The Clash of the Subwoofer

In 1974, when Earthquake came to the theatres, we experienced "Sensurround" for the first time. I recall feeling the bass in the room as we watched the action unfold before us. The rumbling of the engulfing bass added to the "real" feeling of the movie and contributed to the experience of watching the movie. Although not necessarily an advanced nor refined sound, the audiences were treated to very low frequencies produced by subwoofers in a studio. Excellent acting and cool sounds did little to make up for a weak plot, and the movie has found a small cult following along with The Towering Inferno and other disaster films of the 70s. As an aside, the film included an outstanding performance by the former revivalist Marjoe Gortner, famous for his childhood role as an added enticement for more money during revivals with this father. But I have digressed from the purpose of this essay.

As a young teenager destined for a musical life, I was not aware that "Sensurround" (a goofy but effective technique) would actually change the way we hear music and thus alter the musical world perhaps forever. The subwoofer became the norm for sound enhancement and we now hear the subwoofer in most musical performances that are not naturally acoustical. Ironically, despite its frequent use and obvious benefits, the subwoofer does not really produce comprehensive, musical tones by our human definition. The sounds of a subwoofer are too low for human reproduction and aside from the occasional replicated anomalous sounds in nature, not fully understood by our ears. While one could argue that the fundamental tones of the natural harmonic series are occurring all the time in nature and in the atmosphere, our limited ability to hear all tones around us prevent us from identifying the extreme low and high frequencies. Not unlike atoms which we know exist but cannot see, fundamental tones are not always audible, but by virtue of their foundational existence, are essential to sounds we actually can hear and understand.

Subwoofers greatly enhance the bass of a musical ensemble and open up the sound to a richness not previously experienced prior to the subwoofer. It is what makes our bodies want to move, it makes us feel the music, it provides a wide range of sound that amplifies not only the sound but the entire audible experience as well. It is also what annoys us when a "loud" automobile is nearby, and it can spark fear in us when we are near a jet airplane or when a tornado is close. In short, the subwoofer has changed the way we hear and respond to music, and there is no going back. It is here to stay and music (many would argue) is better for it.

But the human experience of making music cannot replicate the subwoofer in any kind of natural way. Before explaining further, I must qualify that a large pipe organ as well as a few musical instruments such as a contrabasson, contraclarinets, and bass drums do come close to this replication although with limitations. Admittedly, having experienced pipe organs in large cathedrals, I believe I responded to the sound much in the same way I have felt the subwoofer in rock concerts and at the showing of Earthquake many years ago. These examples aside, concerts of people singing or playing instruments without sound enhancement cannot have the added benefit of the subwoofer. An acoustic environment is certainly appealing but only insofar as the human can perform well. This is not to disparage the remarkable abilities of great musical performers, but it is to say that sound enhancement has dramatically altered societal preferences for music making. With exceptions, we are no longer as enamored with the natural acoustic sound as we once were. We have been given a taste of amplification, of mixing, of effects, of new frequencies, of sound control, and of subwoofers and most people like it.

Herein lies the cultural clash: between those who prefer the natural acoustical sound made by humans without electronic enhancement, and those who prefer some kind of electronic manipulation of the sound. This tension is felt in churches, in academic circles, in concert venues, and in music education where we teach an acoustical approach to music but are subject to the joyful or, in some cases, subversives whims of sound enhancement and sound managers. Few academically trained musicians have knowledge in or even interest in electronics, amplification, woofers, subwoofers, frequencies, or really anything besides excellence in performance. In a way, however, their rejection or at least lack of consideration is their loss, for well-managed sound enhancement can certainly add to most performances. If this is a battle between natural acoustics and sound enhancement, who will win and will the cultures ever merge?

In the end, the subwoofer improves the overall quality of the experience for the listener and most people will agree that it provides depth and warmth to the music. In defense of acoustically pure music performances in an ideal space for natural music making, it sure is easier to deal with than having to worry about sound systems. Perhaps the clash we musicians feel is partly about the fear of giving up a modicum of control to sound managers who have little musical training. But that, my friends, is yet another subject for discussion.

Thoughts on Frozen

Not being a big fan of animation, preferring real people over fanciful drawings and images, it was with a touch of suspicion that I and my family went to see Frozen. My fears increased as I sat through nearly 20 minutes of cartoon ads and a dull Mickey Mouse cartoon. Nearly falling asleep and dreading more animation (yes, I know I can be a grump at times), the movie began.

Not sure exactly when I got drawn in. Perhaps it was the girls building a snowman or the precision of the animation or events of the first few minutes, but I really believe it was the great music. The snowman song was terrific and after the girl got hurt, the score suddenly became ominous with rich orchestral sounds followed by rhythmic energy and complex but tonal harmonic motion. Rather than hearing sound effects from the orchestra, we heard an eclectic mix of orchestral sounds that incorporated thematic motives juxtaposed with appropriate contrasts perfectly aligned with the events on the screen.

