Tag: market failure

Indiana Redistricting Proposal Adds Value

tomkapostasyLeave a comment

“For the want of a nail, the shoe was lost; for the want of a shoe the horse was lost; and for the want of a horse the rider was lost, being overtaken and slain by the enemy, all for the want of care about a horseshoe nail.”  —  Benjamin Franklin

 Now, more than ever, society must rely on real economic growth to make the pie larger and allow us to choose how to divide the pie.  In the hot policy areas – global warming, health care, unemployment, alternate energy, retirement security, national security, adequate food – all solutions depend upon our ability to grow the economy.

 The private sector, especially in the last 30 years, has demonstrated its nearly unlimited ability to create value.  The contrast between productivity growth in the competitive sectors (ag, manufacturing, distribution, communications, mining, transportation, media, banking, IT, services) and the others (government, social services, utilities, education, health care) is instructive.  About 60% of the economy delivers 3-5% annual productivity improvements, while the other 40% is stuck at 0-1%.

 The slow growth sectors are all in areas where market failure is the rule – sometimes because services are natural public goods and sometimes due to natural monopolies, externalities, or unequal information.  In each case, there is a key role to be played by the government in shaping these industries to pursue continuous improvement as happens naturally in other sectors.

 Unfortunately, our political system does not produce “philosopher kings” who cooperate to find optimal solutions.  In a two-party democratic system, the best that can be hoped for is that the two parties will define contrasting, yet centrist policies and employ politicians who can seek re-election by solving some problems rather than merely demonizing the other side.

 The gerrymandering of Indiana congressional, senate and representative districts every 10 years encourages a polarized political environment.  The party in power draws districts to maximize their representation by creating as many 55-60% safe districts as possible, while consolidating their opponents into as few 80-90% majority districts as possible.

 This process results in extreme left and extreme right candidates winning nearly all races.  Centrist candidates have no chance in stacked districts.  Centrist voters have no influence in stacked districts.  The political parties attract extremist candidates.  They attract extremist supporters.  Only in a small minority of districts do voters have a choice between two qualified centrist candidates who mainly differ by a modest degree on the political spectrum. 

 The Indiana Senate’s Republican Caucus, Secretary of State Todd Rokita and Carmel representative Mike Delph have floated various proposals to turn redistricting over to some form of non-partisan commission, required to take advantage of the computer software which can define boundaries to maximize the compactness of each district, without considering socio-economic, religious, racial or political factors. 

 A visual example of the current skewed districts versus neutral districts is shown at http://bolson.org/dist/IN/.

 Members of both political parties should be able to see that the skillful use of gerrymandering today is a recipe for failure.  Even California voters are now seeing that structures that lead to polarization can bankrupt a state.  Indiana voters who care about the future should pursue this “good government” initiative.

Labor Market Failure and Recovery

tomkapostasyLeave a comment

After 18 months of hiring freeze, it’s time for all profit-maximizing firms to kick start their recruiting.  At present, we’re hiring too few, we’re too focused on exact hiring matches and we’re unwilling to invest in the future.

 The recession was first sensed by wise businesses in 2Q 2008.  The banking crisis of Fall, 2008 terrified even those whose careers went back to 1974-1982 when the last panic of gas prices, inflation, interest rates and Japanese competition derailed the post WWII expansion.  While the freeze and risk-averse decisions were justified at the time, they are wrong today.

 The all-in cost for a senior professional staff member is roughly $100,000 per year.  A good hire lasts for up to 10 years.  A typical hire is a $1 million investment.  In the current environment with 16M candidates chasing 3M jobs, the odds of finding a great candidate are excellent and the ability to hire at 20% below old market salaries is a given.  Firms with a strategic view of human resources should be first in line to hire these high ROI assets – TODAY.  Every good hire is a $200-300,000 addition to the firm’s net worth.

There is little joy in HR departments these days.  Hiring volume is down so the pressure is on to reduce HR staffing and to NOT use external recruiters.  The volume of applicants per position has quadrupled.  HR’s ability to use on-line application forms and screening tools has improved, but not enough.  To cope with the excess supply, HR and hiring managers have decided to make an exact match of past experience by industry and function to the position the penultimate criteria for hiring.  This allows the greatest percentage of candidates to be eliminated in the first screening. 

 Unfortunately, this means that many qualified candidates are not considered.  Narrowly experienced and over-tenured candidates are favored, even if they have had the same experience for 8 years in a row.  Firms pursuing this approach will soon find that they have hired adequate candidates who have limited upside potential.  They are also likely to find that they have made many “hiring errors” because they have not given equal weight to the questions of personal motivation/drive and teamwork/manageability.  I recommend Martin Yates “Hiring the Best” as a guide.

Firms that continue in “hiring freeze” mode have a bias towards replacement of existing positions versus investment in the staff who deliver future value.  There are thousands of highly skilled project managers, business analysts, scientists, quality specialists, product managers, marketing researchers and other professionals who are unemployed because firms are unwilling to restart the investment cycle.  This recession will end and success will depend upon investing in new products, new customers and better processes.  There may be some areas where NOT replacing a separated employee is the right choice.  Successful firms make decisions one choice at a time rather than relying on simple rules.

 Firms that have their financial house in order need to race to the labor market while supply exceeds demand and hire skilled, motivated team players to pursue the next cycle of business investments that deliver long-term value.