Berry Picker

The mainstream media deal with a main foreign-policy question

Everywhere we turn, we’re being offered incentives to act a certain way. A new book ponders the ethical issues of the incentive culture.

An Israeli Samsung commercial that, quite incredibly, depicts a Mossad operation in Iran

The theme at Davos this year was "The Great Transformation: Shaping New Models." One of the models up for discussion was leadership. Panels with titles like "Leading Under Pressure" and "New Leadership Models from China" abounded. While speaking at a private dinner hosted by PwC on the topic of leadership and values in a volatile world, the questions put to me were, "What leadership traits will be paramount in the future?" and "What are the new expectations the public has for business leaders?"

On reflection, it struck me that the conversation this year was very different than in years past. We were no longer talking about reinventing leadership but about adding new elements to the old model. An additive operation in the algebra of change, as my colleague Stuart Albert would put it, not a subtractive or transformative process.

On the opening morning at Davos, I attended a session entitled, "The New Context for Leadership." Up for discussion were purpose-driven leadership, collaborating across organizational boundaries, and inspiring the younger generation. Peter Grauer, the Chairman of Bloomberg, talked about the results of a study to identify what leadership competencies were most valued in his company. The top performers had contradictory attributes, what he called the "and" factor: They had future vision but were tactically strong; they provided strong guidance but were open to challenge; they relied on extensive networks but were also capable of moving fast (i.e., unilaterally); they were hands-on but also empowering.

A similar idea was advanced at the Women Leader's dinner on Friday night. Michelle Bachelet, the former Chilean president, said that in changing times the best leaders are those who can be generals one day and consensus-builders the next. Josette Sheeran, U.N. World Food Program Executive Director, agreed, stating that today's leadership still needs to be hierarchical but also needs to be flexible.

Since the 2008 economic crisis, two very different "rhetorics" about leadership have coexisted. One, the traditional rhetoric, says that our perpetually shifting environment calls for leadership that is more decisive and crisis-oriented than the slow and consensual style that we might prefer in more munificent times. The second, more "politically correct" rhetoric says that the old, command and control model is responsible for many of the problems of the recent years and that only with a more collaborative and inclusive leadership will we get the flexibility, innovation, and new thinking that we need to prosper in a fast-changing and hyper-connected world.

Now it seems that we have settled on a solution — not "either/or," but "yes/and." Like Janus, the Greek god depicted as a man with two heads, each facing in opposite directions, our new leader can and must have it both ways: command and collaborate.

There is obvious practical benefit to this kind ambidexterity. But does it exist, and does it inspire? Or is it just a theoretical model? The people who come to mind when I ask my students about a leader they admire fit the "command rhetoric" (e.g., Steve Jobs) or the "collaborate rhetoric" (e.g., Gandhi), but not both. Never in 23 years of teaching MBA and executive courses have I heard someone cited because of his or her capacity to "code-switch" their leadership style. In fact, when we see leaders who do this effectively, we question their authenticity.

But my questions are not rhetorical, for these are clearly complex and volatile times. Are we looking for leaders who can supplement the traditional tool kit, or do we want leaders who will transform it?

Israel just won a seat on the executive board of the United Nations Development Program, sending a strong message to pro-Israel UN-bashers in America.

The record-breaking Facebook IPO proves a number of things. But one thing it won't prove is that investors who buy now will get wealthy.

Facebook's success confirms these ideas:

The value of networks. Networks become more valuable as the number of users increases. As the largest undifferentiated network that anyone can join, Facebook's value comes from the fact that anyone can join. As numbers climbed into the millions and now close to a billion users, Facebook becomes mandatory, not optional, for those who wish to reach their friends or their potential customers.

The power of platforms. Launching "Platform" in 2007 enabled developers to build apps for the Facebook website. And of course Facebook itself is simply a way for others to create content and share it however they wish — with strangers or with intimates.

The importance of partners. Attracting Zynga and other social game developers who could sell virtual goods arguably helps Facebook with another way to make money besides advertising revenue.

The huge human hunger for connections. Facebook offers intimacy and a feeling of belonging in an increasingly impersonal world. It helps like-minded people sort through the crowd and communicate with peers, with sometimes revolutionary effects.

Now back to the IPO. The gargantuan valuation of $100 billion proves another truth:

The triumph of hope over experience. Facebook could indeed exceed expectations — anything is possible in this world of constant surprises — but history offers a different perspective. To be the next Apple on a sustainable basis will require another wave or two of major innovation. Simply mining the current platform and data won't be enough.

