Many of my most thoughtful colleagues still seem torn about the upcoming presidential election. They are disgusted and frightened by Donald Trump, but uncomfortable with Hillary Clinton. However, I find myself in a very different place.
Politically, I am an independent who has voted in like measure for Republicans and Democrats. After graduating from business school, I worked in the administrations of Presidents Johnson and Nixon. Like many of my colleagues, I am a fiscal conservative and social progressive who has often struggled to find candidates to support that are aligned with this philosophy.
In this election the choice between Clinton and Trump is clear: one is fully qualified to be our next President, and the other has neither the experience nor the temperament to be President. For this reason I am enthusiastically endorsing Hillary Clinton for President of the United States. Let me explain my rationale.
Clinton will be a terrific leader for our country, and will rebuild confidence in our nation for all its people. As several major political leaders, including President Obama, have said, she is the most qualified and most experienced person ever to run for president. She has the intellect, temperament, wisdom, and leadership ability to bring us together as a nation and lead us forward. I trust her fully to use her experience to make the right decisions and always put the interests of the American public ahead of her own needs. She will also unleash fresh energy from new faces or those who have been sitting on the sidelines, dismayed by the dysfunctional of government.
Having been in public service for twenty-five years, her actions have been scrutinized in every possible way. This has caused her to be guarded in public. As she noted in her acceptance speech, “I have been in public service for twenty-five years. I realize I am more comfortable with service than being public.” That is not unusual for politicians seeking our nation’s highest office. Former Presidents Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan were often reticent publicly, as is President Obama.
No doubt Clinton has made mistakes, as she did with her private email server, but which of us has not made significant mistakes in our careers that we have come to regret? The issue for politicians like Clinton is that everything you do is examined with a microscope in the public eye. In contrast, Clinton’s opponent has never held a public or elected position, so he has no record of service to examine.
A majority of Americans are looking for change in electing our next president, but there is no agreement on what that change might look like. In my experience there are two ways to create change: blow the system up and start over, or work diligently for change from within. There is ample evidence that the former cannot work in the U.S., especially under the U.S. Constitution with its proven system of balance of power. The French tried it in 1789, leading to a long period of chaos. The Germans tried it in 1933 when the Nazis seized power and Adolf Hitler was elected Chancellor, leading to the most violent war in history.
Real change is genuinely hard work and must come from within. This is where Clinton excels. Everyone who has worked with her – Republicans as well as Democrats – has come to admire her work ethic and her ability to create positive action. She realizes changes by working with all sides and across the aisle to reach compromise agreements that serve the greater good. This kind of change is never glamorous or exciting, but it is the only way to make meaningful progress. Clinton’s record of creating improvements domestically in education, health care, human rights and equality for all is exceptional.
In international affairs presidents have even greater latitude to make monumental decisions with lasting consequences. Not infrequently, presidents who lack deep knowledge of foreign affairs can make major mistakes, as John Kennedy did with the Bay of Pigs, Lyndon Johnson did in escalating U.S. troops in Vietnam, and George W. Bush made in invading Iraq. Government leaders around the world – friend and foe alike – rely on the stability of the U.S. to deliver on its long-term commitments. In large measure this is why Republicans and Democrats have been unified in their international positions since the 1940s. It is this unity that has made America the greatest nation in the world.
In this realm Clinton stands out even more. She will use her leadership, diplomacy and negotiating skills to advance U.S. interests around the world. She knows every world leader personally and can gauge and influence their actions. In turn, they know her to be both tough and trustworthy – two essential qualities for dealing with both friends and foes. She will not flinch from confronting our foes, nor fail to honor our long-standing commitments to our allies.
Being president is not a one-person job. While the president may be the person constantly in the spotlight, it takes thousands of exceptional leaders to lead this nation. With Clinton’s long history of working with the most dedicated U.S. public servants, I expect she will appoint a talented team of experienced veterans combined with dedicated new faces across the political and geographic spectrum that represents America’s great diversity. This is what capable leaders like Clinton do so well.
Of particular importance in this election are the Millennials and their involvement with national affairs. Clinton’s biggest challenge between now and November will be to get the Millennials engaged to focus their enormous passions on making America a better place to live and work for their generation and those that come behind.
For all these reasons I endorse Hillary Clinton for President. I urge each of you to support her and get behind her campaign. She is the right leader for turbulent times. As President, Hillary Clinton will make America even greater.
