So much crime, so much injustice. Here is what you can do

Last night, when I returned from work I found a burglar stealing the most valuable item in my apartment. Yes, you guessed it, my laptop. Anything but that right? I blocked the exit to my apartment and called the police. Yes, I know it was stupid thing to do, to try and stop a robbery because you never know what sort of weapon a person may have or what he/she may do with it. I guess I did not contemplate laptop or life? In that moment, I was concerned only for my precious laptop.

The police finally arrived and arrested the burglar. She was charged with breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony (since my laptop is worth more than $250, under Massachusetts law her attempt to steal my laptop is consider larceny, a felony that carries a maximum sentence of 5 years in prison or a fine of $20,000). She was convicted, sentenced to 2 years in prison, and will receive a year of probation upon her release. Whether you think the punishment is severe or not is a matter subjective to your feelings about your laptop. I love mine. Regardless, I had no say in what punishment she ought to get, the state prosecuted her.

The above story is fake, none of that really happened to me. But everything else I am going to share with you is 100% true.

So for the last few months, I like you have been pondering on how a group of thieves stole the identities of two million people, defrauded those people of millions of dollars over the course of a few years, and yet not one of the thieves has been charged with a crime. In fact, most of the bandits have access to the same resources they used to carryout their crimes. They have the same potential to commit similar crimes on a grander scale. They wield computers, big bright smiles and brighter personalities. At all times, they are constantly on the look for people looking for solutions. They are out walking the streets and you could be the next victim.

The bandits are Wells Fargo employees including its management and leadership. To keep from disturbing your state of mind, I believe John Oliver's humorous recap suffices in filling you in on the details of this bold crime by a gang of bankers.

Corporate fraud is nothing new thing. However, the actions of Wells Fargo employees are blatantly and shamelessly criminal. These are not evil geniuses cooking complex recipes. Wells Fargo committed identify theft on a grand scale.

The equivalent at the individual level is that a fraudster obtains your personal identification information (i.e. SS#, address, and DOB), opens and maxes out multiple credit cards under your name leaving you in debt.

You would most likely feel that justice has not been carried out if that person was found and fined $450 or the equivalence of just 3% of his/her quarterly income. Yet, this is exactly what happened with Wells Fargo fraudsters. So, why is that not one of the Wells Fargo bandits has been prosecuted for their crimes?

Eric Reed succinctly explains "why bankers don't go to jail,"

Criminal law is about targeted blame. A prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt what each, named defendant did and the criminal intent behind those actions. In a large institution, however, that chain can be broken and parsed so much that it's next to impossible to prove anyone's participation in the overall fraud.

If you would like learn more about why our criminal justice systems is so very merciful to white collar criminals, I would recommend you to read The Divide: American Injustice in the Age of the Wealth Gap by Matt Taibbi. You will learn about the philosophy of collateral consequences. Collateral consequences is a concept that asks that prosecutors weigh the criminal prosecution of a business against the damage that criminal prosecution could cause innocent stakeholders associated with the business, i.e. loss of jobs, loss of capital by investors, as wells as the possible disturbance a criminal prosecution could cause in the markets. Collateral consequence serves not only as a shield for a business but it now serves as a shield for agents of the business, i.e. the employees and leadership (see HSBC). Instead of criminal prosecutions, companies and prosecutors negotiate settlements via deferred prosecution agreements and non-prosecution agreements in which companies pay fines without ever confessing their wrongs. The bigger the fish, the more lenient prosecutors are because the higher the possible collateral result from a criminal prosecution. Great read.

In short, if you want to commit a crime, get a job with a multinational corporation, and do your dirt while you are on the clock.

What I would like to know is how can we the people deliver justice where our criminal justice systems fails - particularly in circumstances of corporate criminality?

In a previous blog post, I discussed the groundswell:

"desire for people to connect, create, stay in touch, and help each other,"

Such as helping each other get justice. I propose a groundswell for justice.

The recent #grabyourwallet campaign is a good example that collective action can reform business practices. Furthermore, the history of America is a history of collective resistance. There is the Boston tea, the Montgomery Bus Boycotts,  and the explosion of the divestment movement. Boycotting is one of many of our tools to protest an enterprise that acts within the law yet behaves contrary to our principles.

But! What recourse is there for justice when individuals shielded against prosecution by the great wall of big money (corporations) break the law? In the case in which our highest prosecutors do not do their job, and claim that corporations are too big to fail and individuals too important to jail?