Before Facebook was born, in the distant past of a dozen-plus years ago, there was a dotcom bubble accompanied by proclamations that the Internet changed the laws of business, that business cycles were over, and that cyberspace knew no limits. Valuations soared, until the crash dashed hopes and lost billions. Now social networks are supposed to be different and change the rules. Facebook is certainly a force for enormous change in many social institutions, as Mark Zuckerberg says. He will be a mega-billionaire after the IPO. But that doesn't mean that ordinary investors can bet their financial futures on friending Facebook.

The reality of web marketing is that almost all of it happens on platforms that are owned by others. Platform owners, such as Facebook or Google, have provided environments where some things are easy to do, some things are much harder to do, and some things simply can't be done. Even tougher for marketers is that these systems are constantly changing as the platforms evolve and grow. The best way to keep attention and stay up to date is to appeal to the philosophy of each platform's users.

In the last few years, Facebook has gone through major growth — from businesses using Groups and Profiles to Pages, which are still changing on their own. This evolution was met by a lot of complaining and foot-dragging by the marketers who were responsible for converting their Group to a Page, or similar issues on other sites. Google+ even launched without support for business features and a rule that any business on the website would be taken off until business features were actually launched.

While there is no escaping the changing systems for these platforms, there are ways that you can be better prepared. Marketers who ask themselves the following questions will rarely get caught off guard because their marketing actually speaks to their audience and doesn't hinge on a specific feature or method of outreach.

Why did the platform come about?
Each marketing platform, whether digital or not, came together with an original purpose or goal: sharing content, keeping in touch, spreading news, and so on. Facebook started so that people could share things they like and keep in touch. While Facebook changes its functionality from time to time, they have stayed true to their core philosophy and tried to make it easier and safer for their users to do more. Other platforms are the same way. Start your plans by looking at how and why the platform began to exist. For example, Google started the AdWords platform, in part, because they could serve ads similar to the keywords users searched.

Google often updates the Terms of Service for their AdWords product. Instead of getting bitten every time this happens, look at Google's goals for the AdWords product and make sure that your ads match where Google is trying to go by writing relevant, useful advertisements. Google even gives incentives to people who write strong, successful ads with lower prices and better placements since that benefits them on every angle. It's also critical to Google that people trust AdWords ads and find them useful, or Google risks losing their main profit center.

What is the killer feature for the platform's audience?
Instead of planting your ads on the edges of what's acceptable or re-using the same strategy on many sites, optimize your work for long-term success by working with customer interest. Create a buyer persona for the people who use each platform, and then use that to develop your strategy. When you've figured out exactly what the perfect item is for that audience, you can create something that has a chance at being really successful.

Zynga, a game company that makes social games primarily for Facebook, has appealed to their customers through the culture of sharing. Their games incorporate the sharing atmosphere very well by encouraging users to share their progress and favorite games with their friends as they play. By aligning their product's marketing with Facebook's culture of sharing, Zynga gets their top users to do their marketing for them, and is unlikely to be disrupted by any platform changes that Facebook makes.

Where else is your audience active online?
As you develop a strategy and methodology for each platform that you are on, continue to research and track what other sites or systems your customers are using. These are all additional opportunities to capture the attention of your audience. If you're not sure what those other platforms are, conduct a survey or ask a few of your current customers where else they're active online. This is valuable intelligence about where to spread your marketing content. Creating customer interaction on multiple platforms will allow you to build a deeper and stronger relationship with your audience. Just be sure that instead of just copying the same strategy and hoping it works somewhere else, you use what you've learned to create something new.

In a society that treats them like children, sports -- and especially martial arts -- offer a way to express strength and independence.

A strange story appeared in Haaretz the other day asserting that the former Middle East negotiator was provided a secure telephone line to the White House.

A bold new proposal to resolve the Iranian crisis

What the country's web restrictions mean for its foreign policy

The military's job today is not to "beat" the Taliban but rather to shape the choices in the field for the political stakeholders and to be able to preempt any effort to overthrow the government in Kabul.

Each nation has its own unique history and culture and meaningful change can only start from within, but the U.S. can help.

An interview with Frances Frei and Anne Morriss, authors of Uncommon Service: How to Win by Putting Customers at the Core of Your Business.

Download this podcast

Toby Lester examines one of the world’s most intriguing drawings.

Film director Neil Jordan’s fifth novel follows two men who can pass for each other.

In Ramona Ausubel’s fablelike novel, a Romanian village shields itself from the Nazis through sheer force of imagination.

An American couple’s marriage spins out of control after they become proprietors of a moldering Irish local.

A father describes, and rages at, the loss of his teenage son.

William Burroughs’s letters from the years of his literary success.