Britain’s leaders were out of sync with its voters. Could the same be happening at your company?
The U.K.’s Brexit vote to leave the European Union shocked the world. The day before the vote,
London odds makers gave 80% chance that Remain would be victorious, as polls revealed a 10-point edge over the Leave campaign.
What caused the politicians and “smart money” to misjudge the electorate so badly? Elites underestimated the anger and despair of Britain’s working class. They also discounted the apathy of the millennial generation, which favored Remain but only 36% voted.
The U.S. faces similar issues: working class anger, hostility toward the federal government, and a desire to blame problems on “the other”—Hispanic people, Muslims, African-Americans, and China. These emotions translate into fears of immigration, globalization, free trade, and technology—all themes that fan flames of distrust in government and the establishment.
American business leaders who ignore their workers’ feelings do so at their own peril. Unhappy employees lead to disengaged workplaces and mediocre results. Here are five lessons they can learn from Brexit to apply immediately in their businesses:
Focus on your workforce first and stock market second
As the near-term pressures from short-term investors have accelerated, business leaders have engaged in financial engineering such as stock buybacks, cost cutting, and spinoffs. As a consequence, companies aren’t investing in their employees. Health care, perquisites, and other benefits are being cut back, employee training programs shelved, and support for creativity and innovation diminished, while the gap in compensation between rank-and-file workers and executives has widened dramatically. With employee cutbacks, fewer people are being asked to carry a larger share of the workload.
To turn around these attitudes, business leaders need to stop trying to please the stock market – which will never be satisfied, no matter how strong the results – and engage and inspire their front-line people. Instead of cutting employee costs, they should be investing in them through training, added compensation incentives, attractive healthcare, and by creating an empowering culture.
Support front-line employees who grow the business, instead of adding corporate bureaucracy that makes work more difficult
All too often, managers see their job as controlling employees throughout the enterprise. Finance groups focus on cost-cutting, risk-averse lawyers make the company impossible to do business with, and human resources casts judgment on employees. As a result, corporate departments at many businesses have grown while the rest of the organization has shrunk, causing resentment.
Meanwhile, top executives spend most of their time in internal meetings poring over numbers rather than listening to employees in research labs, offices, and factories.
Corporate staffs in multi-business companies should be shrunk dramatically in size and refocused on helping employees do their jobs and making it easier for customers to do business. Accenture, with its 275,000 employees, is a good example of this approach. It has no true corporate headquarters, and its minimal corporate staff is dispersed around the world and focused on supporting customers.
Spend one-third of your time with customers
Whether you’re in retail, health care, IT, or financial services, there is no greater place for learning what is going on than being in the marketplace with customers. When I was at Medtronic, I observed more than 700 procedures in 12 years; it was the greatest learning opportunity I ever had. Leaders who apply all five senses to customer interactions learn more first-hand than they do from reading reports or looking at PowerPoint presentations.
When he became CEO of Unilever UL 0.32% , Paul Polman asked his leaders 10 questions to see how much time they were spending with customers. Their responses were so embarrassing that Polman challenged them to refocus their organizations on customers. Similarly, Anne Mulcahy kept XeroxXRX 1.81% out of bankruptcy by skipping the endless meetings at headquarters in favor of riding with field salespeople to stem the tide of customer defections. This type of customer engagement signals to the entire organization that the company puts customers first.
Promote transparency internally and externally
In today’s world of social media and smartphones, transparency is not only the right choice – it is the only choice. Employees expect their leaders to keep them informed about what is going on, no matter how negative the news. When they are not treated with transparency, they turn to external sources and internal rumors for information, which they perceive is more timely and accurate than internal communication.
Following a 2015 layoff, Zappos founder Tony Hsieh wrote to employees: “Remember this is not my company, and this is not our investors’ company. This company is all of ours, and it’s up to all of us where we go from here.” Hsieh’s communications are authentic, transparent, and informal.
Former FordF 2.94% CEO Alan Mulally used weekly business performance reviews (BPR) to create transparency across the organization to turn around the troubled automaker. In these meetings, Mulally dove into details deeper than any Ford executive had ever done. Honest conversations helped to heal Ford’s politically charged, blame-focused culture. Rather than frowning on problems, Mulally used them to come up with solutions.
Work with the government, not against it, to make sensible reforms.