Here is an obvious suggestion. We make citizens' arrest and demand prosecution. A citizen's arrest is

an arrest by an ordinary person(s) without a warrant, allowable in certain cases.

Imagine two million people marching to the homes of the employees that partook in Wells Fargo's fraud to make a citizens' arrest. I am not sympathetic to the argument that the boiler room culture at Wells Fargo pressured individuals to commit crimes. We talk about personal responsibility with street criminals but we absolve white collar criminals of personal responsibility. Why? I look forward to your answer.

There are times in which extreme action is required to move our bureaucrats to action. Even a few hundred people marching to the home of an executive to arrest him for his crimes would energize our spirits and move us to exercise our power. And there is no power like people power. 

If you or I stole someone's identity, and used that identity for our personal financial gain, we would certainly face multiple counts of felony charges. So why aren't they?

I am as enraged and fed up as you are with too big to fail, too rich to jail. I need not repeat that 'no one is above the law, the law is the law.'  Are you audacious enough to bring criminals to justice? Are you ready to make an arrest?

WELL, LET'S GO!

Are you Lit?

Can you recall when you last stepped into your local bookstore? Don't feel guilty, I can't recall the last time I bought a book from my local bookstore as well, with the exception of the bookstore at my local library. It could also be that you don't have a local bookstore to step into.

How we consume books has certainly changed. The convenience that E-readers provide us is unmatched. With E-readers such as Amazon's Kindle, we can carry hundreds of books with us anywhere we go. I don't intend to contribute to the debate of E-books and paperbacks, as I don't foresee that any argument, regardless of how sound, will bring an end to the debate of e-books vs. paperbacks. My intent here is to investigate the nuanced claim that local indie bookstores are making a comeback, and that they are here to stay. I want to specifically focus my attention on a niche business plan for a bookstore in Bronx, NY that is utilizing crowdfunding to cover a percent of its start-up costs.

I have been looking for you

Ok. Are local bookstores dying or thriving? Well it depends on how your interpret the numbers. Though there has been a decline in the number of bookstores nationwide, there has actually been an increase of 13% in the membership of the independent bookseller trade group, the American Booksellers Association (Marketwatch). It is also argued that e-books sales have dropped by 2%. However, an article on Fortune argues that even if its true that e-books sales are falling, it is rather an implication that the competitive market for consumers' attention is squeezing books out and other type of content in. So, the overall market for books is shrinking. Since how we consume content has changed drastically, it is only logical for us to stipulate that we will continue in our digital consumption path. Local bookstores may not be dead yet, but they are certainly on life support if our current consumption trend continues.

For bookstores to survive the purge of the books, they need to focus on serving a niche market (offering unique selection or marketing to a specific group). One such potential niche bookstore is TheLitBar.

So far TheLitBar has raised $62,000 on Indiegogo.com, a crowdfunding platform that has recently added a feature that enables entrepreneurs to raise money for their ideas as well as opens investment opportunities to the general public - so now, you too may have a stake in a startup with the potential for big returns. Noëlle is certainly utilizing the groundswell to her advantage here.

TheLitBar is a feel good business plan. A young women notices a problem in her community and wills herself to action. Noëlle plans to create a local community space for events and a niche hangout space while selling books and wine in hopes of transforming Bronx into a lit borough (as in literate). These goals are admirable. However, if we dig a little deeper into TheLitBar plan, we find that the problem definition is flawed, as well as the proposed business solution.

Solve the right problem

It is true there currently is no local bookstore in the Bronx. But this doesn't mean that the people in the Bronx lack access to books. There are local public libraries in the Bronx and about five colleges which I believe welcome the community to use their resources - if that is not the case this may be a problem that is worth addressing. Most of all, each of us, whether we are a Bronx resident or not, has access to a bookstore that is open 24/7, everyday of the year, and that is Amazon.com. At Amazon.com, you can buy books at competitive prices and receive suggestions from reviewers that read the book you are considering and Amazon's algorithm - this is machine-human collaboration at its best. So the problem is not lack of access.

If the problem definition is flawed, the business solution is bound to be as erroneous. Let me try to put it simple: There are no bookstores in my community, I will open a bookstore, but I can't make money from just selling books. Oh, I will also sell wine at over 200% mark-up. Great, does the Bronx really need another establishment that provides liquor, or "soft liquor"?

