Made to Stick talks about a research study that compared the effectiveness of donation requests using different approaches.  One donation request provided statistics about the masses of people in one region of Africa facing hunger and poverty.  The second letter simply told the story of one needy girl from that region and said that all money donated would go to her.   Obviously, the second letter was tremendously more successful.  

People are much more willing to help if they know of a specific need, instead of just helping a cause.  In other words, when people learn of a huge problem they often feel that “someone should do something”, but they feel the problem is too large for them to solve themselves, so they do nothing.  It’s kind of like a room that is so messy you don’t know where to start, so you go do something else.  However, when we connect with a specific person with a specific need, we are much more likely to sacrifice and help, because we know we can do something to make a huge difference to that person with whom we are connected.  The specific connection makes the service much more real and meaningful. 

The Adoption.com Photolisting is an example of this principle that I have observed first hand.   When prospective adoptive parents are able to see pictures and read bios of orphans they often connect with and then adopt a specific child.  Many parents choose to adopt internationally after connecting with a specific child, who otherwise would not have adopted. Many parents who thought they only wanted to adopt a healthy Caucasian infant in the U.S. end up adopting an older, special needs child from a foreign country because of the connection which they formed with that child by using the photolisting.

If I came to your church congregation and spoke about the many foster children in your state who need to be adopted, I might have a few families come talk to me after the service.  However, if I brought 12 of those foster children with me and explained that I needed emergency foster homes for those children that night, ALL of the children would be taken in (if the families were qualified), and most of those children (if not all) would be permanently adopted by families in that congregation.

Think about it.  How many of us would, without a second thought, take in a starving orphan who showed up on our doorstep needing a place to stay?  I believe there is enough food, money, compassion, time, and great people in this world to solve huge social crises such as the world orphan crisis, hunger, needless death to curable diseases, and poverty.  The problem is not a lack of resources, but instead is effectively connecting those resources with great people who would be willing to help.  

So, then the question is how we can create those connections on a scale large enough to solve the otherwise insurmountable social problems in our world.  Kiva has showed us one of the large pieces of this solution by helping to everyday people, like my family, connect with and lend to entrepreneurs in third-world countries.  On-the-ground organizations help qualify and administer the loans.  And, their repayment rate would put to shame EVERY major bank in the United States.  My family tried to make a loan around Christmas time through Kiva, and the system was a little too effective.  There were more than thousands of people making loans and only four entrepreneurs seeking loans.  By the time we read through a newly posted loan and tried to participate in the loan, the full loan had already been fully funded.  There were more people at that time trying to loan than people listed seeking loans.  I just looked at Kiva as I wrote this blog entry, and it looks like there are now 208 active entrepreneurs listed seeking loans.  However, just in the last week more than 2,000 loans have been made by people like you and I, totaling more than $750,000.  This is another example that there is an abundance of great people, food, money, compassion and time to solve the world’s greatest social problems.  We just have to figure out how to create the specific connections.  

I want to build my future career greatly around this concept of creating connections to solve world social crises.  How can we more effectively build connections between great people in need and the great people who would love to help if they were just connected with specific situations? 

The Song “Amazing Grace”

When William Wilberforce was a child, his pastor was John Newton, the author of the song “Amazing Grace”. John had been the captain of a British slave ship, and had transported tens of thousands of slaves in abominable conditions. He later became a priest to atone for his sins, but lived with thousands of ghosts “haunting” him for his deeds of the past. The first time Wilberforce visits Newton in the movie, Wilberforce is contemplating becoming a pastor instead of continuing with politics. Newton encourages Wilberforce that he has an important work to do. Newton finally confesses his role in the slave trade, possibly as a result of Wilberforce’s outspoken position against slavery, and then Newton writes his memoirs which helped Wilberforce to document the atrocities of the slave trade for his political battle to abolish slavery. During Wilberforce’s last visit to Newton, he discovers that his friend who wrote the words from Amazing Grace “I was blind but now I see”, is now himself blind.

