Attraction, Gratitude, and CSR

Yesterday I mentioned how I am discovering the power of my thoughts on a whole new level by using the principles of "The Law of Attraction" and the "Science of Gratitude". This is a growing movement right now. Because of the popularity and marketing of the books The Secret by Rhonda Byrnes and Thank You Power by Deborah Norville, thousands of people at once are discovering these powerful forces.

What I have not heard mentioned yet is how these exact same principles can transform a company on so many levels. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has proven to be an effective business strategy in many arenas. Lately, it is usually only spoken of in terms of environmentalism. Politics is the force driving CSR, so whatever force is driving politics will logically filter down to CSR. Global Warming is the hot topic now, so it hogs the spotlight.

While our environment is very important and should take a prominent place in our discussions, I think that we should realize that other issues deserve our attention as well. We should also realize that CSR has other facets that can benefit a corporation as well as its stakeholders. Just to name a few, there are issues of diversity of the workforce, giving back to the community in a tangible way, enforcing CSR standards on your vendors, and improving the customer experience.

I apply the law of attraction to my life by thinking positive thoughts about what I desire. I do so with a firm belief that I will attract those things into my life. The result is that the soundtrack to my thought life contains less negativity and focused, positive concentration on my goals and desires.

Once I accepted the validity of this concept and recognized the benefits of it, I realized that a corporation can make this work for them even more powerfully than an individual could. The funny thing is, they are often unaware of how they are using some of the principles of the law of attraction right now. If they deliberately set out to think as a group about a goal and attain it, I am sure that company would conquer their market and exceed expectations.

The people who are teaching The Secret call it the "Law of Attraction" but I don't think it is a law that always works. I believe that at all times there are other forces at work: gravity, thermodynamics, etc. In addition, you have other people manifesting their thoughts. In The Secret, they teach that if you are in a car accident it is because you attracted that to you with your thoughts, even if it was inadvertent. I think that there are times when you are simply in the wrong place at the wrong time while someone else is manifesting their thoughts in some way.

Not only can we be affected by other people's thoughts, but we can combine our thoughts together. I think that if several people concentrate at once, that their thoughts together can affect their world. That is why sporting events can be more exciting when you have friends beside you or you go to a stadium. I think that is why movies are always better in a theatre. And I think that is a major force in the success and failure of corporations.

When you see a corporation full of excited people who all have the same purpose in mind, like Google and Wal-Mart, you find that they are unstoppable and limitless in their power to conquer markets. When you have corporations like Ford where you have several groups competing against each other and various visions, you see struggle despite having all the ingredients for a successful corporation.

Wal-Mart has underpaid employees, from executives to associates. They have a tiny headquaters far from civilization. Even so, they grow, profit and innovate like no other corporation. They penetrate "unpenetrable" markets, they exceed revenue forecasts, and they keep finding new sources of revenue.

Ford has an illustrious history, international brand recognition, some of the brightest professionals from many different fields who are highly compensated, and a network of invested interests to support their every need. Even so, they have been surpassed in several markets, have had to close dealerships, and there is little hope for the near future.

Wal-Mart has a vision and purpose. They have a corporate cheer. They strive to keep all levels of employees in close contact with each other. There are voices of dissent in Wal-Mart, but they are few. The vast majority of Wal-Mart is solidly in step with the vision of low prices, everyday.

Ford is divided in so many ways, it would take all day to point them out. To name a few: They own various businesses that do not synergize. They have unions with one vision and executives with another. They have the Ford family vs. the other shareholders. Their international business is at war with their American masters. The franchise owners disagree with the corporation on the business model. The customers of Ford even seem to disagree with each other on whether Ford is a low-price product or a quality product.

The point I am making is what Abraham Lincoln was trying to say: a house divided against itself will fall. If a company can find a way to focus everyone's thoughts on one goal, they will achieve exactly what they set their mind on. The only challenge at that point is having a dream as big as the resources available to you. Remember September 12, 2001? It was a rare moment when all Americans were thinking and feeling the same thing and having the same desire; no one ever wants September 11th to happen again, but I think we all agree that our nation would be better off if we could agree like we did on September 12th.

