the component, whatever it is. The unit, the requirements have latitude we talked about. They're not exact. There's a minimum of six, a maximum of...or a minimum of five, maximum of six.   0:22:48.8 BB: There's a range you have to meet, is the traditional view of quality. And in my 30 years of experience, I've not seen quality defined any other way than that. It has to be in between these two values. Sometimes it has to be five or below or six or above, but there's a range. But also what we talked about last time is Dr. Deming said "a product or service possesses quality if it helps someone and enjoys a sustainable market." But what I found profound about that definition, it is not me defining quality and saying, "Andrew, the parts met requirements when I threw it. Now, it's your job to catch it." It's me saying, "I've thrown the ball and you tell me, how did I do? You tell me how did I do?" And if you said, "Bill, if you throw it just a little bit higher, a little bit further out, a little bit faster," that's about synchronicity. Now, I'm realizing that my ability to throw the ball doesn't really matter if you can't catch it. So if I practice in the off season, throwing it faster and faster, but don't clue you in, until the first game, how's that helping? So I've got a KPI to throw it really, really hard. And you're thinking, "how's that helping?" So that's...   0:24:19.9 AS: And can you just go back to that for a second? Quality is on a product or service, you were saying that how Dr. Deming defined that, it helps someone...   0:24:26.7 BB: Yeah. Dr. Deming said "a product or service possesses quality if it helps someone and enjoys a sustainable market." And so my interpretation of that is two things. One is, it's not me delivering a report and saying the report met requirements. It's saying, "I get the report to you, and I ask Andrew, how did I do?" And then you say to me, "I had some problem with this section, I had some problem...." But the important thing is that you become the judge of the quality of the report, not me. And it could be information I provide you with in a lecture. It's you letting me know as a student that you had a hard time with the examples. And I'm thinking, "well, I did a great job." So it's not what I think as the producer handing off to you. It's you giving me the feedback. So quality is not a one-way...in fact, first of all, quality's not defined by the producer. It's defined by the recipients saying, "I love this or not." And so that's one thing I wanna say, and does it enjoy a sustainable market? What I talked about in the past is my interpretation of that is, if I'm bending over backwards to provide incredible quality at an incredible price, and I'm going outta business, then it may be great for you, but it may not be great for me. So it has to be mutually beneficial. I just wanna... Go ahead, Andrew.   0:26:03.1 AS: You referenced the word synchronicity, which the meaning of that according to the dictionary is that "simultaneous occurrence of events which appear significantly related, but had no discernible causal connection." What were you meaning when you were saying synchronicity? Is it this that now you're communicating with the part of the process ahead of you, and they're communicating back to you and all of a sudden you're starting to really work together? Is that what you mean by that?   0:26:33.1 BB: Yeah. When I think of synchronicity, I'm thinking of the fluidity of watching a basketball game where I'm throwing blind passes to the left and to the right and to the observer in the stands are thinking: holy cow. That's what I'm talking about, is the ability that we're sharing information just like those passes in a basketball game where you're...I mean I cannot do that without being incredibly mindful of where you are, what information you need. That's what I meant. That's what I mean. As opposed to - I wait until the number is less than...I'm out there in the hot sun. I get the measurement, 6.001, no, no, no, wait. Now it's five. Where's the synchronicity in that? Am I concerned about how this is helping you, or am I concerned about how do I get this off my plate onto the next person? And I'd also say...   0:27:32.6 AS: Yep. And another word I was thinking about is coordination, the organization of the different elements of a complex body or activity so as to enable them to work together efficiently. You could also say that the state of flow or something like that?   0:27:48.7 BB: I'm glad you brought up the word "together." The big deal is: am I defining quality in a vacuum, or am I doing it with some sense of how this is being used? Which is also something we got into, I think in the, one of the very first podcasts, and you asked me what could our audience...give me an example of how the audience could use this. And I said you're delivering a report to the person down the street, around the corner. Go find out how they use it. I use the example of providing data for my consulting company to my CPA, and I called 'em up one day and I said, "how do you use this information? Maybe I can get it to you in an easier form." That's together. I mean relationships, we talked earlier about marriage, relationships are based on the concept of together, not separate, together. Saying something is good, without understanding how it's used is not about "together." It's about "separate."   0:28:54.1 BB: And so what I find is, in Lean, we look at: how can we get rid of the non-value-added tasks? Who defines value? Or I could say, and Lean folks will talk about the...they'll say this: "eliminate things that don't add value." My response to them is, if you tell me that this activity does not provide value in this room for the next hour, I'm okay with that. If you tell me this activity doesn't add value in this building for the next year, I'm okay with that. But if you don't define the size of the system when you tell me it doesn't add value, then you're implying that it doesn't add value, period.   0:29:43.4 BB: And I say, how do you know that? But this is the thinking, this is what baffles me on the thinking behind Lean and these concepts of non-value-added, value-added activities. I think all activities add value. The only question is where does a value show up? And likewise in Six Sigma quality, which is heavily based on conformist requirements and driving defects to zero, that's defining quality of the parts in isolation. What does that mean, Andrew? Separate. It means separate. Nothing about synchronicity. And so I'm glad you brought that point up because what I...this idea of "together" is throughout the Deming philosophy, a sense of together, defining quality in terms of a relationship.   0:30:31.1 AS: And I remember when I was young, I was working at Pepsi, and they sent me to learn with Dr. Deming. And then I came back, and what I was kind of looking for was tools, thinking that I would...and I came back of course, with something very different, with a new way of thinking. And then I realized that Dr. Deming is so far beyond tools. He's trying to think about how do we optimize this whole system? And once I started learning that about Dr. Deming, I could see the difference. Whereas, you may decide - let's say that you wanna learn about Lean and get a certification in Lean or something like that.   0:31:15.5 AS: Ultimately, you may go down a rabbit hole of a particular tool and become a master in that tool. Nothing wrong with that. But the point is, what is the objective? Who defines the quality? And Dr. Deming clearly stated in the seminars that I was in, and from readings that I've read, that the objective of quality isn't just to improve something in...you could improve something, the quality of something and go out of business. And so there's the bigger objective of it is: how does this serve the needs of our clients? So anyways, that's just some of my memories of those days.   0:31:52.4 BB: Yeah. But you're absolutely right. And the point I'm hoping to bring out in our sessions is: I'm not against tools and techniques. Tools and techniques are incredible. They're time savers, money savers, but let's use them with a sense of connections and relationships. And I agree with you, I've done plenty of seminars where people are coming in - they're all about tools and techniques. Tools and techniques is part of the reason I like to differentiate is to say....and again, I think people are hungrier for tools and techniques. Why? Because I don't think they've come to grips with what concepts and strategies are about. And I'm hoping our listeners can help us...can appreciate that they go together. Tools and techniques are about efficiency, doing things faster, doing things cheaper. Concepts and strategies are about doing the right thing. Ackoff would say "doing the right thing right." And short of that, we end up using tools to make things worse. And that's what I'm hoping people can avoid through the insights we can share from Dr. Deming.   0:33:05.4 AS: And I would say that, would it be the case that applying tools, and tools and techniques is kind of easy? You learn how they work, you practice with them, you measure, you give feedback, but actually going to figure out how we optimize this overall system is just so much harder. It's a complex situation, and I can imagine that there's some people that would retreat to tools and techniques and I saw it in the factory at Pepsi when people would basically just say, "well, I'm just doing my thing." That's it, 'cause it's too much trouble to go out and try to negotiate all of this with everybody.   