The Fight to End the Slave Trade

Wilberforce was chronically ill for most of his political career. His anti-slavery bills were rejected each year by parliament for about 20 years, despite the fact that he collected extensive evidences of the slave trade and 390,000 signatures to support his cause. William Pitt had been Wilberforce’s friend since they were both teenagers. Pitt became Prime Minister at the age of 24 and was credited with encouraging Wilberforce to take up the abolitionist cause. However, during the war with France, Wilberforce’s friends, including Pitt turned against him. Finally, Wilberforce crafted an anti-slavery bill which was disguised as an anti-French bill, and this brought Wilberforce and Pitt back together as friends.

The Horrors of Middle Passage

Imagine being kidnapped from your home, your family and friends. You are forced to walk in chains with captors speaking languages you don’t understand, and you have no idea where you are going. You are taken to a ship where you are traded to the slave traders for guns and other merchandise. The captors make you lie down below deck in chains in a space that is about 4 feet by 18 inches by 18 inches. The stink of human waste, perspiration and death reak in the air. On your trip across the atlantic ocean you watch as the slave traders throw the dead as well as some living slaves overboard. More than half of these slaves may have died during this middle passage voyage of injustice, cruelty and unimaginable human suffering.

Olaudah Equiano

Olaudah Equiano is an important figure in the abolition of the English slave trade. He wrote his first-hand account of slavery and the slave trade in his memoirs The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano, which sold 50,000 copies in just a few months. This was a very important work because it was one of the only first-hand accounts of slavery, and helped to change public sentiment about many elements of slavery, which had previously been kept secret. Equiano saved up enough money to finally purchase his freedom from one of his various masters. He then traveled the world on many adventures. He eventually returned to England and became very active in the anti-slavery movement where he traveled the country bearing witness of the atrocities of slavery. The abolition of the slave trade was finally passed ten years after he died.

Conclusion

This movie was tremendously inspiring, and made me want to commit my life to make more of a meaningful difference for good. According to Anti-Slavery International, more than 12 million people are still in slavery today, more than 200 years after William Wilberforce succeeded in ending the English Slave Trade. Find out what you can do to help end slavery world-wide at AntiSlavery.org.

Find the Amazing Grace DVD at Amazon.com.

The U.S. implementation of this Convention has been the catalyst for many changes in the international adoption process. Some of the most notable changes are the following:

• Adoption Service Provider Accreditation & Approval - Adoption service providers are now under the oversight of the Department of State, for the first time in U.S. history.  As such, they are accountable to the designated accrediting agencies, such as the Council on Accreditation (COA).   Adoption Service Providers must now meet requirements such as ethics, fee disclosure, records retention, training for families, and qualifications for agency staff.

• Forms & Processes - The old I-600 forms have been replaced with I-800 forms.  These forms introduce new requirements intended to ensure families are qualified to adopt, and help to better protect children.  For example, special training may be required for a child with special needs, and all families must have at 10+ hours of training.

• New Criteria of Being Adoptable – Children adopted through the Convention must now meet a new set of criteria as to whether or not they are adoptable.  For example, two birthparents can now relinquish a child for adoption if they are unable to provide proper care for their child. Consular officials must determine whether each specific child meets the criteria of being adoptable before custody is granted or the adoption is finalized in the child’s country.

• Tracking Adoptions – A new Adoption Tracking Service has been implemented to allow the Department of State to track all international adoptions.

• Tracking Complaints – A Hague Complaint Registry has been implemented to provide a system to help monitor and resolve complaints against adoption service providers.  The information in this registry will be used as the adoption service providers are reviewed for accreditation.

The Hague Convention on International Adoption is not perfect. Adoption agencies have complained about various elements, such as the insurance requirements, the increased levels of bureaucracy, and the resulting increased cost to do an international adoption.  Some of the smaller adoption agencies have simply been unable to survive with these additional requirements, and have closed their programs.  That portion is concerning to us, as we have seen a drop in the number of agencies doing international adoption, and the number of adoptions being completed.