The story proceeds rather typically in a type of allegory about power, kingdoms, love, confusion, relationships, and comic relief. In a broad sense, it was a classic "love solves all" kind of plot with some twists and turns including bad guys, good guys, and plenty of tension. But underneath the rather cliched story we find great characters, stunning visual effects, amazing and beautiful crystals, and a depth rarely found in movies today. Little Olaf was absolutely hilarious and the snow monster scenes were intense and spectacular. The hints of anti-totalitarianism, of the value of charity, the problems with isolationism, the value of family, the way human actions spawn events that have far-reaching implications, and the joy of those who are outside the mainstream of looks and behavior all came together for a movie to be enjoyed by all ages.

The images were magnificent and the energy moved forth all the way to the end where everything turned out well. But aside from the tension, the interesting dialogs, the amazing graphics, and the physical comedy, it was the songs that jumped out as outstanding. In a musical theatre style, each song contained harmonic interest, rhythmic complexity, memorable melodies, zippy texts, and goal-directed dynamic growth. In short, simply great songs all the way through the movie. If anything, I wanted more and am hoping to see this show on the stage someday. Probably worth traveling to London if it makes to the West End!

Wonderful movie for all ages. I encourage everyone to experience Frozen. As in all great art, you will be changed in some magical way.

Orchestras, Operas, and Opportunities

As clichéd as it sounds, it is true that challenges can be seen as opportunities. Such is the case with the arts and music in particular. Many symphony orchestras and some opera houses continue to struggle to pay the bills. Their personnel and operating costs are greater than their revenue, forcing them to rely solely on sponsorships and donations to stay solvent. While businesses and donors have traditionally given to the arts, they are beginning to be suspicious of the inherent value and even future of the symphony orchestra. Nobody wants to support a sinking ship, and until orchestras find ways to bring in revenues through ticket sales, they will likely remain on life support.

Let us play the blame game. It is possible that poor management of many orchestras has caused some of the problems. Good managers control costs and find ways to maximize profits, recognizing the value of a strong marketing mix, segmentation, careful accounting, and appealing products. Good managers have a working knowledge of cost accounting, budgeting, human resources, leadership, the future value of money, inventory, and pricing. Granted, the challenges of dealing with symphony orchestras are excessively complicated and require skills not normally needed in the corporate world, but the essence of good management must remain true in spite of the unusual structure of an orchestra.

But management is not the whole story of where the blame lies, in fact management is probably not the real story at all. A manager is essentially an employee of the board, and the board is the controlling and responsible entity of the orchestra. The board has a fiduciary responsibility to ensure the solvency of the organization, whether that is through donations, ticket sales, or sponsorships. The board, hopefully, is comprised of those who love music but also have enough business acumen to make wise decisions for the present and future of the ensemble. And herein lies the tension, the board as the responsible entity, must remain in control, at least to an extent, with the programming of the orchestra. This then means the conductor of the orchestra is an employee not an employer of the board of directors. Yikes!

A conductor of an orchestra has achieved his/her position through a combination of factors including great talent, tenacity, leadership, people skills, wisdom, and intellect. Their leadership abilities are a marriage of musical talent, confidence, and unswerving dedication to excellence in all things. Outstanding conductors, by virtue of their abilities, are often strong in opinions, relentless in effort, and goal-directed in their leadership. Asking a great conductor to bend to the will of a board is difficult at best. When all goals are the same--musical and financial--the results will be positive for all constituents, and the board will be able to pay the bills and enjoy great music. A wise board gives the conductor the latitude to make the musical decisions that are best for the orchestra, the community, and for the cause of music. But how much freedom should be allowed when revenues decline and the goals of presenting great music fly in the face of paying the bills? Conductor autonomy only works when boards, musicians, and community meet all the artistic and financial goals, and when all constituents work congruently for those same goals.

But this rarely happens in today's eclectic world of changing tastes, digital transmission, and unpredictable behavior. What kind of live music will sell tickets and how should an orchestra (a medium with a long, prosperous, and highly respected heritage) respond to the need to generate revenue? Should we abandon the old in favor of the new? Should we give up on the canon of "classical" music that has stood the test of time and been highly valued for over a century? Isn't classical or art music the best kind of music with the greatest qualities? Without classical music, are we destined to become a society of popcorn and candy cane eaters without any artistic sense, living in a quagmire of artistic mediocrity totally devoid of depth and quality?