I don't think so. A space that offers intellectual escape need not serve any substance other than tea and coffee (which I consider holy drinks). I am more concerned about the message this sends to children in the borough. Even if a certain area is reserved for children and teens (KiddieLit), I bet that teens will be tempted by the fancy adult bar made of books and wonder how sweet that class of wine must taste. Let's not propagate the notion that people of color need alcohol to socialize. Let's get lit on books instead of the wine.

As ingenious as the idea of a bookstore serving wine sounds, it will not appeal to the current residents of the Bronx. Bronx's residents have access to multiple libraries, five colleges, and Amazon's bookstores. As for the wine, Bronx has no shortage of liquor stores and bars. Whether TheLitBar will work once the Bronx is fully gentrified and officially becomes the Piano District is another story. TheLitBar does not tackle the bigger problem, that books are going out of style. Once the veil is lifted, and we can see through the sentimental appeal, the clever utilizing of social platforms by the founder, we can conclude that TheLitBar solves a problem, but it is not the (right) problem.

I feel smarter with every glass

Have We Forgetten About Competitive Advantage?

Everyone is doing it. No, it is not sex. It is talking. People talk to each other. People, who maybe strangers or even far away from one another exchange gossip, ideas, and surprisingly do business with each other everyday. Yes, I know that you know that people talk. But did you know that people talk about you? Oh, ok. You really don't care whether people talk about you or not. Well, if you are a business, what people are saying about you, your products/services matters a lot to your bottom line and your existence.


As a business, you know that the best type of advertising is word of mouth - that informal personal appeal current customers that love your products/services make on your behalf to their friends, family members, and colleagues. You also know that customers may also say negative things about you to those in their networks. Technology has amplified this word of mouth through social media, blogs, YouTube, and in customer review pages.

Word! You don't say!

And NO! You don't have the magical power to change the conversation. Your clever marketing is powerless against the

"desire for people to connect, create, stay in touch, and help each other," 

as well as talk about you. This amplified social connection of people interacting with other people in the cloud (yes, that magical place) about businesses (like yours); and of consumers purchasing from each other is known as the groundswell.

Feeling powerless yet? Well, great! There are a slew of market research companies that would love to tell you what these people are saying about you in the cloud. Only by first listening, can you then capitalize on their narrative or combat it if it happens to negatively portray your brand.

There is something odd right about eavesdropping on customers freely discussing your business. What is stranger is that now you are told to base your business decisions on what they say.You are told that

"To keep your customers—and to attract new ones— you need to remain relevant and superior" 

by constantly revolutionizing your products/services, and yes, your communications to your customers. You are asked to do the nearly impossible.

Well, let me ease your mind. I am going to agree with your mother's personal advice to not give much attention to what people have to say about you, it is all nonsense. Why?
Two words, Competitive Advantage. It is the difference between Cola and Coca-Cola, yes the one and only Coke you drink.

 

Competitive advantage is a "condition or circumstance that puts a company in a favorable or superior business position" (look it up in the dictionary). In "Customer Loyalty is Overrated," Lafley and Martin argue that our normative view of competitive advantage is flawed because we begin with the wrong supposition that people are conscious consumers. They write, that

"The conventional wisdom about competitive advantage is that successful companies pick a position, (compete on price, quality, innovation, or focus on your niche) target a set of consumers, and configure activities to serve them better (align your business to the changing demands of customers, i.e. bend to the customers' will)."

It turns out that customers do not want to expend the effort needed to differentiate between products. Plus, human minds prefer automated choices. So, what?




yeah, yeah, so what? What are you telling me?



Well, if you find a way to build on your competitive advantage by making your products/services the default choice, you will build a cumulative advantage that would make it very difficult for competitors to penetrate into your market share. Cumulative advantage is

the layer that a company builds on its initial competitive advantage by making its product or service an ever more instinctively comfortable choice for the customer.

In order to sustain your competitive advantage, the authors recommend that you Become Popular Early (maybe by offering free trials); design for habit (constant update reminders, i.e. the notifications on SM sites); Innovate inside the brand; keep the communication simple (avoid any compare and contrast arguments). 


Whatever happened to MySpace? MySpace failed to build a cumulative advantage. MySpace became popular early because it was free. However, the ability for users to personalize their pages created inconstancy in user experience. This was further exasperated by the constant addition of features to appeal to more users and the proliferation of ads cluttered the pages more. User experience varied by pages one visited. MySpace failed to build on its competitive advantage because it did not design for habit. Whereas now, with Facebook, every page you visit has a consistent look and feel, even on mobile devices. 