0:33:50.7 BB: I think in part, I think as long as they're managing parts in isolation, which is the prevailing system of management, then, I agree with you. Becoming aware of interdependencies in the greater system, and I'll also point out is whatever system you're looking at is part of a bigger system, and then again, bigger system, then again, bigger system. What you define is the whole, is part of a bigger system. No matter how you define it, it's part of a bigger system because time goes to infinity. So your 10-year plan, well, why not a 20-year plan? Why not a 30-year plan? So no matter how big a system you look at, there is a bigger system. So let's not get overwhelmed. Let's take a system, which Ackoff would say, take a system which is not too big that you can't manage it, not too small, that you're not really giving it the good effort, but don't lose sight of whatever system you're looking at - you'll begin to realize it is actually bigger than that. Again, what Dr. Deming would say, the bigger the system, the more complicated, which is where you're coming from, but it also offers more opportunities. I think we're so used to tools and techniques.   0:35:14.3 BB: I don't think people have really given thought to the concepts and strategies of Deming's work as opposed to Lean and Six Sigma as being different, which is why I wanted to bring it up with our listeners, because I don't think people are defaulting on the tools. I just don't think they appreciate that concepts and strategies are different than tools and techniques. And I like to have them become aware of that difference and then understand where black-and-white thinking works, where continuum thinking has advantages. There's times to look at things as connected, and then there's times to just move on and make a decision, which is a lot easier because the implications aren't as important. But at least now we get back to choice, be conscious of the choice you're making, and then move on. All right, so also on the list we had, who defines quality?   0:36:09.0 BB: We talked about that. What is meant by good: the requirements are met. Who defines good? Again, if you're looking at Phil Crosby, who defines good? Someone has to set, here are the requirements for being "good." I could be giving a term paper and me saying to the students, this is what "good" means. Next thing I wanted to look at is, "why stop at good?" And, I'm pretty sure we've talked about this. A question I like to ask people is how much time they spend every day in meetings, discussing parts, components, things that are good and going well. And what I find is people don't spend a whole lot of time discussing things that are good and going well. So why do they stop? Why not? Because they're stopping at "good."   0:36:57.1 BB: And that goes back to the black-and-white thinking. They're saying things are "bad" or they're "good." We focus on the bad to make it good, and then we stop at good. Why do we stop at good? Because there's no sense of "better." All right. And what does that mean? So again, we have why stop at good? Why go beyond good? And this is...'cause I think we're talking about really smart people that stop at "good." And I think to better understand what that means, what I like to do is ask people, what's the letter grade required for a company to ship their products to the customer? What letter grade does NASA expect from all their suppliers? And I asked a very senior NASA executive this question years ago. He was the highest ranking NASA executive in the quality field.   0:37:50.5 BB: And I said, "what letter grade do you expect from your contractors?" And he said, A+. A+. And I said, actually, it's not A+. And he is like, "What do you mean?" I said, "actually the letter grade, your requirement is actually D-." And he pushed back at me and I said, what...he says, "well, what do you mean?" I said, "how do you define quality?" And he said, "We define quality as requirements are met. That's what we require." I said, "so you think A+ is the only thing that meets requirements?" He's like, "well, where are you coming from?" I said a pass-fail system, now we get back to category thinking, if it's good or bad, what is good? Good is passing. What is passing? What I explained to him: passing is anything from an A+ down to a D-.   0:38:38.9 BB: And he got a little antsy with me. I said, "well, the alternative is an F, you don't want an F, right?" I said, "well, what you're saying is that you'll take anything but an F and that means your requirements are actually D-." And then when I pushed back and I said, "is a D- the same as an A+?" And he said, "no." I said, "well, that's what I meant earlier" in the conversation with him. And I told him that they weren't interchangeable. So when you begin to realize that black and white quality, Phil Crosby-quality, allows for D minuses to be shipped to customers. Again, in this one way I define quality, I hand it off to you. 'Cause in that world, Andrew, I make the measurement, it's 5.999, it meets requirements, I ship it to you, your only response when you receive it is to say, "thank you."   [laughter]   0:39:33.2 BB: For a D minus, right? Well, when you begin to understand relationship quality, then you begin to understand that to improve the relationship, what's behind improving the relationship, Andrew, is shifting from the D- to the A. And what does that mean? What that means is, when I pay attention to your ability to receive what I give you, whether it's the pass or the information, the more synchronously I can provide that, the letter grade is going up, [laughter] and it continues to go up. Now, again, what I'm hoping is that the effort I'm taking to provide you with the A is worthwhile. But that's how you can have continuous improvement, is stop...not stopping at the D minus.   0:40:17.6 BB: Again, there may be situations where D minus is all you really need, but I, that's not me delivering to you a D minus blindly. That's you saying to me, "Hey, I don't need an A+ over here. All I really need is a D minus." That's teamwork, Andrew. So on the one hand, and what I think is, our listeners may not appreciate it, is who defines the letter grade? So in your organization, I would say to people, you give everyone a set of requirements to go meet, what letter grade does each of them has to meet to hand off to a coworker, to another coworker, to a customer? Every single one of those people, all they have to do if they're feeling disenfranchised, as you mentioned earlier, they're feeling like an interchangeable part, well, under those circumstances, Andrew, I don't have to call you up, I just deliver a D minus. And you can't complain because I've met the requirements.   0:41:14.2 BB: So what I think it could be a little scary is to realize, what if everybody in the company comes to work tomorrow feeling no dignity in work and decides to hand off the minimum on every requirement, how does that help? And what I find exciting by Deming's work is that Dr. Deming understood that how people are treated affects their willingness to look up, pay attention to the person they're receiving and deliver to them the appropriate letter grade. So I'm hoping that helps our audience understand that if it's a black and white system, then we're saying that it's good or it's bad. What that misses is, keyword Andrew, variation in good. So the opportunities to improve when we realize that there's a range, that "good" has variation. Another point I wanna make is, what allows the Deming philosophy to go beyond looking good?   0:42:16.2 BB: Well, if you look at the last chapter 10, I think, yeah, chapter 10 of the New Economics is...like the last six pages of the New Economics is all about Dr. Taguchi's work, and it's what Dr. Deming learned from Dr. Taguchi about this very thought of looking at quality in terms of relationships, not just in isolation, Phil Crosby-style meeting requirements. And the last thing I wanna throw out is I was listening to a interview with Russ Ackoff earlier today, and he gave the three steps to being creative. This is a lecture he gave at Rocketdyne years ago. And he said, the first thing is you have to discover self-limiting constraints. Second, you have to remove the constraint. And third, you have to exploit that removal. And what I want to close on is what Deming is talking about is the self-limiting constraint is when we stop at good.   [laughter]   0:43:20.7 BB: And I'm hoping that this episode provides more insights as to the self-imposed constraint within our organizations to stop at "good." What happens when we go beyond that? And how do you go beyond that? By looking at how others receive your work and then expand that others and expand that others and expand that others. And then what I find exciting is, and the work I do with students and with clients is, how can we exploit every day that idea of synchronicity of quality, and not looking at quality from a category perspective? Again, unless that's all that's needed in that situation. So I don't want to throw out category thinking, use category thinking where it makes sense, use continuum thinking where it makes sense. So that's what I wanted to close with.   0:44:12.1 AS: Bill, on behalf of everyone at The Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for this discussion. For listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'm gonna leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, and it's very appropriate for the discussion that we've had today. "People are entitled to joy in work."  