However, on the other hand, over the years we have observed a destructive spiral that has happened in countries that do not have very strong adoption procedures and protections.  These countries open international adoption programs, the number of adoptions grows quickly, then a few unethical individuals ruin it for everyone else, and the countries’ international adoption programs are closed down, or implement unnecessary restrictions that substantially decrease the number of adoptions.  I know this is a gross over-simplification of much more complex issues.  However, several countries, which historically had effective international adoption programs are still closed today (or have dramatically reduced the number of international adoptions they allow) because of these core issues.

Whether we like it or not, this is the system is in place and it’s not going anywhere any time soon.  Over time, I believe the number of international adoptions will increase and exceed what they were prior to the issues that have been faced in international adoption recently.  I believe the Convention will reduce the risk of child abduction, sale, exploitation and trafficking. Most importantly, I believe that these systems will provide more protection for children, ensure parents are better qualified and prepared, help adoption agencies provide a higher level of service, decrease the risk to adoptive families, and reduce the risk that countries will close their international adoption programs because of system abuses.  Without diminishing the pain of the current problems, I believe that the Hague International Adoption Convention will be in the long-term best interest of children.

Learn more about the Hague International Adoption Convention.

The following list shows the core ideologies of the Visionary Companies:

3M

• Innovation; “Thou shalt not kill a new product idea”
• Absolute integrity
• Respect for individual initiative and personal growth
• Tolerance for honest mistakes
• Product quality and reliability
• “Our real business is solving problems”

American Express

• Heroic customer service
• Worldwide reliability of services
• Encouragement of individual initiative

Boeing

• Being on the leading edge of aeronautics; being pioneers
• Tackling huge challenges and risks
• Product safety and quality
• Integrity and ethical business
• To “eat, breathe, and sleep the world of aeronautics”

Citicorp

• Expansionism–of size, of services offered, of geographic presence
• Being out front-such as biggest, best, most innovative, most profitable
• Autonomy and entrepreneurship (via decentralization)
• Meritocracy
• Aggressiveness and self-confidence

Ford

• People as the source of our strength
• Products as the “end result of our efforts” (we are about cars)
• Basic honesty and integrity

General Electric

• Improving the quality of life through technology and innovation
• Interdependent balance between responsibility to customers, employees, society, and shareholders (no clear hierarchy)
• Individual responsibility and opportunity
• Honesty and integrity

Hewlett-Packard

• Technical contribution to the fields in which we participate
• Respect and opportunity for HP people, including the opportunity to share in the success of the enterprise
• Contribution and responsibility to the communities in which we operate
• Affordable quality for HP customers
• Profit and growth as a means to make all of the other values and objectives possible

IBM

• Give full consideration to the individual employee
• Spend a lot of time making customers happy
• Go the last mile to do things right; seek superiority in all we undertake

Johnson & Johnson

• The company exists “to alleviate pain and disease”
• “We have a hierarchy of responsibilities: customers first, employees second, society at large third, and shareholders fourth”
• Individual opportunity and reward based on merit
• Decentralization = Creativity = Productivity

Marriott

• Friendly service & excellent value; “make people away from home feel that they’re among friends and really wanted”
• People are number 1–treat them well, expect a lot, and the rest wil follow
• Work hard, yet keep it fun
• Continual self-improvement
• Overcoming adversity to build character

Merck

• “We are in the business of preserving and improving human life. All of our actions must be measured by our success in achieving this goal.”
• Honesty and integrity
• Corporate social responsibility
• Science-based innovation, not imitation
• Unequivocal excellence in all aspects of the company
• Profit, but profit from work that benefits humanity

Motorola

• The company exists “to honorably serve the community by providing products and services of superior quality at a fair price”
• Continuous self-renewal
• Tapping the “latent creative power within us”
• Continual improvement in all that the company does–in ideas, in quality, in customer satisfaction
• Treat each employee with dignity, as an individual
• Honesty, integrity, and ethics in all aspects of business

Nordstrom

• Service to the customer above all else
• Hard work and productivity
• Continuous improvement, never being satisfied
• Excellence in reputation, being part of something special

Procter & Gamble

• Product excellence
• Continuous self-improvement
• Honesty and fairness
• Respect and concern for the individual