The philosophical tug-of-war between artistic elites, lovers of classical music, and those seeking a lighter more eclectic offering, although not new, is more pronounced today than ever before, with the result being a significant drop in revenues for most orchestras and operas. For the orchestra to survive, boards and conductors must work together to program concerts that will attract and interest audiences. The art form, regardless of whether it is a string quartet, concert band, symphony orchestra, ballet, solo piano, or opera must be able to support itself and demonstrate greater revenues than expenses.

To those holding onto an unsustainable model from the past, it is time to examine the role of music in today's culture and think beyond personal preference. It is time to embrace a global music perspective that amalgamates many genres from the past as well as the present, while retaining the congruence of the collective spirit. For those who despair that the demise of operas, orchestras, and "classical" music is a sign of the hopelessness of the modern world, I recommend living in a personal cave of recordings and videos while longing for the past to return. For the others, there is now an opportunity to discover new art forms, to try new ways of making music, to embrace eclecticism, to put aside differences and find common ground, to develop new audiences, and to recognize that music is alive and well today in many forms, from many lands, and in a multitude of styles.

Anti-Luddism or Technology Solves All, okay Most

In opposition to some acquaintances and distant colleagues, I am not a Luddite at all. This does not mean I don't often miss the old days where our lives did not intersect dramatically with technology, but it does mean that I see technology as being that which can solve most of our societal problems. Knowing this sounds unlikely, I further see technology as enhancing and compounding opportunities for greater face time and personal relationship development. As I type this entry, I text three people, read two emails, check facebook periodically, listen to a video on using Google Docs, and consider developing my Excel skills. All this while being iced in due to poor weather.

True that all the technology in the world cannot solve the problems of bad weather, but perhaps one day technology can deliver products and goods for those captured by bad weather. Technology cannot directly help those struggling with depression or illness or relationship problems or the myriad of challenges that face us everyday, but it can help us understand we are not alone and technology can also provide data and information to help prevent future problems. A quick look at Google Trends reveals a decline in lung cancer. This could be attributed to a decline in smoking or simply an effort to improve the atmosphere. Technology's ability to disseminate information quickly to a wide audience is creating a new generation of people who are aware of health issues and how to avoid the pitfalls of certain behaviors.

This goes beyond health education and into personal behavior. Regardless of the naysayers I often meet, I contend that people are generally improving their actions and recognizing that their behavior has consequences both personally and collectively. Technology has inadvertently caused social accountability through the frequent use of cameras, Facebook, Twitter, videos, mobile phones, and email. While people may still have problems with rage or theft or bullying, these type of behaviors can be captured and widely distributed. In London while it may be invasive and feel a little like "big brother," there is no doubt that the video cameras located around the city have curtailed many negative behaviors.

Without having any official data, I believe students today are better behaved than past generations. Although I remain concerned with certain educational flaws due to the prevalence of technology, in general I find students know how to access information quickly and use that information to help them. Smartphones lend themselves to tremendous opportunities for knowledge, for insights, for cognitive facts, and for crowdsourcing curiosities. Technology holds institutions, organizations, and individuals accountable for behavior, for truth of information, and for quality. A poorly made product or a poor teacher are quickly identified and expressed publicly (much to the chagrin of some!). Technological advances allow us more time and opportunities to learn new things and to apply our knowledge in a multitude of ways. Online banking, shopping, Facebook, recipes, maps, and now even digital currency have given us new and exciting ways to live our lives.

All these and more have ironically contributed to more free time and more luxuries of relationship building. While some people may choose to have an unhealthy relationship to their gadgets (and I must admit to being tied to my mobile phone), most use technology to increase the efficiency of their day to day lives. This then results in more time to spend with friends watching movies, talking, "hanging out", and having fun. Perhaps over time we will see an increase in hobbies and interests outside of an individual's chosen profession. In a way, we get concerned when it seems that no part of our lives can escape technological advances, but in other ways we benefit from technology in all its complexities.

To say technology is perfect and makes our lives complete would be false, and there are many challenges associated with gadgets and advances. Frustration often sets in when I am forced to update my computer or punch in numbers when making a service phone call or battle the self-checkout line at Walmart. And I wonder about the absurd information on Facebook. I also get weary of answering 50 emails at work each day. I question the accountability quotient at times and fear the loss of privacy due to the constant invasive properties of technological advances. I often wistfully recall the days of a world without mobile phones, computers, and ease of information. But I refuse to be a Luddite and will continue to embrace our technological world with all its glories and the occasional misgivings.

MBA and Education

With four degrees behind me, one would think I am highly educated and knowledgeable in many areas, able to impart great wisdom with alacrity and comprehension. Yet if I could say one thing that I know beyond a shadow of a doubt, it is that I am absolutely certain of how little I really know. My education is not about completing a degree, it is about discovering new things, of revealing truths, of finding new pathways to goals, and about applying knowledge to all facets of life. But as noble as all of this sounds, in truth I remain ignorant of so much.