From the "Science of Gratitude", we learn that being grateful at all times is a powerful force. Even if we are facing adversity, if we count our blessings we realize that we are at the starting point of a great future. This applies to companies as well.

Truly grateful companies that fail are rare. I can't think of one off the top of my head. I can think of thousands of companies who have found success while showing gratitude. I would argue that it is easy to prove that their gratitude is a major factor of their success.

Have you ever worked for a boss who seemed to be truly grateful for your work? I have had bosses who recognized my extra efforts; I was more likely to make an extra effort if I knew it would be recognized. I am not talking about cash, I am talking about a nod or a word of thanks. Cash is always welcome, and it is appropriate if my extra efforts resulted in additional revenue or cost-reduction. However, if all I did was add an extra column to a report or I reorganized the supply cabinet, all I need is thanks and I will find some other way to go above and beyond.

One boss looking for opportunities to thank his or her employees could transform a department. If you take it up to the corporate level, you can create a culture of gratitude. There are all sorts of examples where companies train their management, implement recognition programs, and provide employee appreciation days or Christmas bonuses to show their gratitude. A company's benefits program is often a strong indicator of their gratitude to their employees.

A corporation has other interests to be grateful for. First of all, there are the stockholders who risk their money on the company. To show them gratitude is easy: pay a dividend, grow the business, and stay out of trouble. Corporate officers who pay themselves rediculous bonuses and spend millions on perks are ungrateful. Companies like Wal-Mart who keep their executives in a thrifty mindset are expressing gratitude to the people who have risked their savings on company.

A corporation needs to appreciate their customers as well. The Bell Telephone companies did not do this while they held a mopnopoly on the market. In 1996, that market was opened to competition, and customers fled in droves. The same happened in cable TV markets when satellite TV became affordable.

On the other hand, market research has shown that people will knowingly pay higher prices out of loyalty or preference. For instance, I will always get my oil changed at Keystone Chrysler in Mission, KS. I started going their because they were a customer of mine. Because my company did not appreciate them enough, they are leaving us. However, I will not leave them because they have shown their appreciation to me every time I go in there. I don't know if they are the best bargain in own, but they treat me the best and that is worth it.

Look in your wallet and identify all the cards you use earn points at your favorite businesses. Not credit cards, I am talking about the rewards cards. I have cards for Borders, True Value, Price Chopper, and Holiday Inn, among others. When I travel, airlines and hotels show me appreciation by awarding points to me. They know that my company is paying the bill, but they also know that I likely influenced the decision and they appreciate that.

For me, the "Law of Attraction" and the "Science of Gratitude" define the fundamental principles of CSR and make its implementation easy. If a company wants to improve its situation, it has to get everyone focused on the same goal. One way to begin to focus people is to provide them with a goal they can all agree on: clean water, feeding hungry kids, or maybe improving education. A focused CSR intiative could be the first step in focusing the various stakeholders on unifying a corporate mission.

For instance, at Ford they could all choose the goal of wiping out malaria on the continent of Africa. I predict that it would not be hard to get the employees to agree to give up a little time and money to help out on that mission, no matter what color their collar is. Moreover, surely every Ford customer wouldn't mind financing an extra $20 on the purchase of their car to be donated to the cause? The communities around Ford plants would probably forgive many offences if they knew that Ford was making a difference in fighting Malaria.

Can you see the worldwide marketing campaign now: "At Ford, we not only build safe and efficient cars, we reduced deaths from malaria last year by 25%". After the one unifying mission is in full swing and everyone feels good about it, a discussion about Ford family interests or collective bargaining would have a channel and a meeting point. Everything else would just be details. There would be evidence in everyone's mind that they can all work together efective on malaria, so why not on other things as well?

If there was more gratitude at Ford, they would be a very different company. Even Wal-Mart could learn a lesson here. To be honest, if Wal-Mart showed more gratitude to their entry-level associates they would probably move from company to cult. Seriously, if an unskilled and unambitious person knew that they could go to Wal-Mart, work hard at the entry level for twenty years, and be rewarded with a livable wage and basic benefits, they would devoted to the end. They would jump on a grenade for a company like that.