Sony

• To experience the sheer joy that comes from the advancement, application, and innovation of technology that benefits the general public
• To elevate the Japanese culture and national status
• Being a pioneer–not following others, but doing the impossible
• Respecting and encouraging each individual’s ability and creativity

Wal-Mart

• “We exist to provide value to our customers”–to make their lives better via lower prices and greater selection; all else is secondary
• Swim upstream, buck conventional wisdom
• Be in partnership with employees
• Work with passion, commitment, and enthusiasm
• Run lean
• Pursue ever-higher goals

Walt Disney

• No cynicism allowed
• Fanatical attention to consistency and detail
• Continuous progress via creativity, dreams and imagination
• Financial control and preservation of Disney’s “magic” image
• “To bring happiness to millions” and to celebrate, nurture, and promulgate “wholesome American values.”

Visionary companies can, and usually do evolve into exciting new business ideas, yet they remain guided by their core ideology.

It is interesting to note that none of the Visionary Companies had more than six core ideologies. More than that becomes too difficult for everyone to remember. The core ideology should be simple enough and thoroughly indoctrinated so that all team member can recite them and apply them. The core ideology should not revolve around fads or trends, or change with the market. They should be the guiding stars for the direction of the company.

Jack Welch, the legendary CEO of GE said:

Numbers and values. We don’t have the final answer here–at least I don’t. People who make the numbers and share our values go onward and upward. People who miss the numbers and share our values get a second chance. People with no values and no numbers–easy call. The problem is with those who make the numbers but don’t share the values… We try to persuade them; we wrestle with them; we agonize over these people.

Although it appears to be essential for businesses to develop core ideologies and alignment with team members to those core ideologies, businesses will not be successful with core ideologies alone. Well articulated intentions are important, however it is more important to translate those intentions into concrete goals, or “mechanisms with teeth”, which can transform a wannabe company into a sustainable great company.

Find Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies at Amazon.com.

(Source: Built to Last)

There is a loneliness in all aspects of leadership. . . It was ever thus. The price of leadership is loneliness. The price of adherence to conscience is loneliness. The price of adherence to principle is loneliness. I think it is inescapable. The Savior of the world was a man who walked in loneliness. I do not know of any statement more underlined with the pathos of loneliness than His Statement: ‘The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man hath not where to lay his head.’ (Matthew 8:20).

In general conference today, Elder Craig Zwick encouraged us to stand for right. But, as we do so, he said that we may be standing alone for a while.  Elder Neuenschwander gave examples in general conference about righteous individual in a crowd.  He reminded us about Alma, who was one of the priests of the wicked King Noah in the Book of Mormon.  Alma stood up and spoke out in favor of the prophet Abinadi.  When King Noah sought to kill him, Alma fled, and started the Church of God among those people.  Elder Neuenschwander also gave the example of the one woman in the crowd who touched the hem of the Saviour’s robe and was healed. In Nephi’s dream of the tree of life in the Book of Mormon, a multitude of people partied in a great and spacious building.  They mocked a small number of people who had arrived at the tree of life and were partaking of it’s fruit, which symbolized the love of God.

Standing up for something often means standing alone. Moral leadership often does not have followers at first. Doing what’s right is usually not the popular position. However, in time our examples of standing for right can help others draw the strength they need to also stand up.  I’m grateful for courageous people who I have observed standing as moral leaders, and the strength they have given me through their example.

In the movie there is a scene with a woman selling bread crumbs to feed the birds. She says “Feed the birds–tuppence a bag.” To Walt, that was the metaphor for the whole film. “Tuppence” is a very small amount of money and it doesn’t cost us much to show a little bit of kindness.

Often, after a crazy week during the making of Mary Poppins Walt would ask for a status report from his team. Then, he’d ask them to play the song “Feed the Birds”. Walt loved that song. As it played he would look through the north window wishfully. Then, he would turn around and say, “That’s what it’s all about, isn’t it?” It wasn’t just message of the film. To Walt, the simple message of kindness was what life was really about.