The more I study accounting, management, ratios, and finance, the more I discover how much I still need to learn. Not unlike music, there seems to be no end to the knowledge required to be a successful money manager. The more I know, the less I know. In a way, this is the journey of a lifelong learner, one who cannot seem to get enough knowledge in many areas. The formal education means nothing without an insatiable curiousity and without an awareness of one's own limitations. In fact, the enemy of knowledge is the unbridled arrogance that prevents further improvement; whereas, the friend of knowledge is a curious mind. That coupled with a desire for understanding are ultimately the spicy ingredients that lead to humility in its totality.

Humility and receptiveness are the keys to knowledge. My knowing that I cannot know everything and that getting an education is simply one way to acquire a modicum of knowledge and skills, are extremely humbling ideas and, at the same time, strangely amusing. Acquiring an education has little to do with intelligence and everything to do with humility, curiosity, and tenacity. Unfortunately, in my case, it simply demonstrates how little I truly know and how much more I wish to know. To that end, I continue my quest for knowledge and will now dive into books, into writing, and into trying to have greater comprehension of the arts and of the world of business.

The World of Music

Having completed my Masters of Business Administration, it is now time to start blogging again. Knowing there are very few readers of my blog, mostly due to the hiatus of nearly 2 years, I feel led to express my thoughts regardless of the readership. Several lofty goals are rolling around in my head for the future including writing two books, pursuing some licenses, starting a rock band (okay, I know that is absurd), and investing in some kind of venture. But for now, let's just talk about music.

Audra McDonald is simply fantastic in the recent staged version of Sound of Music. To me, the classic song "Climb Every Mountain" has become a little bit stale over the last several years. A good song, its blocked chords and lack of rhythmic variety has prevented it from becoming a staple in the broadway repertoire. As I listen to the various songs in the recent Sound of Music, the performance of Climb Every Mountain stands out. Not unlike the stunning performance of On My Own by Samantha Barks in Les Miserables, Audra McDonald sings with great energy, intensity, and expression. A great singer does not sing at the notes and shrug off the text but, instead, applies meaning to each syllable, connecting the text and music in a bold expression of emotion. Audra McDonald does all this and more as she is both authentic and convincing in her performance. The power of her voice and her ability to turn a phrase while communicating the text made me want to jump up and conquer every mountain I find!

Recently discovering the songs of Reynaldo Hahn, I have been listening to Susan Graham sing these marvelous songs. A touch simplistic, they are still very beautiful with mesmerizing expression and moments of peaceful, serene joy. Both sublime and appealing, Hahn's music is the right recipe at the end of a stressful day. Not unlike Benjamin Britten's British folk songs, Reynaldo Hahn's songs have qualities that make them accessible to all people while retaining the qualities often associated with art music.

Speaking of sublime, I got in a discussion with an art teacher over the value of Lucien Freud's art. She made the statement that his art is sublime without being pleasant. Thinking that through, I am in full agreement with this statement. His art is disturbing and almost disgusting to me in a way, but at the same time, it seems to reach beyond the obvious and into the depth of what it means to be human. The discussion reminds me to avoid the trappings of seeing art and hearing music in its superficialities. Great art requires time to absorb and such is true of the art of Lucien Freud.

The song Roar by Katy Perry continues to be enjoyed by all (okay, most) and I find it compositionally interesting. It has some nice elision of phrases, a prevalent usage of pentatonic scales, and some rhythmic displacement of accents. Add to the music a solid performance by a fine pop singer, and you have a hit! It really is a zingy song and somehow always puts a smile on my face and provides a sense of confidence and power. In short, it is an inspiring song. Nearly as appealing but in an edgier style is Applause by Lady Gaga. Her voice is captivating and the variety within the song, including range changes and melodic leaps, gives it a lasting appeal. Probably not for everyone, Lady Gaga continues to reach audiences with her antics and pop musical depth.

But no essay on music can leave out my continued admiration for the music of Johannes Brahms. In spite of my enjoyment of rock and pop music, I always find myself listening to Brahms and admiring his craft and expression. Every time I hear the last movement of Symphony No. 2, I end up ranking it among the greatest works of the 19th century (Beethoven's Violin Concerto in the group as well). And I still enjoy the grand symphonies of Gustav Mahler and the tone poems of Richard Strauss. Who can criticize the late works of master composer Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart? His last few operas are among the greatest works of the classical era.

Back to rock...Chicago, Blood Sweat & Tears, Styx, Bon Jovi, Stevie Wonder along with another dozen or so remain appealing. Fooling Yourself (Angry Young Man) by the Styx is a blast and I have yet to hear a song by Stevie Wonder that I didn't like. Over in the Christian world, I am a big fan of the music of Keith Getty with his nice blend of hymns and choruses. Chris Tomlin is not necessarily my favorite performer, but he sure writes a singable song and continues to sing and write outstanding music in those circles.