In this episode of 92Y Talks, join renowned political philosopher and Harvard University professor Michael J. Sandel and David Brooks, accomplished New York Times columnist and commentator, for an exploration of the new edition of Sandel's book Democracy's Discontent, which addresses the perils democracy confronts today. Now, a quarter century later, Sandel updates his classic work for an age when democracy's discontent has hardened into a country divided against itself. He shows how Democrats and Republicans alike embraced a version of finance-driven globalization that created a society of winners and losers and fueled the toxic politics of our time. In a stirring new epilogue, Sandel argues the necessity of reconfiguring the economy and empowering citizens. The conversation was streamed live as part of The 92nd Street Y, New York's online talks series on December 1st, 2022.

Capitulo 69 de Negocios de Otro Planeta discutiendo y conversando sobre la Tiranía del Merito, este capitulo esta basado en el libro del mismo nombre de Michael J. Sandel y un hilo en Twitter desarrollado por el psiquiatra Pablo Malo. La Meritocracia tiene un lado bueno y otro negativo, hablemos de ambos y discutamos una visión diferente de este tema. Si quieren seguir reflexionando conmigo los invito todos los lunes a escucharme ;) Link de la noticia https://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias-55825871

Kim talks to rockstar Harvard philosopher Michael J. Sandel about the dark heart of meritocracy and how we can begin to bridge America's great divide.

Der Philosoph Michael Sandel beschreibt in seinem Buch mit dem Titel "Vom Ende des Gemeinwohls" die Folgen der Meritokratie, also einer Gesellschaftsordnung, die hauptsächlich auf Leistung beruht. Er kritisiert, dass diese Form der Leistungsgesellschaft mitunter für den aufkommenden Populismus verantwortlich ist und zur Erosion des Gemeinwohls führt.

Saya membahas buku What Money Can't Buy karya Michael J. Sandel. Buku ini membahas hal apa yang seharusnya tidak boleh dibeli dengan uang. Di era sekarang, ibaratnya kita bisa membeli apapun. Apakah kamu tahu, kalau kamu bisa membayar kamar penjara yang lebih nyaman, hanya dengan 1.2 juta rupiah per malam? Di California dan berbagai kota lainnya di Amerika Serikat, narapidana dengan kasus non kekerasan bisa menikmati fasilitas tersebut apabila mereka sanggup membayarnya. Ini adalah contoh yang menarik. Pertanyaanya sekarang seperti ini, apakah semua hal boleh dibeli dengan uang? Penulis berusaha memberikan pandangan dari sudut pandang moral, kalau ketika semua hal bisa dibeli dengan uang, maka hal ini bisa berbahaya. Bukan hanya dari sudut pandang etika, tapi hal ini akan memperlebar kesenjangan sosial dan ibaratnya dunia hanya milik yang punya uang saja.

Dzisiaj dwie książki Michaela J. Sandela: "Tyrania merytokracji" i "Czego nie można kupić za pieniądze". Zapraszam! Do dyskusji o książkach zapraszam do YouTube: https://youtu.be/dfzQ5nFA1cc (https://youtu.be/dfzQ5nFA1cc)