Some of the highlighted concepts from the first week of my MBA courses included:

(1) Don’t hire anyone you can’t fire. Charity does not tolerate poor performance. When employees feel they cannot be fired, their performances drop and it does a disservice to them and the company.

(2) Opportunities multiply as they are seized. In my life, when I jump through one window that has opened another series of opportunities presents itself.

(3) Be Fair, but have the intestinal fortitude to make the tough decisions. Many companies allow themselves to be run into bankruptcy because they are not able to make the tough decisions, such as cutting staff and raising prices when necessary. When companies reach bankruptcy, a turnaround expert comes in and takes those difficult courses of action. If the bankrupt companies could have chosen to take those actions themselves they may have avoided bankruptcy. So, as business owners, we need to be willing to make the difficult decisions ourselves. If we can’t make these difficult decisions ourselves, we should get out of business. However, if those difficult decisions, such as letting staff go, ever cease to be painful, we should also get out of business.

(4) Don’t do anything stupid. This was a famous quote by the CEO of a company that was embroiled in accounting scandal. I originally felt that this quote referred to his desire to keep everything legal. However, it clearly became evident that this quote was iconic because the CEO and his team were consistently pushing the boundaries of ethics and this statement created a “moral ambiguity” under which ethical and legal lines were crossed.

This quote took on much more meaning on Friday, when we went to Aspen Grove to participate in team building activities that taught us business principles. Our guide for the day took us to two railroad ties that were about 15 feet apart. A rope hung down in the middle but was too far away to reach. Our group had to get across the gap between the railroad ties. To complicate the situation, many of the team members were given disabilities. For example, one of the team members had no arms. So, one of our group members created a lasso with belts and a shoe tied to the end, and lassoed the rope. Then, after a few members had crossed the chasm, we tied a loop in the rope hoping that the member of our group who was not able to use his arms would be able to sit in the rope loop. However, the rope was so high that it was very difficult to lift him into a sitting position.  The “disabled” group member had only his feet in the loop as we were struggling, and he finally asked us to just let him swing. The entire group filled with laughter, because we could see what he could not… His head would have hit the railroad tie if we had let him swing. The point of these two examples is that we need to be sure there is no ambiguity between what is right and wrong so that we don’t do something stupid, and we don’t let others around us swing into that railroad tie.

I was recently looking at the application for a top-tier MBA program, and one of their essay questions from last year asked, “In your career, you will have to deal with many ethical issues. What are likely to be the most challenging and what is your plan for developing the competencies you will need to handle these issues effectively?”

I believe the most challenging ethical issue that I face is that of social inequality. I live in a world of opportunity and luxury compared to 95% of the world. Note the following sobering statistics:

• By end-2003, there were an estimated 143 million orphans ages 0-17 in 93 developing countries. More than 16 million children were orphaned in 2003 alone (UNICEF).
• HIV/AIDS orphans more than 6,000 children every day.
• An estimated 218 million children aged 5-17 are engaged in child labor, excluding child domestic labor (UNICEF).
• At least one million deaths occur every year due to malaria, a treatable disease (CDC).
• A reported 1.2 million children are trafficked annually for child labor purposes and sexual exploitation (UNICEF).
• One billion people in the world today live in extreme poverty, surviving on $1 a day or less (Gates Foundation).
• Some 250,000 children are forced into armed conflict (UNICEF).
• Approximately 2 million children, most of them girls, are enslaved in the global commercial sex trade (UNICEF).
• 1.1 billion people lack clean water worldwide (Worldvision).

These statistics do not include the absence many other luxuries we take for granted, such as the opportunity for education, plentiful employment, good medical care, and political and religious freedoms. These are simply luxuries that much of the world does not enjoy.

I lived for two years in a third world country. I remember the first time I went hungry, with no food or money to buy food, and the accompanying sense of hopelessness. I know that one night of hunger is trite compared to the plight of millions around the world who regularly go to bed hungry. However, that night helped me to understand, even in a small way, the hopelessness that millions children and families around the world face every day. How would it feel to have my children die because I could not afford a $1.50 vaccine for malaria? How would it feel to have to give my thirsty children a glass of water I knew was filled with bacteria and human feces? How would it feel to have my children go to bed hungry because I could not earn enough money to provide food? How would I feel if my children could not get an education, and I knew they were doomed to repeat the vicious cycle of poverty?