This is the major failing of the Conservative Political mindset. We believe that the marketplace efficiently establishes rates of pay based on supply and demand. However, like the "law of attraction" there are other factors that can influence supply and demand. Many of my fellow Conservatives speak disparagingly of low-skilled and unambitious employees. They seem to believe that these people are by-and-large lazy and unethical. I cringe when I hear a person of my political philosophy saying that poor people need a kick in the pants, or that all they have to do is [enter activity here] and they would get ahead.

In real life, it is more complicated than it is in the mind of many Conservatives. I do not propose that we should pay janitors the same as engineers or CEO's. However, if the guy is happy as a janitor and doesn't want to be a manager or take college classes, why can't we just be grateful to have a good janitor and reward his hard work and attention to detail with a livable wage and decent benefits. If the janitor is good, he should be able to afford a decent car and a decent place to live, provide his family with a comfortable life and reliable health care, and set aside some money for retirement.

Are you so far unconvinced that we should pay a janitor more than the market requires right now? Okay, close your eyes and imagine your company without a janitor. Can you see the trash? Can you smell the bathroooms? Can you feel the insects and rodents crawling up your leg? Now do you appreciate your janitor? If so, pay him like you mean it. Only an idiot could make an arguement that janitors who do their job well shouldn't be paid better.

The alternative is what we have now: dirty bathrooms, unmotivated janitors, and janitor's kids growing up without every seeing a dentist or a regular doctor. You have things being stolen by the night cleaning crew to help them compensate for their status and treatment. You have high turnover because they can always make ten cents more per hour down the street.

Public school janitors are an example of how this can work well. Have you ever heard of a school janitor strike? I haven't; certainly it is rarer than a teacher's strike. The janitors who I knew growing up would help us with anything we asked. They were always seen doing something productive, rather than spending the whole day on a smoke break. They knew they had it good, and that their retirment would be taken care of. They enjoyed their work. Therefore, they did their job and a few extras along the way.

You will notice that I use the words "livable wage" rather than "living wage". This is where I define myself as a conservative. I think that if the government legislates minimum wages, they end up making the situation worse rather than better. When the minimum wage goes up, the law of supply and demand becomes the primary factor here: there are now less job opportunities available in the economy.

You see, there is a certain amount of money available for wages at any given time. Let's say that in Kansas City for 2008, there is $1 billion available for wages. In the current conditions, lets say there 1.5 million jobs, of which 500,000 are at the minimum wage. Now, add a city law requiring an additional "living wage" increase of $2.00 per hour on top of the federal minimum wage. What happens?

If Kansas City increases the minimum amount that you can pay an employee without also increasing the amount available to pay wages somehow (through a tax cut or other established means), then you have essentially ensured that job opportunities in Kansas City will decrease.

If you increase the amount a business has to pay in wages without increasing their revenue by that exact amount simultaneously, then the money will have to come from somewhere. Many leftists would say that the business owner should willingly give up some of their profits to their employee. I agree, but that cannot be legislated. If the business owner does not decide on their own to give up those profits and does not accept a reason to do so, then they will simply decrease the number of employees that they have on staff. Alternatively, they will take their business to another city or country. See China for a dramatic example of that. You will have some employees laid off and now receiving no wages rather than minimum wages (increasing the burden on public assistance). The employees who are left will have to work harder for the same pay.

What many leftists do not understand is that business owners who are most affected by minimum wage increases and living wage laws are not enjoying huge profit windfalls. There are many businesses who are just barely getting by or are working hard to grow into their market. The owners do not have equity or cash, they just have debt, bills, and an idea. By increasing their overhead without increasing their revenue, you have limited that business owner's effectiveness. Maybe they were competing against a Chinese company and gaining ground; now that you have increased the minimum wage they are unable to compete with the Chinese company. Surely you'd agree that is not best for the minimum wage employee, the city, or the country. Only the Chinese would root for that scenario.

When we express gratitude, we are rewarded. The quality of our own thoughts and emotions are improved. Our cummunications with, and relations to, other people are improved. We begin to receive back the karma we send out. People begin to send us more favor because they know we will appreciate it and think we deserve it.

When a company appreciates people, they gain power. They can negotiate with unions easier because they are already known as an appreciative employer. They can earn favor from their customers and communities. They earn loyalty and extra effort from their employees.