Topic: Can Germany's New Chancellor Revive the Left in Europe?   Last December, as he was plotting what most considered to be a hopeless bid to become Germany's next chancellor, Olaf Scholz interrupted his campaign preparations for a video call with an American philosopher. 去年12月，蕭茲策畫競選德國下任總理，被多數人認為毫無希望之際，他為了與一名美國哲學教授視訊通話而暫停參選準備工作。 Scholz, a Social Democrat, wanted to talk to the philosopher, Michael J. Sandel of Harvard, about why center-left parties like his had been losing working-class voters to populists, and the two men spent an hour discussing a seemingly simple theme that would become the centerpiece of the Scholz campaign: “Respect.” 社會民主黨籍的蕭茲想跟美國哈佛大學哲學教授桑德爾談談，像他的黨這類中間偏左政黨為何失去勞動階級選民，眼看這些人轉而支持民粹主義者。兩人花了一小時討論一個看似簡單、後來成為蕭茲競選骨幹的主題「尊重」。 Scholz is Germany's ninth postwar chancellor — and the first Social Democrat in 16 years — succeeding Angela Merkel and heading a three-party coalition government. Defying polls and pundits, he led his 158-year-old party from the precipice of irrelevance to an unlikely victory — and now wants to show that the center-left can again become a political force in Europe. 蕭茲是德國戰後第九位總理，也是16年來首位社民黨籍總理，接替梅克爾並領導三黨聯合政府。他打破民調和專家預測，帶領他那成立158年的政黨，走出被認為無關緊要的險境，取得難以置信的勝利，如今他希望展現中間偏左勢力能再度成為歐洲一支政治力量。 For the center-left in Europe, Scholz's victory comes at a critical moment. Over the past decade, many of the parties that once dominated European politics have become almost obsolete, seemingly bereft of ideas and largely abandoned by their working-class base. 對歐洲中間偏左勢力而言，蕭茲勝選的時機很重要。過去十年來，許多一度主導歐洲政治的這類政黨變得幾乎被淘汰，他們看來沒有主張，而且大致被他們的勞動階級基本盤放棄。 The political energy has been on the right, especially the populist far right, with many American conservatives flocking to countries like Hungary to study the “illiberal democracy” of Viktor Orban, that nation's far-right prime minister. 政治能量在右派這邊，尤其是民粹極右派，許多美國保守派人士湧入匈牙利這類國家，研究該國極右派總理奧班的「不自由民主思想」。 “The biggest concern in politics for me is that our liberal democracies are coming increasingly under pressure,” Mr. Scholz says about himself on the Social Democrats' website. “We have to solve the problems so that the cheap slogans of the populists don't catch.” 蕭茲在社民黨網站上描述自己：「對我而言政治上最大的憂慮是，我們的自由民主政體承受愈來愈大的壓力。我們必須解決這些問題，好讓民粹主義者的廉價口號無法打動人心。」 Last year, in the middle of the first Covid-19 lockdown, Mr. Scholz read Professor Sandel's latest book, “The Tyranny of Merit” in which the Harvard philosopher argued that the meritocratic narrative of education as an engine of social mobility had fueled resentment and contributed to the rise of populists like Mr. Trump. 去年德國實施首次新冠肺炎防疫封鎖時，蕭茲閱讀了桑德爾教授最新著作「成功的反思」，這位哈佛哲學教授在書中主張，菁英領導體制陳述的「教育是社會流動的動力」，助長憤恨並促成美國前總統川普這種民粹政治人物崛起。 “The backlash of 2016 vividly expressed that simply telling people, ‘You can make it if you try,' was not an adequate response to the wage stagnation and job loss brought about by globalization,” Professor Sandel said in an interview. “What Social Democratic elites missed was the insult implicit in this response to inequality, because what it said was, ‘If you're struggling in the new economy, your failure is your fault.'” 桑德爾受訪時說：「2016年的強烈反應鮮明表達出，僅僅告訴人們『去嘗試就能做到』，並非對全球化造成的薪資停滯和失業的適切回應。社民黨菁英沒注意的是，這種對於不平等現象的回應隱含著侮辱，因為它說的是，『如果你在新經濟裡苦苦掙扎，你失敗是你自己的錯』。」Source article: https://udn.com/news/story/6904/5970225 Next Article   Topic: Europe's COVID Culture War Plays Out in Pockets of Germany   Sven Müller is proudly unvaccinated. He thinks COVID-19 vaccines are neither effective nor safe but a way to make money for pharmaceutical companies and corrupt politicians who are taking away his freedom. 斯凡．穆勒對未接種疫苗感到自豪。他認為新冠疫苗既不有效也不安全，是幫製藥公司及剝奪他自由的腐敗政客賺錢的一種方式。 Under state rules to stem coronavirus infections, he is no longer allowed to go to restaurants, to the bowling alley, to the cinema or to the hairdresser. From next week, he will be barred from entering most shops, too. But that has only strengthened his resolve. 遏制新冠病毒感染的邦法規定，他不得進入餐館、保齡球館、電影院或找理髮師。從下周起，他還被禁止進入多數商店，但這只會堅定他的決心。 “They can't break me,” said Müller, 40, a bar owner in the town of Annaberg-Buchholz, in the Ore Mountain region in the eastern state of Saxony where the vaccination rate is 44% — the lowest in Germany. 40歲的穆勒說：「他們打不倒我。」他是德東薩克森邦厄爾士山區安娜貝格布赫霍爾茨鎮的一名酒吧老闆，當地疫苗接種率是全德國最低的44%。 Müller personifies a problem that is as sharp in some parts of Europe as it is in the United States. If Germany had red and blue states, Saxony would be crimson. In places like this, pockets of unvaccinated people are driving the latest round of contagion, filling strained hospital wards, putting economic recoveries at risk and sending governments scrambling to head off a fourth wave of the pandemic. 歐洲某些地區，有個問題與美國一樣激烈，穆勒是此事化身。若德國有紅州和藍州，薩克森邦將是深紅。在這樣的地方，一小群未接種疫苗的人正引發最新一波疫情，使得捉襟見肘的醫院病房人滿為患，令經濟復甦面臨風險，並讓政府在阻止第四波疫情爆發上疲於奔命。 Western European governments are resorting increasingly to thinly veiled coercion with a mixture of mandates, inducements and punishments. 西歐國家政府正逐漸採取幾乎不加掩飾的強制手段，包括強制令、誘導及處罰。 In many countries, it is working. When President Emmanuel Macron announced in July that vaccine passports would be required to enter most social venues, France — where anti-vaccine sentiment was strong — was one of the least vaccinated countries in Europe. Today it has one of the highest vaccination rates in the world. 在許多國家，此舉正在發揮作用。今年7月，法國總統馬克宏宣布，進入大多數社交場所必須持有疫苗護照。當時，反疫苗情緒強烈的法國是歐洲接種疫苗最少的國家之一。如今它是世界上疫苗接種率最高國家之一。 Prime Minister Mario Draghi of Italy followed Macron's lead with even tougher measures. There, and in Spain, too, attempts by populist parties to stoke a broad-based anti-vaccine backlash have largely been snuffed out. 義大利總理德拉吉跟隨馬克宏帶領，採取了更嚴厲措施。在西班牙，民粹主義政黨激起廣大反疫苗反對聲浪的企圖，基本上也被撲滅。 But regional resistance against the coronavirus vaccine remains. In Central and Eastern Europe — and in the German-speaking countries and regions bordering them — the problem is more stubborn. 但地區性抗拒疫苗的情況依舊存在。在中歐、東歐及相鄰的德語國家和地區，這個問題更棘手。 In Italy, the northern province of Bolzano — bordering Austria and Switzerland, where 70% of the population is German-speaking — has the country's lowest vaccination rate. 在義大利，靠近奧地利與瑞士邊界的北部省分波爾察諾有70%人口講德語，該省疫苗接種率全國最低。 “There is some correlation with far-right parties, but the main reason is this trust in nature,” said Patrick Franzoni, a doctor who spearheads the inoculation campaign in the province. Especially in the Alps, he said, the German-speaking population trusts fresh air, organic produce and herbal teas more than traditional drugs. 在該省率先發起疫苗接種運動的醫師派崔克．佛蘭佐尼說：「這與極右翼政黨有些關係，但主要原因是對自然的信任。」他表示，尤其在阿爾卑斯山區，說德語的民眾更相信新鮮空氣、有機農產品與花草茶，而不是傳統藥物。Source article : https://udn.com/news/story/6904/5919791   Next Article   Topic: It's Election Season in Germany. No Charisma, Please!   The most popular politician who would like to be chancellor isn't on the ballot. The leading candidate is so boring people compare him to a machine. Instead of “Yes, We Can!” voters are being fired up with promises of “Stability.” 可能成為總理的最受歡迎政客，不在選票上。居於領先的候選人太無趣，人們將他和機器相比。沒有「是的，我們能！」選民對各種「穩定」的承諾感到激憤。 Germany is having its most important election in a generation but you would never know it. The newspaper Die Welt recently asked in a headline: “Is this the most boring election ever?” 德國正舉行一個世代中最重要的一次選舉，但你可能不會知道。《世界報》最近在標題這樣問，「這是歷來最無聊的一次選舉嗎？」 Yes and no. 是，也不是。 The campaign to replace Chancellor Angela Merkel after 16 years of her dominating German and European politics is the tightest in Germany since 2005, and it just got tighter. The Social Democrats, written off as recently as a month ago, have overtaken Merkel's conservatives for the first time in years. 在總理梅克爾主導德國和歐洲政治16年後，這場準備取代她的競選是2005年以來最激烈的，且會更緊繃。直到一個月前都還很邊緣的社會民主黨，已超前梅克爾的保守派系，是近年首見。 But the campaign has also revealed a charisma vacuum that is at once typical of postwar German politics and exceptional for just how bland Merkel's two most likely successors are. No party is polling more than 25%, and for much of the race the candidate the public has preferred was none of the above. 不過這次競選也顯露領袖魅力的真空狀態，這是戰後德國政治的常態，尤其顯示最有可能接替梅克爾的兩個人有多平淡。沒有政黨在民調中支持率超過25%，而競選中大多數時間，大眾偏好的候選人也非上述兩位。 Whoever wins, however, will have the job of shepherding the continent's largest economy, making that person one of Europe's most important leaders, which has left some observers wondering if the charisma deficit will extend to a leadership deficit as well. 然而，不論誰會勝出，將負責帶領歐陸最大經濟體，成為歐洲最重要的領袖之一，這也讓一些觀察家想知道，欠缺領袖魅力是否也會延伸為欠缺領袖能力。 While the election outcome may be exciting, the two leading candidates are anything but. 選舉結果也許令人興奮，兩名領先的候選人卻不讓人這麼覺得。 Less than a month before the vote, the field is being led by two male suit-wearing career politicians — one balding, one bespectacled, both over 60 — who represent the parties that have governed the country jointly for the better part of two decades. 距離投票日不到一個月，選舉由兩個穿西裝男性職業政客領先，一個禿頭，一個戴眼鏡，兩人都年過60，他們代表的政黨在過去20年中大部分時候聯合治理國家。 There is Armin Laschet, the governor of the western state of North-Rhine Westphalia, who is running for Merkel's conservative Christian Democrats. And then there is Olaf Scholz, a Social Democrat who is Merkel's finance minister and vice chancellor. 北萊因–西伐利亞邦邦總理拉謝特，代表梅克爾的保守派基督教民主黨參選。社會民主黨的蕭茲，是梅克爾的財政部長及副總理。 The candidate of change, Annalena Baerbock, the 40-year-old co-leader of the Greens, has a bold reform agenda and plenty of verve — and has been lagging in the polls after a brief surge before the summer. 代表改變的候選人，是40歲的綠黨共同黨魁貝爾伯克，提出大膽的改革政見並充滿活力，她在夏季之前支持度短暫上升，目前落後。 It's a nail-biter, German-style: Who can most effectively channel stability and continuity? Or put another way: Who can channel Merkel? 這是德式的緊張：誰能最有效引領穩定與延續，或者說，誰能複製梅克爾？ For now it seems to be Scholz — a man Germans have long known as the “Scholz-o-mat” or the “Scholz machine” — a technocrat and veteran politician who can seem almost robotically on message. Where others have slipped up in the campaign, he has avoided mistakes, mostly by saying very little. 目前看來似是蕭茲，德國人認識已久的「蕭茲機器人」或「蕭茲機器」，一名技術官僚及資深政客，傳達訊息時像是機器人。其他候選人在選戰中不小心失言時，他避免犯錯，大多數是因說得很少。Source article: https://udn.com/news/story/6904/5739953