The greatest issue that we face as those who have been blessed financially is to not look at those material goods as our possessions, and instead to look at them as spiritual stewardships. We have been blessed with abundance for a reason, and it is our responsibility to find what He wants us to do with those resources.

Although the global social crisis may seem bleak, we live in a world of abundance. There is plenty of food, clean water, clothing, medicine and education, or at least enough money to create it. The only question is whether those of us who have are willing to share our blessings with those who do not.

Bill Gates is the richest man on the planet (Forbes). He has contributed billions to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The foundation’s fortune has increased to $33 billion and is responsible for many charitable works around the globe — from a $100 million HIV/AIDS initiative in Botswana to a $1.5 billion commitment to distribute vaccines to children in developing countries.

I sat in a meeting last year with senior officials from the Mozambique child welfare system. They explained how diseases such as AIDS/HIV and malaria were decimating their population and that within just a few years they estimated that 10% of the entire population of their country would be orphans. They then explained the amazing work that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is doing in treating malaria in Mozambique and the hope that is providing.

Say what you want about Bill Gates, but where the rubber meets the road, he is making a greater difference in the lives of widows and orphans than anyone on the planet. Not only is he giving his money, but he is giving his time. In July 2008, he is stepping away from Microsoft to run his foundation full time. I know I’m not Bill Gates’ judge, and I know there are other factors which will be used to determine salvation in addition to good works. However, I can’t think of a better example of what the prophet James taught, that pure religion requires serving others, especially the widows and orphans.

At that time Nacy Pelosi was making headlines for her diplomatic visit to Syria against the wishes of President Bush. White House spokeswoman Dana Perino had said about Syria, that “This is a county that is a state sponsor of terror, one that is trying to disrupt the Senora government in Lebanon and one that is allowing foreign fighters to flow into Iraq from its borders. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad “probably really wants people to come, and have a photo opportunity, and have tea with him, and have discussions about where they’re coming from. But we just think it’s a really bad idea.”

So, very early in my conversation with my new colleague I brought up this situation, and I explained that I disagree with the position of President Bush. I believe in the old maxim that we should keep our friends close and our enemies closer. I explained that if President Bush does not agree with Syria, that eliminating communication isn’t going to solve the problem. If we want to influence foreign governments, we have to start by building friendships. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and President Bush should be vacationing together. They should try to find the elements where they do agree, such as humanitarian aid projects, and focus on how they can work together on those projects. Then, after a friendship has been built, there will be a much greater opportunity for those organizations to work together to solve more complicated issues. When we focus on differences walls are built, and the opportunity to positively influence is greatly diminished.

I know that it is not the role of a congresswoman to be an ambassador for the United States to foreign countries. That aside, instead of criticizing Nanci Pelosi, the Bush administration should have been focusing on improving their relationship with Syria. I was very encouraged to see last month that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met with her Syrian counterpart in the first high-level diplomatic contact between Washington and Damascus in more than two years.

No two governments and no two people are going to agree on all of the issues all of the time. The Bush administration regularly disagrees with each of its’ major allies about a variety of issues. If both of us think and act exactly the same, one of us is redundant. So, the difference between whether a country is an ally or an enemy is not whether we agree with them or not. Instead, it is whether or not we are willing to focus on the issues where we agree and work together on those issues.

I explained to my dinner guest that night, that this same concept is true in the adoption community and in other relationships in our life. None of the adoption organizations and no two people are going to agree with each other on all issues all of the time. Instead of focusing on the very small percentage of issues where we disagree, we need to focus on working together on the 95% of the issues where we do agree. Then, once we have a friendship, there is a much greater likelihood that we will be able to work together to resolve the issues where we disagree. Or, if not, the worst-case scenario is that we will be able to synergistically work together to make a difference on the 95% of the issues where we agree.