So, if you build on your competitive advantage your business can remain not only relevant but the preferred choice. Preferred by habit.

Make it easier for me!

Innovation and Customers: 

Keep in mind that innovation hardly comes from customers. Customer feedback is certainly helpful, as the feedback creates the space for continual improvement. Henry Ford wrote that

"No business can improve without possible attention to complaints and suggestions," 

But customer feedback should not drive your innovation nor should drive your competitive advantage.

Steve Jobs did not care much for market research, he reasoned that 

"customers don't know what they want until we've shown them."

If you want to survive, kneel before your gods, whether they be rational or not. Heed the maxim that the customer is always right. If you want to thrive, be different, build on your competitive advantage.

Education is a hot business

The nomination of Betsy DeVos as secretary of education by Donald Trump, and her senate committee confirmation should have not come as a surprise to anyone. There has been a trend in the United States in which the view of corporations and their executives have escaped their persona of greed, and are now seen as America's best chance of making itself great again. Regardless of the vagueness of that statement, there is a sustaining thought by conservatives (movement conservatives to be exact) that private enterprises can fix everything wrong with our public institutions. If you would like to read more on the history of this shift, I would recommend you to read Paul Krugman's book The Conscience of a Liberal.

 The first and foremost thing that these so pseudo successful business leaders want to fix is our bureaucrats, i.e. the people with that have the knowledge and experience to lead our institutions. What is most concerning about the nomination of DeVos is that she has no experience in leading educational institutions whether that is k-12 or higher education. See below video in which Sen. Warren questions her lack of experience in leading higher education.

The hypocrisy is very evident on her last comment. She is coming to "repair" a "broken" education system, and her plan is to delegate her job to career bureaucrats in the department of education. If the intelligent educational professionals reporting to her tell her that her plans are harmful to the education of America's children, you can be certain that they'll be fired or that they'll resign. Because the game of this new administration is: you must go out, if you can't go along. Need an example and an early warning. The Trump administration fired acting U.S. Attorney General Yates for her dissent on the executive order banning immigration from Muslim countries. 

Even more concerning is Ms. DeVos inability to commit to enforcing existing regulations such as the Gainful Employment rule that requires career colleges to actually prepare their students for the job market.

Ms. DeVos lack of experience is a threat to the future of both K-12 and higher education. Her incompetence was further highlighted by Senator Al Franken, in which Ms. DeVos was unable to differentiate between the philosophies of growth and proficiency which has been an ongoing debate in the education field.

The people's champion, Senator Sanders expresses that the only reason she is interviewing is due to her connections not her competence.  "Do think if you were not a multimillionaire, if you're family has not made hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions to the Republican Party, that you would not be sitting here today?" Hmm, honestly, she would not.

And where exactly does her family wealth come from? Amway, a MLM (multi-level marketing) organization. That is just a fancy way of saying a company built on a pyramid scheme.

It is obvious that Ms. DeVos supports charter schools, but the success of charter schools is mixed and possibly no different from public schools. The exception is that charter schools effectively market to low income families and pay their executives handsomely. This is exactly what you'd expect from a private enterprise - whatever it is market it down the customer's throat.

On a personal note: Last month, I was at the Grove Hall Boston Public Library. On the bulletin board, a flyer by a local charter school was posted. It appeared professionally done. The flyer did not highlight any of the achievements of the school, it was a call to submit admissions applications to the school. What I found odd is that my cousin calls me on that same week to ask if I can assist her with an application to transfer her twin daughters from their junior high (public) to another school - the charter school whose posting I saw at the library. When I inquired on why she wanted to do that, she could not cite anything about the charter school's performance other than that it was better. She did not know why that charter school was better, it just was. Mind you, she didn't even visit the school, nor call the school,  nor ask anyone about the school's performance. I bet it was the fancy flyer with pictures of children happy in school.

If public schools are unable to counter charter school marketing campaigns,it may be time to start the count down for the end of America's public school system. Just because public schools currently have a competitive advantage (a legislative advantage) doesn't mean they are safe from competition, particularly now when an anti-public schools leader is going to to lead America's education department. Now more than ever, public school must re-imagine and protect their brand from, yes greedy and shady business people.