Okay, enough pontificating about music. I am probably one of the most eclectic musicians in the business!

Sensemaking and Folksongs

Coming across the term "sensemaking" in my Organizational Communication textbook, I cynically wondered why academics continually make up words to fit some sort of ideology. It seemed to me that "sensemaking" is the normal thing we do everyday in all situations and should not require some sort of term to describe normal events. Yet as I kept my sarcasm going in my head, I also decided to examine the usage more carefully. In all honesty, I was completely wrong in my suspicion, and my cynicism was totally without merit. Sensemaking is alive and well and is a worthy practice for all organizations and leaders.

The author of the textbook referenced a man named Karl Weick which then led me to read more about sensemaking. In its base form, sensemaking is the process of  individuals in an organization incorporating all  information about situations, events, emotions, or people and communicating that information in an open environment. It is also about avoiding assumptions, about team building, and about looking beyond the obvious, applying depth and meaning through organizational behavior. Sensemaking combines knowledge and information with human interaction and awareness of human needs, applying comprehensive meaning to the experience.

As I learned more about sensemaking, I realized the inherent value of the process and have decided to practice the theory at every opportunity. Reflecting on how to invoke sensemaking as a part of my leadership world, I began to read about examples of how using sensemaking can make a difference in organizations. Studying these situations brought me to the tragedy of the fire of 1949 at Mann Gulch Montana. Without going into detail, 13 brave firefighters lost their lives due to assumptions, poor information, poor organizational leadership, a lack of team building, and a lack of knowledge of science. Their decisions were based on intuition and self motivation rather than capturing all the information needed to survive. It is not insignificant that of the three people who survived, one used his knowledge of fires to make it work to his advantage, and the other two bonded together and used collective decision making to find a way out. While tragedy may have occurred in spite of utilizing sensemaking, it is likely more would have survived had they fully understood all the factors at play in the experience. Sadly, the event points to the need for organizations, leaders, and everyone to practice a high level of sensemaking in not only the dramatic events of our lives but also the day to day activities.

For anyone seeking to know more about sensemaking, there are several excellent articles on the subject that identify seven properties of sensemaking to apply in situations related to organizations or in leadership. But what does any of this have to do with folksongs? Learning more about the Mann Gulch tragedy and feeling engulfed in the powerful emotion of lives lost, I discovered a folk song about the event. Called the Mann Gulch Tribute, the song tells the story of the events of the fire and the people who fought bravely but lost to the power of nature (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWLSbWhwTE0). It is sung with a folk type of accompaniment of guitar arpeggiated with varied and judicious uses of simple chords and appropriate harmony. The charm of the song is its simplicity that allows the story to come through in a balance of emotion and objective presentation.

Folk songs are cathartic expressions of honesty, allowing listeners to understand the pain without excessive sentimentality or unbridled musical anguish. Folk songs can be joyous, sad, bitter, satisfying, or simply narrative in presentation. They may or may not make a political statement and they may or may not teach a lesson in their texts. Mostly folk songs are music of the people, for the people, and by the people. As Louis Armstrong once quipped, "All music is folk music, I ain't never heard no horse sing a song." I recall my dad singing folksongs with his guitar and my mother harmonizing in the background. Those were good times and the memories have stayed with me forever.

I am not a luddite and I love our advanced world of technology with media at our fingertips, instant information whenever we want it, and communication of all types with anyone at anytime. But if I could move back time or bring something back to our culture or at least alter our lives in some sort of way, it would be to return to the idea of using folksongs to express the events of our lives. For some anachronistic joy, go to youtube (a wonderful new technology, by the way), and listen to some Peter, Paul, and Mary, or Bob Dylan, or Pete Seeger or perhaps some more modern fare such as John Denver, Paul Simon, Jim Croce, or Bruce Springsteen.

Or take a journey through the world by finding folksongs from various countries such as Ireland, Scotland, Wales, or France or Ukraine. Perhaps a few moments in the Far East to enjoy some music of the people or experience the worship practices of cultures from Africa. It is all grand and points to a world of authenticity of expression of the people. In a way and a bit of a stretch, folk music is the ideal way to understand organizational communication and the application of sensemaking. Folk music in its purest form attempts to give broad meaning to the joys and challenges of life by applying comprehensive knowledge blended with emotion and intuition. Maybe organizations and leadership could learn from the music of the people.

What makes music "Classical"?