Many business leaders see government as an enemy, and send out legions of lobbyists to influence laws in their favor. Properly constructed, regulations can help protect against defective or rogue products in the marketplace and ensure customer and employee safety. — Brexit should be a wakeup call for all business leaders. The vote showed Britain’s leaders were out of sync with its voters. Could the same thing be happening with employees in your company? Are you involved on the front lines with your employees and customers every day, or are you holed up at headquarters?
The answer may well determine your company’s success.
Bill George is Senior Fellow at Harvard Business School, former Chairman & CEO of Medtronic, and author of Discover Your True North.
The debate over which form of leadership works best seems settled, in my view. Most leading companies globally are focusing on developing "authentic leaders" within their ranks. Executive courses at Harvard Business School in authentic leadership development are oversubscribed and expanding every year. As the Harvard Business Review declared in January 2015, “Authenticity has emerged as the gold standard for leadership.”
In 2003, our book Authentic Leadership proposed a new kind of leader, whose character was the ingredient that mattered most—more than characteristics or style. We also challenged older models of leadership, including the “great man theory” and competency-based leadership models. Previous generations of business people spent more time trying to “market” themselves as leaders, rather than undertaking the transformative work that leadership development requires.
Critiques of authenticity
But recently three leading scholars at Insead, Stanford, and Wharton challenged the concept of authentic leadership. Like all movements—Harvard University Professor Michael Porter’s famous five forces of strategy comes to mind—growing acceptance of an idea often attracts contrarian critiques, which ultimately are healthy in clarifying our understanding.
In Leadership BS, Stanford’s Jeff Pfeffer says, “the last thing a leader needs to be at crucial moments is authentic.” Insead’s Herminia Ibarra adds, “We have to find a way to fake it till we become it.” The most recent salvo comes from Wharton’s Adam Grant, who wrote in the June 5 New York Times, “’Be yourself’ is actually terrible advice… Nobody wants to see your true self.”
"AUTHENTIC LEADERS MONITOR THEIR WORDS AND BEHAVIORS CAREFULLY TO BE ATTUNED TO THEIR AUDIENCES AND TO ENROLL THEIR COLLEAGUES AND TEAMMATES"
While these writings have garnered plenty of press attention, their critiques of authentic leaders reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of authenticity. Webster defines authenticity as “real or genuine; not copied or false; true and accurate.” It comes from the Greek word for author, which led author Warren Bennis to say, “You are the author of your life.”
Ibarra postulates two types of authentic leaders: “low self-monitors” and “high self-monitors.” Low self-monitors tend to say whatever comes to mind, whereas high self-monitors watch carefully what they say for its impact on others. This distinction creates a false dichotomy because low self-monitoring is the opposite of being authentic, and is a sign of immaturity and insensitivity to the feelings of others. Leaders who do this, such as telling a colleague, “I’d like to go to bed with you,” as Grant proposes, are anything but authentic.
Authentic leaders monitor their words and behaviors carefully to be attuned to their audiences and to enroll their colleagues and teammates. They do so because they are sensitive to the impact their words and actions have on others, not because they are “messaging” the right talking points.
Ibarra’s second critique of authentic leaders is that they are often locked into a rigid sense of themselves, much like their immature teenage selves. This is the antithesis of authentic leaders, who are constantly developing themselves to increase self-awareness and improve relationships with others. They don’t hide behind their flaws; instead, they seek to understand them. This lifelong developmental process is similar to what musicians and athletes go through in improving their capabilities.
How leaders develop their authenticity
Rather than trying to redefine what it means to be authentic, research and leadership development programs should focus on how leaders develop their authenticity. Being authentic as a leader is hard work and takes years of experience in leadership roles. No one can be authentic without fail; everyone behaves inauthentically at times, saying and doing things they will come to regret. The key is to have the self-awareness to recognize these times and listen to close colleagues who point them out.
The essence of authentic leadership is emotional intelligence, or EQ, as articulated by Daniel Goleman. People with high IQs and low EQs can hardly be called authentic leaders. In contrast to IQ, which basically does not change in one’s adult lifetime, EQ can be developed. The first and most important step on this journey is gaining self-awareness.