No 49º episódio do podcast, a minha conversa é com a Tabata Amaral, uma das deputadas mais votadas em São Paulo. Ela tem uma trajetória muito interessante, que vale ser escutada. Sou sua fã desde o começo, pela maneira como a Tabata fala sobre a educação, sobre como foi tão central para ela, sobre como foi uma constante mesmo nos tantos momentos importantes e complicados da vida dela, e como fez com que ela se destacasse e traçasse sua trajetória. A Tabata é formada em Harvard, onde todos a amam e já associam o seu nome ao Brasil. E foi um orgulho imenso ter essa conversa com ela. Você pode encontrar a deputada Tabata Amaral em: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tabataamaralsp/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/tabataamaralsp Facebook: https://pt-br.facebook.com/tabataamaralSP/ Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/tabataamaralsp Site: https://tabataamaral.com.br/ Eu sou a Gabi Oliveira, antropóloga, mãe de dois e professora, e este é o meu podcast, “Uma estrangeira”. Você também pode me encontrar no meu instagram @gabi_instaaberto. Para contar o que você está achando do podcast, mandar sugestões, perguntas e acompanhar os episódios, é só seguir o instagram @umaestrangeira_podcast ou escrever para o email umaestrangeirapodcast@gmail.com. Este podcast é produzido e editado por Fabio Uehara (@fauehara) e revisado por Tatiana Yoshizumi. Neste episódio foram citados: Projeto Voa: http://www.projetovoa.org/ Acredito: https://movimentoacredito.org/ Clube do livro da Tabata: https://www.instagram.com/nossolugardeleitura/ A Tirania do Mérito, de Michael J. Sandel: https://amzn.to/3CvAzye --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/uma-estrangeira/message

We're in a moment of rapid, disorientating change: the fourth industrial revolution, Web 3.0, machine learning, unregulated capitalism, climate change--the list is long and challenging. Roman and Rob share some of their recent readings/investigations and how it's helping them think about technology, economics, and art in a world that seems to change by the week. They talk about George Dyson's "Darwin Among the Machines," Michael J. Sandel's "The Tyranny of Merit," and Benjamin's Labatut's "When We Cease to Understand the World," among other books. Music: “Sunday Smooth" by Scott Buckley, used under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License - www.scottbuckley.com.au.

How do beliefs shape and determine our attitudes towards policies? In this episode, Thomas Douenne looks at carbon taxation in the context of the Yellow Vest Movement, and how French people rejected a tax & dividend policy which they assumed would negatively impact their purchasing power. Working Paper: “Yellow Vests, Pessimistic Beliefs and Carbon Tax Aversion”, with Adrien Fabre https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/pol.20200092&&from=f Recommendation: “The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good?” (2020) by Michael J. Sandel https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/50364458-the-tyranny-of-merit

Hello 通勤家族，1/25下午1點到3點，歡迎來年貨大街，迪化街永樂市場前的街頭播音室來跟我們互動見面！禮盒有限，先搶先贏喔 XDD  禮品通關密語: Happy birthday! 年貨大街街頭播音室官網: https://2022lunarnewyear.taipei   每日英語跟讀 Ep.K295: Can Germany's New Chancellor Revive the Left in Europe?   Last December, as he was plotting what most considered to be a hopeless bid to become Germany's next chancellor, Olaf Scholz interrupted his campaign preparations for a video call with an American philosopher. 去年12月，蕭茲策畫競選德國下任總理，被多數人認為毫無希望之際，他為了與一名美國哲學教授視訊通話而暫停參選準備工作。 Scholz, a Social Democrat, wanted to talk to the philosopher, Michael J. Sandel of Harvard, about why center-left parties like his had been losing working-class voters to populists, and the two men spent an hour discussing a seemingly simple theme that would become the centerpiece of the Scholz campaign: “Respect.” 社會民主黨籍的蕭茲想跟美國哈佛大學哲學教授桑德爾談談，像他的黨這類中間偏左政黨為何失去勞動階級選民，眼看這些人轉而支持民粹主義者。兩人花了一小時討論一個看似簡單、後來成為蕭茲競選骨幹的主題「尊重」。 Scholz is Germany's ninth postwar chancellor — and the first Social Democrat in 16 years — succeeding Angela Merkel and heading a three-party coalition government. Defying polls and pundits, he led his 158-year-old party from the precipice of irrelevance to an unlikely victory — and now wants to show that the center-left can again become a political force in Europe. 蕭茲是德國戰後第九位總理，也是16年來首位社民黨籍總理，接替梅克爾並領導三黨聯合政府。他打破民調和專家預測，帶領他那成立158年的政黨，走出被認為無關緊要的險境，取得難以置信的勝利，如今他希望展現中間偏左勢力能再度成為歐洲一支政治力量。 For the center-left in Europe, Scholz's victory comes at a critical moment. Over the past decade, many of the parties that once dominated European politics have become almost obsolete, seemingly bereft of ideas and largely abandoned by their working-class base. 對歐洲中間偏左勢力而言，蕭茲勝選的時機很重要。過去十年來，許多一度主導歐洲政治的這類政黨變得幾乎被淘汰，他們看來沒有主張，而且大致被他們的勞動階級基本盤放棄。 The political energy has been on the right, especially the populist far right, with many American conservatives flocking to countries like Hungary to study the “illiberal democracy” of Viktor Orban, that nation's far-right prime minister. 政治能量在右派這邊，尤其是民粹極右派，許多美國保守派人士湧入匈牙利這類國家，研究該國極右派總理奧班的「不自由民主思想」。 “The biggest concern in politics for me is that our liberal democracies are coming increasingly under pressure,” Mr. Scholz says about himself on the Social Democrats' website. “We have to solve the problems so that the cheap slogans of the populists don't catch.” 蕭茲在社民黨網站上描述自己：「對我而言政治上最大的憂慮是，我們的自由民主政體承受愈來愈大的壓力。我們必須解決這些問題，好讓民粹主義者的廉價口號無法打動人心。」 Last year, in the middle of the first Covid-19 lockdown, Mr. Scholz read Professor Sandel's latest book, “The Tyranny of Merit” in which the Harvard philosopher argued that the meritocratic narrative of education as an engine of social mobility had fueled resentment and contributed to the rise of populists like Mr. Trump. 去年德國實施首次新冠肺炎防疫封鎖時，蕭茲閱讀了桑德爾教授最新著作「成功的反思」，這位哈佛哲學教授在書中主張，菁英領導體制陳述的「教育是社會流動的動力」，助長憤恨並促成美國前總統川普這種民粹政治人物崛起。 “The backlash of 2016 vividly expressed that simply telling people, ‘You can make it if you try,' was not an adequate response to the wage stagnation and job loss brought about by globalization,” Professor Sandel said in an interview. “What Social Democratic elites missed was the insult implicit in this response to inequality, because what it said was, ‘If you're struggling in the new economy, your failure is your fault.'” 桑德爾受訪時說：「2016年的強烈反應鮮明表達出，僅僅告訴人們『去嘗試就能做到』，並非對全球化造成的薪資停滯和失業的適切回應。社民黨菁英沒注意的是，這種對於不平等現象的回應隱含著侮辱，因為它說的是，『如果你在新經濟裡苦苦掙扎，你失敗是你自己的錯』。」Source article: https://udn.com/news/story/6904/5970225

Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good? by: Michael J. Sandel Quick Fix: Why Fad Psychology Can't Cure Our Social Ills by: Jesse Singal Kingsport: (The Weird of Hali #2) by: John Michael Greer The General vs. the President: MacArthur and Truman at the Brink of Nuclear War by: H. W. Brands Based on a True Story: Not a Memoir by: Norm Macdonald Silmarillion by: J. R. R. Tolkien The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity by: Carlo M. Cipolla The Last Place on Earth: Scott and Amundsen's Race to the South Pole by: Roland Huntford How God Works: The Science Behind the Benefits of Religion by: David DeSteno

This month the RePod is joined by Adam Holmes, State Representative of Ohio House District 97. We talk a little bit about the past and future of Ohio public libraries, books he keeps in mind while serving our district, and Shakespeare. You can contact Representative Holmes at rep97@ohiohouse.gov or by calling (614) 644-6014. For more information about MCLS, please visit us at muskingumlibrary.org If you'd like to submit your own Reread, Rewrite, Recommend books, or if you have any library questions for our guest hosts, please email Sarah at podcast@muskingumlibrary.org Books mentioned in this episode: Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do - Michael J. Sandel Democracy in America - Alexis de Tocqueville Witchshadow (Witchlands 4) - Susan Dennard Ender's Game - Orson Scott Card Rosaline Palmer Takes the Cake - Alexis Hall Great Expectations - Charles Dickens Frederick Douglass: Prophet of Freedom - David W. Blight Dead Wake: the Last Crossing of the Lusitania - Erik Larson

In a world obsessed with success, plenty of us feel a compulsive need to achieve. ------ We tell ourselves - and our kids - to try hard and never give up, for this is the secret to success. But by the time young people finish school, many students find it hard not to link their efforts and abilities with their identity and their self-worth with their achievements.  CPXer Justine Toh's book Achievement Addiction calls out our fraught relationship with success. In this episode, we talk about tiger parenting and its fixation on academic accomplishment and how meritocratic ideas associating success with effort imply that our wins and failures are always deserved. We also discuss other social cues showing the value we place on achievement - like the way former Australian Federal Treasurer Joe Hockey once described Australia as a nation of “lifters, not leaners” which distinguishes between those who contribute to the public purse and those who take from it.  We also talk to Julia, a Sydney-based cardiologist, who wouldn't describe herself as an achievement addict but who found herself striving for significance. She lets us in on what might be found on the other side of achievement.  ------ Explore: Justine Toh's Achievement Addiction and other titles in the Re:CONSIDERING series. Amy Chua's Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother Michael J. Sandel's The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good

Tornano i Libri a Colacione, la rubrica di Tutto Esaurito su Radio 105! La bella indifferenza di Athos Zontini e La tirannia del merito di Michael J. Sandel.→ Sei un autore, vorresti lavorare in editoria? http://www.edday.it → Leggi? Ti aspetto su BookBlister! http://www.bookblister.com → Scrivi? Ti aspetto su https://www.berettamazzotta.it

Tornano i Libri a Colacione, la rubrica di Tutto Esaurito su Radio 105! La bella indifferenza di Athos Zontini e La tirannia del merito di Michael J. Sandel.→ Sei un autore, vorresti lavorare in editoria? http://www.edday.it → Leggi? Ti aspetto su BookBlister! http://www.bookblister.com → Scrivi? Ti aspetto su https://www.berettamazzotta.it

Tornano i Libri a Colacione, la rubrica di Tutto Esaurito su Radio 105! La bella indifferenza di Athos Zontini e La tirannia del merito di Michael J. Sandel. → Sei un autore, vorresti lavorare in editoria? http://www.edday.it → Leggi? Ti aspetto su BookBlister! http://www.bookblister.com → Scrivi? Ti aspetto su https://www.berettamazzotta.it

It's Nick and Goldy's summer reading list!  We want to know what you're reading, too. Let us know on Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics.  Remember to shop local and small when you can, or order from IndieBound or Bookshop.org—both of which support independent bookstores! All of these books are also likely available at your library.  Every book mentioned in this episode:  The WEIRDest People in the World: How the West Became Psychologically Peculiar and Particularly Prosperous by Joseph Henrich  Escape from Rome: The Failure of Empire and the Road to Prosperity by Walter Scheidel The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good? by Michael J. Sandel Success and Luck: Good Fortune and the Myth of Merit by Robert H. Frank The Black Swan and Fooled by Randomness by Nassim Nicholas Taleb Democracy, Race, and Justice: The Speeches and Writings of Sadie T. M. Alexander by Nina Banks  Why Buddhism is True by Robert Wright Caste by Isabel Wilkerson His Truth Is Marching On: John Lewis and the Power of Hope by Jon Meacham   The Sum of Us: What Racism Costs Everyone and How We Can Prosper Together by Heather McGhee 1491 by Charles C. Mann Nature's God: The Heretical Origins of the American Republic by Matthew Stewart The Second World War by Winston Churchill  Lafayette in the Somewhat United States by Sarah Vowell  Debt by David Graeber  Website: http://pitchforkeconomics.com/ Twitter: @PitchforkEcon Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics Nick's twitter: @NickHanauer

The expression “getting your just deserts,” according to Merriam-Webster, means receiving the punishment that you deserve. This episode looks at rewards as well as punishment. The idea is to explore whether we can be said to deserve something or not. I explain that there are three separate meanings for this notion: 1. Merit — What we earn through talent and effort 2. Civil Rights — What our culture, society, and laws say we are entitled to 3. Intrinsic Deserts — What we imagine is inherently ours from the simple fact of being human See Also 1. The Tyranny of Merit (2020), by Michael J. Sandel 2. Dependent Origination, in Buddhist Philosophy 3. Not What Should Be, by Alan Watts 4. Changing Attitudes on Same-Sex Marriage (2019), by the Pew Research Center

Stuart and Eamonn are joined by former BBC Scotland journalist and broadcaster, Isabel Fraser! This week - media coverage of Prince Philip’s death, David Cameron and the lobbying scandal and issues related to the upcoming Holyrood election. At the end of the show, Stuart, Eamonn and Isabel go on to share their personal media recommendations. Stuart: ‘How To Get Away With Murder’ - series on Netflix - www.netflix.com/title/80024057 Isabel: ‘Klara and the Sun’ - book by Kazuo Ishiguro - www.waterstones.com/book/klara-and-the-sun/kazuo-ishiguro/9780571366217‘The Tyranny of Merit’ - book by Michael J. Sandel - www.penguin.co.uk/books/313/313112/the-tyranny-of-merit/9780241407592.html Eamonn: ‘The Worricker Trilogy’ - series on Amazon - www.amazon.co.uk/The-Worricker-Trilogy-Season-01/dp/B00JXN3V74 For more information about Talk Media, visit: www.thebiglight.com/talkmedia

José García Domínguez, Cristina Losada y Eugenia Gayo hablan del libro de Michael J. Sandel "La tiranía del mérito: ¿Qué ha sido del bien común?" (Debate, 2020). Si te animas a apoyarnos económicamente haciéndote mecenas del programa, tendrás acceso también a una segunda parte del programa semanal y a los "Diarios de El Búho".