I just read a short piece discussing what makes a book or an author a classic. In the article, the author wryly mentions that denouncing particular classics has become a past time for professors and journalists to receive attention or at least a publication (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2013/05/canon-fodder-denouncing-the-classics.html). As I was reading through this, I began to think in terms of music and composers. In academia we have settled on the "canon" of music literature and are comfortable with those nebulous decisions passed down through generations. We erroneously call this music "classical" in that the music has become classic over a period of time. Unfortunately there is a confusion with the term classical due to its usage in art, literature, architecture and music as a time period or, in some cases, a style. Nevertheless, for this discussion, the term "classical" will be used synonymously with the term "canon" as referencing acceptable music for academic study.

To be fair, the greatest test of worth in art is the test of time. When a composition or a composer "makes it," we discuss and listen to that person or the piece of music regardless of how long ago it was created. Shakespeare is great today just as it was during his time. Beethoven is still worth studying and performing in spite of not having any new works since his death in 1827. Many composers have withstood the test of time and are performed today on a regular basis, with audiences finding meaning in their music and willing to support the music not due to its reputation but rather to its actual quality. This makes absolute sense and is to be valued beyond its commercial value and into its internal accomplishments.

But the canon of literature is changing, as it should, with an unusual form of crowdsourcing that is difficult to understand and codify. The people are redesigning what it means to be classical. At one time people simply accepted the decision of the "experts" that a specific work of art is great or that a particular artist is deemed the finest in the field. When it comes to evaluating art, the combined opinions of experts, educated people, time, and an awareness of concepts and interests working together form artistic worth. In a way we trust the art expert who claims Rodin to be a great sculptor, but in other ways it is easy to agree upon studying a Rodin sculpture and seeing its precision and feeling the power in the piece.

But what happens if people become uninterested in the music of Beethoven or Mozart, Bach or Brahms? What happens if large amounts of people no longer trust the "experts" in the field and instead decide they prefer a different type of art? What will we do as academic musicians if the music of Mozart no longer has substantial meaning in the world to most people? How do we deal with our conviction that Mozart is essential listening and worthy of study if most people feel rather ho-hum about Mozart's music? In a way, this is catastrophic. If we have spent our lives regaling the plays of Shakespeare as vital literature for everyone and suddenly "everyone" or at least a majority disagrees, then we run the risk of acknowledging we were wrong and will face the real fear that Shakespeare will disappear. Unacceptable in either case.

"Classical" is not determined historically by scholars or experts, it is determined by you and me and by the 6 billion people who inhabit the earth. How many times have I told people about a great work of art or play or piece of music or movie and expressed my unbridled enthusiasm with joyful zeal only to realize that I was somewhat singular in my view? While there is no problem with my preference, I also must accept, at least to an extent, that my views are my own and while sometimes broadly embraced, also sometimes only minimally loved. In the end, the canon we scholars so love is decided by the people. This is as it should be. I may often disagree with people's love of certain art or literature but I cannot denounce the popularity of the work itself.

For example, I have no particular love nor respect for the Canon in D by Pachelbel. I find it to be excessively dull and repetitive, totally lacking in creativity and expression. If I never hear the piece again, I will be very happy. Yet, obviously, my views are my own and I must live in my own strange bubble of what I deem as worthy art since the Canon in D is so popular. It is heard in weddings ad nauseum and seems to be loved by all--much to my confusion and disdain. Oh well, I lose on this one!

My point is not to disparage the tastes of the masses, but instead to reflect on how the masses determine the worth over time, for better or worse. If music by Joseph Haydn does eventually fall into the black hole of extinction, which will not surprise me, then scholars will need to accept it. If the hymn And Can It Be becomes a never performed hymn in church, which may already be true to an extent, then hymn lovers, of which I am, will need to accept it. If art and literature of the past become museum pieces without great merit in today's world, then so be it. I may not like it and I may continue to fight to keep it, but in the end worthy art is determined over time by virtue of its broad acceptance.

"Classical" is made by you and me.

Church Music Thoughts

About to go for a run followed by getting ready for church, I am full of complex thoughts on music in society and church in particular. Adopting a utilitarian philosophy of church music, I do try to retain my sincerest optimism for the role of music in our culture in both secular and sacred contexts. Sound exists as a rule in our world, and music, a result of a certain organization of sound, is a pervasive entity in virtually every part of cultural activity, earning a place beyond that of entertainment and nearly to a necessity. Music is a vital part of our society, affecting all ages and all types of people, equalizing the classes, finding the educated and uneducated, and melding all types of cultures together.

As an outspoken advocate for music as the great peacemaker, bringing together the masses and the individuals in a bold expression of unification, I often find myself at odds with my own belief system in music. After all, shouldn't I then like everything? But in liking everything, am I in danger of liking nothing by virtue of mediocrity of preference? Furthermore, the musical worldview of total acceptance somehow augers against my experience and training in music. Am I not an expert, at least to an extent? But does my "expertise" work against my globalization and vast tolerance? Hidden beneath these questions is a murky form of bipolar disorder in music called "psychological bitonality"! (decided to pitch a little humor for the musicians reading this entry).