In preparing to write Discover Your True North, my research team and I conducted in-depth interviews with 172 authentic leaders. This research highlighted the vital role of self-awareness in leadership development. Here are some recommended steps people undertake to develop a deeper understanding of themselves in order to become authentic leaders:
Explore their life stories and their crucibles in order to understand who they are. As my HBS colleague Lakshmi Ramarajan says, the process of learning, growing, and developing an integrated self is a process of construction and meaning–making. As leaders explore their life stories and crucibles, and process their experiences, they develop deeper understanding of themselves and feel increasingly comfortable being authentic. This is a lifelong journey in which we are always discovering the next layer, much like peeling an onion. As leaders discover their truth, their True North, they gain confidence and resilience to face difficult situations.
Engage in reflection and introspective practices by taking time every day to step back from the 24/7 world, turn off all electronics, and reflect on what is most important to them. This can be done through introspective practices that are growing rapidly in popularity, such as meditation, mindfulness, prayer, long walks to clear one’s mind, or simply sitting quietly and reflecting. The key here is set aside preoccupation with task lists, iPhones, and the latest news in order to reflect privately. In this way the urgent does not take precedence over the important in one’s life, and leaders examine how they are living their lives and engaging with the world around them.
Seeking honest feedback from colleagues, friends, and subordinates about themselves and their leadership. One of the hardest things for leaders to do is to understand how other people see them, which is often quite different than how they want to be seen. To gain greater understanding of how they are coming across, authentic leaders obtain real-time feedback by listening to their “truth tellers,” who give them candid critiques about their leadership. Those that surround themselves with loyal sycophants, who only tell them how well they are doing rather than being brutally honest, risk going off track. Leaders also gather feedback through regular 360 degree reviews from peers and subordinates. The qualitative comments shared in 360 reviews can be of great benefit if leaders take them to heart, and genuinely try to change.
Understand their leadership purpose so they can align people around a common purpose. Purpose defines the unique gifts people bring to leadership challenges, through which they can align others with their purposes in order to create positive impact. This is far more important than focusing entirely on achieving success in metrics like money, fame and power, yet ultimately produces sustained success in those metrics as well.
Become skilled at tailoring their style to their audiences, imperatives of the situation, and readiness of their teammates to accept different approaches. There are times when leaders have to make difficult decisions that are sure to displease people, and they’ll need to give tough feedback. At other times they need to be inspiring, good coaches, and consensus builders. These flexible styles aren’t inauthentic if they come from a genuinely authentic place. In this sense leaders’ styles become the outward manifestation of their authenticity. As leaders gain experience and develop greater self-awareness, they become more skillful in adapting their style, without compromising their character.
What is needed now is a deeper understanding of how leaders become authentic, as they navigate the practical dilemmas and paradoxes they face. For example, Karissa Thacker’s recent book The Art of Authenticity takes authenticity to a deeper level by exploring topics like relational transparency and honest conversations, making peace with paradox, and seeking the truth.
My colleagues at HBS are working on the challenges of being authentic, such as how and when to be vulnerable, cognitive distortions, making meaning of who we are by integrating the constructed self with the true self—or True North—and going from purpose to impact. These are fertile areas for research by academics and in-company leadership experts.
Rather than creating false postulations about authentic leaders, we need to focus on how we can enable leaders to become more authentic, and give them the tools to do so. In this way authentic leaders will be able to create better lives for everyone they serve.
Bill George is Senior Fellow at Harvard Business School, former Chairman & CEO of Medtronic, and author of Discover Your True North.
The US Men’s Soccer Team had a great run to the semi-finals in the just-concluded Copa America Centenario. This was the 100th anniversary of this tourney usually reserved for South American teams only, and played in the US for the first time ever. While it was disappointing to get clobbered by Argentina, the overall team performance bodes well for the future.
Here are some things we learned about the US team in watching its six games:
Kudos to Coach Juergen Klinsmann for setting an aggressive goal of reaching the semi-finals, and then making it. This was a bold objective in a very competitive tournament, featuring five of the world’s top nine teams: #1 Argentina, #3 Columbia, #5 Chile, #7 Brazil, and #9 Uruguay. The top three teams all advanced to the semis, as Brazil, Uruguay and Mexico fell by the wayside. In the quarters, the US bested #13 Ecuador, 2-1.