Agradece a este podcast tantas horas de entretenimiento y disfruta de episodios exclusivos como éste. ¡Apóyale en iVoox! José García Domínguez, Cristina Losada y Eugenia Gayo hablan del libro de Michael J. Sandel "La tiranía del mérito: ¿Qué ha sido del bien común?" (Debate, 2020). Si te animas a apoyarnos económicamente haciéndote mecenas del programa, tendrás acceso también a una segunda parte del programa semanal y a los "Diarios de El Búho".Escucha este episodio completo y accede a todo el contenido exclusivo de El Búho. Descubre antes que nadie los nuevos episodios, y participa en la comunidad exclusiva de oyentes en https://go.ivoox.com/sq/125506

Stuart and Eamonn are joined by former BBC Radio Scotland journalist, Isabel Fraser! This week - media coverage of Prince Philip’s death, David Cameron and the lobbying scandal and issues related to the upcoming Holyrood election. At the end of the show, Stuart, Eamonn and Isabel go on to share their personal media recommendations.Stuart: 'How To Get Away With Murder’ - series on Netflix - www.netflix.com/title/80024057Isabel:‘Klara and the Sun’ - book by Kazuo Ishiguro - www.waterstones.com/book/klara-and-the-sun/kazuo-ishiguro/9780571366217‘The Tyranny of Merit’ - book by Michael J. Sandel - www.penguin.co.uk/books/313/313112/the-tyranny-of-merit/9780241407592.htmlEamonn: ‘The Worricker Trilogy’ - series on Amazon - www.amazon.co.uk/The-Worricker-Trilogy-Season-01/dp/B00JXN3V74Support the podcast and gain access to bonus content: www.patreon.com/talkmediaKeep up to date with the show on Twitter: @TBLTalkMediaFor more information about the podcast, visit: www.thebiglight.com/talkmedia See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Phil is joined by Eugene McCarraher, Professor of the Humanities and History at Villanova University, to discuss his article "A Providentialism Without God: The Case Against Meritocracy" as well as Goya's "The Dream of Reason Produces Monsters" The Manifesto: Eugene McCarraher, "A Providentialism Without God: The Case Against Meritocracy" https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/providentialism-without-god The Art: Goya, "The Dream of Reason Produces Monsters" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TheSleepofReasonProducesMonsters#/media/File:FranciscoJos%C3%A9deGoyayLucientes-Thesleepofreasonproducesmonsters(No.43),fromLosCaprichos-GoogleArtProject.jpg Other works discussed: Eugene McCarraher, The Enchantments of Mammon https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674984615 Michael Young, The Rise of the Meritocracy https://www.routledge.com/The-Rise-of-the-Meritocracy/Young/p/book/9781560007043 Michael J. Sandel, The Tyranny of Merit https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374289980 David Goodhart, Head, Hand, Heart https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Head-Hand-Heart/David-Goodhart/9781982128470 Fredrik deBoer, The Cult of Smart https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250200372 William Deresiewicz, Excellent Sheep https://billderesiewicz.com/books/excellent-sheep/ Alejandro Anreus, Shades of Suffering: Goya's Graphic Imagination https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/shades-suffering Nicholas Penny, The People's Goya https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v26/n18/nicholas-penny/the-people-s-goya Julian Bell, Teeming With Things Unknown https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2020/10/08/francisco-goya-teeming-things-unknown/

¿Qué hay de malo en un sistema que promueve el ascenso de acuerdo con los méritos? Mucho, detrás de la meritocracia hay un lado oscuro que poco se ha debatido y, mucho menos, visibilizado.

Olaf Scholz ist Vizekanzler, Finanzminister und tritt in diesem Jahr im Wahlkampf für das Amt des Bundeskanzlers für die SPD an und hatte schon so einige politische Ämter inne: Er war Mitglied im Deutschen Bundestag, Generalsekretär der SPD, Innensenator von Hamburg, Bundesminister für Arbeit und Soziales und Erster Bürgermeister von Hamburg. Er ist 62 Jahre alt, lebt mit seiner Frau Britta Ernst in Potsdam und war – bevor er in die Berufspolitik so richtig los ging – als Rechtsanwalt tätig. Wir sprechen im Podcast über seinen ersten Wahlerfolg und was sich seitdem geändert hat. Was bedeutet es, Bundeskanzler zu werden und warum möchte er das sein? Wofür steht die SPD 2021 und wofür steht er? Olaf Scholz galt lange als Bewahrer und Sparer, vielleicht habt ihr von der berühmten schwarzen 0 gehört, die wurde lange mit Olaf Scholz verbunden. Im vergangenen Jahr hat er sich dann mit dem milliardenschweren Konjunkturpaket einen neuen Namen gemacht, im Wahlkampf spricht er viel über Investitionen in die Zukunft. Ich wollte wissen, woher der Richtungswechsel kommt. Außerdem, wie er sich den sinkenden Kurs der SPD erklärt, warum es so viel Armut in Deutschland auch unter Regierungsbeteiligung der SPD gibt und was er dagegen tun möchte. MEIN GAST: https://www.instagram.com/olafscholz/ DINGE: Michael J. Sandel - The Tyranny of Merit https://amzn.to/2OB8FfG Talk mit Lady Bitch Ray - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xj4EuNjOJQU&t=70s * *Affiliate Link SUPPORTER: Babbel - babbel.com/audio, Code "check-in" Triodos Bank - triodos.de, Code "HOTELMATZE" BookBeat - bookbeat.de/hotelmatze MITARBEIT:
 Redaktionelle Unterstützung: Torben Becker 
Musik: Jan Köppen 
Mix & Schnitt: Maximilian Frisch MEIN ZEUG:
 Wunschgäste bitte in die Kommentare: apple.co/2RgJVH6
 Mein Newsletter: www.mailchi.mp/mitvergnuegen/matzehielscher Instagram: www.instagram.com/matzehielscher LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/matzehielscher/
 YouTube: bit.ly/2MXRILN
 Twitter: twitter.com/hotelmatze1 
Mein Buch: bit.ly/39FtHQy

In the Tyranny of Merit, political philosopher Michael Sandel attacks what he calls “the rhetoric of rising” and ideas about meritocracy on both the political left and right in the United States. Michael Sandel teaches political philosophy at Harvard University. His writings—on justice, ethics, democracy, and markets--have been translated into 27 languages. His course “Justice” is the first Harvard course to be made freely available online and on television. It has been viewed by tens of millions of people around the world, including in China, where Sandel was named the “most influential foreign figure of the year.” (China Newsweek). Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/50364458-the-tyranny-of-merit Audio production by Graham Stephenson Episode music: Caprese by Blue Dot Sessions Rate, review, and subscribe to this podcast on Apple, Anchor, Breaker, Google, Overcast, Pocket Casts, RadioPublic, and Spotify