I will admit that these mental meanderings about musical acceptance, mediocrity, training, sound, and other lofty thoughts are making me tired. For the church service I am about to lead, I chose two older hymns (just can't bring myself to use the word traditional), one recent chorus, 3 older chorus that some would consider hymns, and then a simple scripture song. Will these do the trick? Should worship be a trick? Will people hold their scorecard in their hand and give me low marks or high marks? Do I want to worry about it?

I believe that whatever music is sung or experienced in church should be about worshiping God. But, admittedly, I am sensitive to the truth that not all music allows all people to worship God. Some people cannot get past the problems of having to sing music not in their preference base. Recognizing this, at times I wonder if church music leaders ought to post a sign outside the church saying what the music will include. Such as: TODAY IN THE SERVICE WE WILL USE THE ORGAN ON TWO OLDER HYMNS FOLLOWED BY THE DRUMS AND GUITARS ON TWO NEW FAST CHORUSES. WE WILL THEN BRING IN THE PIANO FOR SOME OLDER CHORUSES THAT ARE SLOW AND PRETTY.  FOR THE OFFERTORY, WE WILL SING JUST AS I AM WITH ONLY PIANO AND ORGAN. WE WILL END THE SERVICE WITH A GOSPEL SONG AND USE DRUMS AND GUITARS ALONG WITH PIANO AND ORGAN. PLEASE ATTEND IF MOST OF THIS IS IN YOUR PREFERENCE LIST!

I'm sure the preacher would be very supportive of such an approach to the worship service! Kidding aside, I do spend quite a bit of effort in worship planning and always pray that the music will not be a deterrent to a worshipful experience for everyone. When music polarizes people, it is not doing a good job. When it brings people together for a common goal, it is fulfilling its mission as music. In church, the music should enhance the worship time and the spiritual experience for the community of believers. It should also touch lives and express the sublime, teaching and fostering a greater understanding of God.

So, we'll see how it goes!

Pursuing the MBA

It is all about learning, and being a student again reminds me that learning remains one of the great opportunities of our lives and that in a broad sense education is truly a lifelong endeavor. I recall moving chairs and music stands in the band hall the day before I received my PhD in Fine Arts. The grand fanfare of receiving what many consider the top degree one can earn was quickly diminished when I returned to my office and began moving chairs and stands as I had before I had the degree. Nothing had changed really, it was still work as usual.

Not that I am belittling the PhD which hangs proudly on my wall, serving as a reminder of many years of schooling, of papers, of presentations and projects, of terrific stress brought on by qualifying exams, oral exams, and defenses of the major research dissertation. All that and more ultimately led to the PhD, shaping my academic career and  allowing me to serve as an administrator in higher education. And I no longer move chairs and stands as often as I once did, but when I do, it is strangely comforting and deservedly humbling.

My career is a good one and, I suppose, enviable to some. Why, then, would I subject myself to yet another degree pursuit far removed from my discipline? The simple answer is that I enjoy learning new things and have always been interested in the business world. The more complex answer is that I firmly believe all disciplines and all areas of life are greatly impacted by technology and a thorough application of information and data of consumer activity. Regardless of the discipline, a healthy knowledge and utilization of marketing, financial wisdom, and business communication can be vastly beneficial in fund-raising, in promoting programs, and in setting budgeting priorities. Few in higher education administration can escape those business principles that define so much of how scholarly activities intertwine with current practices in the marketplace. Those in academia who refuse to understand how business works, preferring instead to live in a black hole of humanistic and artistic scholarship that makes little impact on modern culture, will continue to be mystified and ultimately denigrated by the leaders making the decisions.

Justification aside, it has been a rocky but exciting ride. I am now 2/3 completed with my degree and, to my knowledge, am the oldest student in the program. Each course has been demanding with all the rigors attached to graduate school including presentations, projects, and research papers coupled with extensive reading of books and articles. Maintaining my day job as Dean (day job is a myth for a dean of fine arts, by the way since there are several concerts at night most weeks throughout the year!), I find myself working every evening on papers and getting up each morning for further refinement of the previous night's work. Often sandwiching in the challenges of being a Dean with the expectations of being a student, I understand the stressful and perplexing world of a being a student again.

Each teacher has a different approach to teaching and a different set of expectations for writing and presenting. This is as it should be. There is no cookie cutter model of excellence in education, and the key is to adapt to each teaching style and simply meet the expectation set forth by the instructor. Negative thoughts about assignments are non-productive; furthermore, procrastinating with the idea that the challenges will be swept under the proverbial rug is without any merit. For me it is necessary to manage my time schedule very carefully, compartmentalize each expectation, and meet the demands with thorough attention to every detail. This is not unlike being a Dean although it is a bit more intense.