For the first time as US coach, Klinsmann went with the same lineup, shaped in a more aggressive formation with emerging star Bobby Wood teamed up front with veteran Clint Dempsey. Dempsey led the way with three goals and two assists, disproving the doubters that said he is over the hill. The US played a more aggressive style of attacking its opponents all over the field, and it paid off. Klinsmann also found a solid back line led by young John Brooks, Geoff Cameron, Fabian Johnson and DeAndre Yedlin. Brooks, Wood and Yedlin are emerging young stars while Dempsey and Jermaine Jones proved they have enough life to anchor the team at the 2018 World Cup.
However, the crushing defeat at the hands of Argentina and Lionel Messi showed just how far the US has to go to move into the top ranks. The Americans played that game without three starters, while revealed just how thin its bench strength is. Klinsmann needs to jettison journeymen like Chris Wondolowski and Kyle Beckerman and give his younger players like Darlington Nagbe and 17-year-old Christian Pulisic – who has the potential to become the best player in US history – the opportunity to start rather than being subbed in with twenty minutes left.
US Captain Michael Bradley was the major disappointment of the tourney. He was off pace with his passes the entire tournament, and a disaster against Argentina. As captain, it was Bradley’s job to lead the team and serve as quarterback in the back, yet he never showed any spark or leadership in the six games. Is Bradley over the hill at only 28, or does he need some serious coaching to get his game back on track? Instead of protecting his captain, Klinsmann needs to send him a message by benching him this fall in favor of a center midfield duo of Jones and Nagbe.
In spite of losing 1-0 to Columbia in the third-place game, the Americans played this top-ranked team dead even. Only a brilliant save kept Dempsey’s curling direct kick out of the upper corner. Minutes later, Wood hit the post – a shot that could just as easily bounced in. The US was playing without two of its starting defenders due to injuries, as Columbia realized that subs Michael Orozco and Matt Besler couldn’t keep up the pace.
Looking ahead to World Cup 2018, Klinsmann should bring more of emerging young stars into the starting lineup and give them the experience of starting in qualifying games this fall, and drop the journeyman veterans who have proven that they can’t play at the top level. In spite of some disappointments, the US run in Copa was a big step forward and a sign of better days ahead.
Bill George is Senior Fellow at Harvard Business School, former Chairman & CEO of Medtronic, and author of Discover Your True North.
In our series "The Price of Profits," we're exploring corporations. What are they for? Whom are they for? And how that impacts the economy and you. Bill George is the senior fellow at the Harvard Business School and the former CEO of Medtronic. During his time as CEO, George took a long-term approach to growing Medtronic into a booming business. He spoke with Marketplace host Kai Ryssdal about shareholder value and the problems with short-term thinking. On the prevalence of shareholder-value thinking:
I think we've moved way too much towards what's called shareholder value and away from taking into account creating value for all your stakeholders. You've got to think about how you're creating values for your customers and in turn your employees. If you do that, well you'll have great value for your shareholders.
On the reporting requirements for companies:
I think we should take the Warren Buffet approach at looking at the underlying financial metrics and not trying to meet the stock markets expectations. I always told the stock market 'those are your expectations, my job is to build the company and achieve the goals we've announced to you.' But I do think we should report quarterly. I think it's a good discipline and because it gives investors a current look at what's happening.
On companies engaging in buybacks:
There's no evidence that in the long term buying back stock increases the stock price. If companies have excess cash, like say Apple does, I think it can be a very good thing to give some of that excess cash back to the shareholders. But if you're depleting your ability to invest in research and development, in capital expenditures, in expansion or acquisitions, I think it's a mistake.
Click the audio player above to listen to the full interview. Bill George was chairman of the board of Medtronic from 1996 until 2002. The current chairman and CEO of Medtronic, Omar Ishrak, is on the board of trustees of American Public Media, the parent company of Marketplace.
The original content for this piece was published on MARKETPLACE.com on 6/16/16.
Discussing management issues in the auto sector with Suzy Welch, "Winning" co-author; Paul Argenti, Dartmouth professor; Jeff Sonnenfeld, Yale School of Management; and Bill George, Harvard Business School.
The original video was posted on 06/02/16 on CNBC.com.
The Forum was thrilled to have Bill George as our closing speaker on Day 3. Former Chairman and CEO of Medtronic, Senior Fellow at the Harvard Business School, and author of Discover Your True North, Bill discusses finding your own True North – the internal compass that sets one on a path toward their fullest potential as a leader. Today’s global business community calls for leaders who will change the world for the better and inspire others around them to do the same.