In the Tyranny of Merit, political philosopher Michael Sandel attacks what he calls “the rhetoric of rising” and ideas about meritocracy on both the political left and right in the United States. Michael Sandel teaches political philosophy at Harvard University. His writings—on justice, ethics, democracy, and markets--have been translated into 27 languages. His course “Justice” is the first Harvard course to be made freely available https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fajlZMdPkKE (online) and on television.  It has been viewed by tens of millions of people around the world, including in China, where Sandel was named the “most influential foreign figure of the year.” (China Newsweek). Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/50364458-the-tyranny-of-merit (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/50364458-the-tyranny-of-merit) Audio production by Graham Stephenson Episode music: Caprese by https://www.sessions.blue/ (Blue Dot Sessions) Rate, review, and subscribe to this podcast on Apple, Anchor, Breaker, Google, Overcast, Pocket Casts, RadioPublic, and Spotify

Lewis H. Lapham speaks with Michael J. Sandel, author of “The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good.” Thanks to our generous donors. Lead support for this podcast has been provided by Elizabeth “Lisette” Prince. Additional support was provided by James J. “Jimmy” Coleman Jr.

What's The Right Thing To Do?

"Vati" Monika Helfer, Gewinnerin des Bayern2-Publikumspreises beim Bayerischen Buchpreis 2020, erkundet weiter literarisch ihre eigene Bagage (Hanser) "Erste Person Singular" Wer bin ich und wenn ja, wieviele? Haruki Murakamis neuer Erzählungsband versammelt acht Geschichten (Dumont) "Vom Ende des Gemeinwohls" Der amerikanische Philosoph Michael J. Sandel untersucht, "wie die Leistungsgesellschaft unsere Demokratien zerreißt" (S. Fischer) "Mädchen, Frau etc." Bernardine Evaristo und ihr ungewöhnlicher, mit dem Booker Prize gekrönter Roman über das Leben schwarzer britischer Familien (Tropen) "Natur und Gender" Moderationsgespräch mit dem Leipziger Philosophen Christoph Türcke über seine "Kritik eines Machbarkeitswahns" (C. H. Beck) Hörbuch: "Sprich mit mir". T. C. Boyles neuer Roman, gelesen von Florian Lukas (Der Hörverlag) Das literarische Rätsel. Wunschbuch zu gewinnen. Wer ist zu Gast bei Brigitte Hobmeier alias Wally Buk?

These are dangerous times for democracy. We live in an age of winners and losers, where the odds are stacked in favor of the already fortunate. Stalled social mobility and entrenched inequality give the lie to the American credo that you can make it if you try. The consequence is a brew of anger and frustration that has fueled populist protest and extreme polarization, and led to deep distrust of both government and our fellow citizens--leaving us morally unprepared to face the profound challenges of our time. World-renowned philosopher Michael J. Sandel argues that to overcome the crises that are upending our world, we must rethink the attitudes toward success and failure that have accompanied globalization and rising inequality. Sandel shows the hubris a meritocracy generates among the winners and the harsh judgement it imposes on those left behind, and traces the dire consequences across a wide swath of American life. He offers an alternative way of thinking about success--more attentive to the role of luck in human affairs, more conducive to an ethic of humility and solidarity, and more affirming of the dignity of work. The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good? (FSG, 2020) points us toward a hopeful vision of a new politics of the common good. Renee Garfinkel, Ph.D. is a psychologist, writer, Middle East television commentator and host of The New Books Network's Van Leer Jerusalem Series on Ideas. Write her at VanLeerIdeas@gmail.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/van-leer-institute

These are dangerous times for democracy. We live in an age of winners and losers, where the odds are stacked in favor of the already fortunate. Stalled social mobility and entrenched inequality give the lie to the American credo that you can make it if you try. The consequence is a brew of anger and frustration that has fueled populist protest and extreme polarization, and led to deep distrust of both government and our fellow citizens--leaving us morally unprepared to face the profound challenges of our time. World-renowned philosopher Michael J. Sandel argues that to overcome the crises that are upending our world, we must rethink the attitudes toward success and failure that have accompanied globalization and rising inequality. Sandel shows the hubris a meritocracy generates among the winners and the harsh judgement it imposes on those left behind, and traces the dire consequences across a wide swath of American life. He offers an alternative way of thinking about success--more attentive to the role of luck in human affairs, more conducive to an ethic of humility and solidarity, and more affirming of the dignity of work. The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good? (FSG, 2020) points us toward a hopeful vision of a new politics of the common good. Renee Garfinkel, Ph.D. is a psychologist, writer, Middle East television commentator and host of The New Books Network’s Van Leer Jerusalem Series on Ideas. Write her at VanLeerIdeas@gmail.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

連生命都能買賣之後，錢到底是什麼呢？ 很多人無止盡的想追求賺大錢，但從沒想過賺錢的目的到底是什麼… 可能我的個性真的沒這麼狼性吧？ 本集建議搭配這一集說書服用，效果更加 窮人面臨最大的問題？獨立書店的倒閉危機來自電商通路嗎《錢買不到的東西》邁可．桑德爾｜NeKo嗚喵．說書

Trong những thập niên gần đây, các giá trị thị trường ngày càng lấn át các chuẩn mực phi thị trường trong hầu hết các mặt đời sống. Sandel lập luận rằng, nếu chúng ta không sớm nhận ra điều này, chúng ta sẽ biến từ có một nền kinh tế thị trường sang trở thành một xã hội thị trường (market society) Michael J. Sandel đặt ra một trong những câu hỏi về đạo đức quan trọng nhất của thời đại chúng ta: có vấn đề gì đang xảy ra với thế giới này khi mọi thứ đều có thể mua được bằng tiền? Làm sao chúng ta có thể ngăn các giá trị thị trường khỏi xâm nhập vào những lĩnh vực của đời sống vốn không bị chi phối bởi các giá trị thị trường? Đâu là giới hạn đạo đức của thị trường? -- Người dịch: Nguyễn Trịnh Đôn, bài đăng trên Tạp chí Tia Sáng Original: Michael J. Sandel - The Moral Limits of Markets

Why has American politics fallen into such a state of horrible dysfunction? Can it ever be fixed? These are the questions that motivate Michael Tomasky's deeply original examination into the origins of our hopelessly polarized nation. “One of America's finest political commentators” (Michael J. Sandel), Tomasky ranges across centuries and disciplines to show how America has almost always had two dominant parties that are existentially, and often violently, opposed. When he turns to our current era, he does so with striking insight that will challenge readers to reexamine what they thought they knew. Finally, not content merely to diagnose these problems, Tomasky offers a provocative agenda for how we can help fix our broken political system―from ranked-choice voting and at-large congressional elections to expanding high school civics education nationwide.

Journalist Daniel Finkelstein, and writer Jill Paton Walsh, reveal their favourite books to presenter Harriett Gilbert. Daniel Finkelstein, recommends Influence: the Psychology of Persuasion by Robert B Cialdini. Jill Paton Walsh's choice is What Money Can't Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets by Michael J. Sandel. And Harriett Gilbert's pick is The Van by Roddy Doyle. Produced by Beth O'Dea