If corporations are grateful for what they receive, they receive more. In that case, unions become unnecessary...if other factors are taken care of as well. Minimum wage increases become unnecessary. In fact, in a perfect world of appreciative corporations we wouldn't need to worry as much about Social Security reform, insolvency and bankruptcies, health care and medicare, and elderly people living on dog food. Marketing costs would be lower because people would mention your good works and good products together in excited tones for free. Political backlash in foreign countries would be minimized because who wants to bite the hand that irrigates, educates, and feeds them? If oil companies in Venezuala had been more appreciative of their hosts, we never would have heard of Hugo Chavez.

Think about companies like Jet Blue. They have a vision for their employees: let them spend more time at home with their family. The employees are committed to this vision; they appreciate the policy and the policy makes them feel like they are appreciated by their employer. Therefore, their minds are now open for Jet Blu to add a vision. The employees of Jet Blue are more likely to hear the vision, accept it, focus on it, and work on it together because they are already in a position of gratitude. Now, Jet Blue can say, "Always try to upsell a flight to Salt Lake City with every call" or "Reduce call time by 1 minute without reducing revenue or customer satisfaction" and the employees will be more likely to accept the vision, focus on it, and achieve it.

I would like to point out that when a company expresses gratitude, it must be sincere. It will take thought, discussion, and soul-searching to reach a point of effective sincerity, and that path leads through profitable analysis and brainstorming. Only sincere gratitude will allow a company to maximize its effectiveness during implementation. Insincere gratitude will just be a cardboard cut-out of what they could be benefitting from.

To top it all off, people can smell the difference. If Pepsi implements a truly sincere gratitude program and Coke copies it without sincerity, the end result will be tremendous dividends for Pepsi and miniscule or negative dividends for Coke.

I have said before that CSR needs to be sincere. It is great if a company donates money to a homeless shelter, whether they are sincere in their effort or just doing it for publicity. However, an insincere comapny will end its efforts as soon as they feel they have milked that cow dry. A sincere company will continue its efforts even when the cameras shut off. That sincerity will generate a special kind of loyalty among its stakeholders. Employees, communities, NGO's, customers, vendors, suppliers, and even shareholders will recognize and reward sincere efforts at gratitude and responsibility.

People are less likely to sell off a stock at any price if they really like the company, while they will sell at the drop of a hat if they do not have any feeling for the company. The difference has saved some companies from the total wrath of bear markets; compare Cisco and Google to some of their fallen comrades over the last 10 years.

How does a company implement sincerity? That is a topic that has failed to show up in any business book I have read. However, in considering how to get the "Law of Attraction" and the Science of Gratitude" to word in a corporation, I realize that it all starts with gratitude.

If the leaders of a business sit down and discover the things that they are truly thankful for, they will have a great starting point for implementing CSR. No matter where a company is financially and strategically, they have something to be thankful for. Once they start listing those things and then reaching out to express gratitude, they will see the ship start to turn. Each time they do this, they will find that their gratitude attracts more things to be thankful for. By thanking a vendor for meeting a deadline, they will find that they not only get better service but they also get price breaks or extra service. By appreciating the employees they have, they will find that the quality of employee that they attract increases. As they reach out to their communities, they will find that they get attacked less and defended more. Appreciating customers attracts customers, and their marketshare doubles.

At some point of considering the things to be grateful for, you begin to appreciate democracy, capitalism, clean water, lack of war, an educated workforce, quality of American healthcare, and so many other basics that we usually take for granted. A company who sincerly appreciates what they have will naturally want to provide some essentials of civilized life to a people who do not have it available to them. That is when their attempts at CSR will turn the world upside down.

The difference between sincere and insincere attempts at CSR are obvious. Sincerity adds a level of passion, detail, and effectiveness that is unknown by insincere companies. Why should a company seek to sincerely implement an effective CSR initiative?

1. Because it increases your leverage amongst your stakeholders: employees, communitiues, giovernments, vendors, customers, shareholders.

2. It multiplies your marketing efforts.

3. Because you find that you are truly thankful for what you have and you want to express your gratitude--hoping that your karma comes back you.