This content was originally posted to stthomas.edu on 05/19/16.
I asked a few leaders about their concept of leadership. Typical answers are: it’s a position, role, job, or responsibility. One rare response I heard is that “leadership is acting.” You fill in a leadership position and you’re expected to act in a certain acceptable manner. To be effective as a President, you’ve got to look and sound Presidential.
Duterte and Trump
Their detractors may not like it, but Rodrigo Duterte and Donald Trump are presumptive winners in their separate quests for leadership posts in opposite parts of the world. Their similarity doesn’t end there.
Both leaders don’t exactly fit the conservative mold of traditional leaders. They make quick, binding statements that they later reverse or “clarify.” A little more finesse in their deportment or language can improve their image, but they didn’t seem to bother about them during the campaign. Their followers saw a brighter future with them at the helm. WYSIWYG. What you see is what you get.
From the time of the Greek philosophers, to the time of Shakespeare, and until Bill George wrote his book in 2003, people have been amazed at how authenticity became a revered trait of great leaders. In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Polonius said, “To thy own self be true.”
You’ve heard of different types and styles of leadership – benevolent, fierce, autocratic, tough-minded, failure-tolerant, participative, or servant leadership. Starting in early 2000s, authentic leadership became part of the vocabulary of modern management art and science.
From a practical sense, if you were the follower, you wouldn’t be comfortable with a leader who wears different masks. During office hours, your boss is a non-nonsense stickler to the rules, flagellating employees to produce the last ounce of productivity. At five o’clock, he transforms before your eyes to an inveterate gambler, womanizer and drunkard. Before the clock strikes 12, he’s a henpecked husband bringing midnight snacks for the wife and kids.
The term authentic leadership has had many meanings and slants, but many gurusagree that authentic leaders:
Are self-aware and genuine. They’re aware of their own strengths, limitations, and emotions. They’re not afraid to show their real self to their constituencies. They act consistently, whether in public or alone with their close friends. They don’t hide their mistakes, nor are they afraid that they will look weak because of past mistakes.
Are mission-driven and results-oriented. They’re able to subordinate their personal interests to the bigger goals the organization. They are passionate with what they do, and will follow through completion the results they seek to achieve, not for their own glory, power, money or ego, but for the genuine good of the organization and its constituents.
Lead with their heart. They use both the heart and mind. They’re not afraid to show emotions. Like all humans, they have their own vulnerability. They could cry when showing empathy to others. This doesn’t mean they’re “soft.” They just know how to connect with the people they lead.
Focus on the long term. In Bill George’s model, authentic leaders are focused on the long-term. They nurture organizations and people over the long term, and spend time and effort to ensure continuity of leadership and organizations. They despise short-termism that can show current benefits and prefer large dividends for the people and the organization over extended periods.
In his book, Bill George deplored the way some CEOs were running large organizations. He wrote, “… integrity, stewardship and sound governance are deeper issues that must be addressed by leaders themselves.” To build enduring organizations, George believes that leaders of the highest integrity must have the “courage to build their companies to meet the needs of all their stakeholders, and recognize the importance of their service to society.”
Authentic leaders have a genuine desire to serve others, empower the people they lead to make a difference, and are “guided by passion and compassion as they are by their logical minds.” George thinks that an authentic leader must develop his or her own leadership style “consistent with his or her personality and character. The authenticity of the leader is more important than the style with which the leader leads. To be authentic means to accept one’s faults and shortcomings, as well as to use one’s strengths in bringing the organization and the people to a better future.”
Simply put, authenticity is being genuine, not pretending to be someone else. However, it doesn’t mean, “This is me. I am bad, and I shall always be bad. I am your leader, and you have to follow or else …”
On the other hand, it means, “I may not be perfect, but because I care for you and our group, I will improve myself where I am weak. I will use my strengths to get us to where we all want to be. I will not pretend to be what I am not. Let’s help each other achieve our shared vision of a better future.”
Henna Inam said, “Authentic leadership is the full expression of ME for the benefit of WE.”
(Ernie is the 2013 Executive Director and 1999 President of the People Management Association of the Philippines (PMAP); Chair of the AMCHAM Human Capital Committee; and Co-Chair of ECOP’s TWG on Labor and Social Policy Issues. He is President and CEO of EC Business Solutions and Career Center. Contact him at email@example.com)