The reactions toward me by the other students have been mixed I suspect. One student called me "Teacher's Pet" while another student has called me an "Overachiever." I did hear one student expressing his admiration of someone older willing to learn new things and pursue a new degree, and I was thanked by another student for providing "real world" experiences in the discussion times. Most of the students have been very friendly, respectful, and not concerned with the age disparity. Since few of them are from an arts or humanities background, they expend very little energy in discourse about literature, art, or music. They tend to be pragmatic thinkers with concern about the future and a keen awareness of current political climate and its effect on companies.

The teachers, an impressive lot in all respects, have struggled a bit to treat me as a regular student particularly when it comes to discussion on advanced business policies, but for the most part they recognize I am there to learn not to interfere. And learn I have and will continue to do so, probably for the rest of my life in fact! Maybe there is something to being a perpetual student where each day is a new opportunity to learn, to apply, and to enjoy the journey. To use a phrase I tend to use too often I suspect--"It's a blast!"

Report: This Business of Music

Krasilovsky, M. William and Sydney Shemel with contributions by John M. Gross & Jonathan Feinstein, This Business of Music: The Definitive Guide to the Business and Legal Issues of the Music Industry, 10th edition. New York: Crown Publishing Group, 2007.

This Business of Music is a comprehensive, legal resource for anything related to the field of music business including but not limited to technology, recording, copyright, trade regulations, videos, taxation, management, publishing, loans, public domain, composers, performers, performing, labor, contracts, and foreign distribution. Divided into four large parts with multiple chapters in each part, the book works to examine music business in its entirety and all the legal considerations. Part One is titled Music Business Trends and Transformations. Part Two: Record Industry Agreements and Practices, Part Three: Music Publisher and Writer Agreements and Practices, and Part Four: Other Aspects of the Music Business. There are a total of 42 chapters in the book with numerous subheadings within each chapter, ensuring the topic is completely covered.

As in most legal books, This Business of Music does not expend any energy in creative interpretations nor rhetorical, colorful language. The sentences spin out with conciseness and clarity, leaving no doubt as to the intention or goals. Well-indexed and organized, this volume provides an ideal resource for music managers whether in educational circles or professional. All areas related to music business are dealt with and discussed in legal terms, providing a complete handbook beneficial to all people involved in music.

The book begins with a short chapter on trends and transformations in the music industry. Labor for performing musicians remains flat and salaries are reported to be low with some exceptions in certain negotiated professional salaries. Most performing musicians supplement their earnings with additional employment and a significant number of performing musicians are "between engagements." In most ways, these statistics are disturbing for performing musicians until we examine the growth of "listening" to music.

As the book states on page 4, "Music is big business in the United States." Listeners encompass the entire population and listening to music in some form or another involves more than 20 hours per week for most people. The technological age of digital downloading and listening directly through a computer makes tracking listening patterns difficult but it has been projected at over 40 billion dollars per year spent on music audio and or video sales. The book suggests we may be at an all time high in dollars spent for music listening. This large of an industry requires a high degree of regulation and requirements to protect both individuals and businesses involved in the creation, distribution, and handling of music.

There are three major performing rights organizations that serve to protect performers and writers. The American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers (ASCAP) collected $698 million on behalf of its 200,000 members in 2004. Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI) collected $779 million in 2005-2006, and SESAC, originally titled Society of European Stage Authors & Composers but referred to as SESAC, collects between $5 and $7 million each year. The chart on page 9 demonstrates the large amount of retail music as compared with digital and device driven music. Licensing agencies are working through the court system to develop a license for digital downloading which could include a comprehensive statutory blanket license for legitimate digital service (p. 10). The proliferation of digital technology is driving forward the need for legislation and ultimately industry equilibrium.

Within Part Two there are several chapters of significant value to managers with Chapter 7 being the most relevant in higher education. Chapter 7 called Sound Recordings: Rights, Restrictions, and Royalties and discuss the law as it relates to sound recordings and the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976. The Act "states that copyright of a sound recording rests initially with the 'author' or 'authors' of that recording" (p. 64). It is often difficult to determine the authors of sound recordings and determination is a process of bargaining with the parties involved, further complicated by the role of the employee in producing the recording. Most of these situations are determined on a case-by-case basis.

"The copyright gives the owner of a sound recording the exclusive rights to reproduce it, to distribute the records to the public, and to make derivative works based thereon" (p. 64). But it does not protect the owner from a soundalike recording to be made nor does it give royalties to the owners for broadcasts of recordings. It does prevent the renting of recordings that were lawfully purchased or duplication of recordings for profit. This, however, does not extend to libraries or nonprofit institutions lending recordings. In the case of databases of recordings, the purchaser has the right to hear the recording but not to duplicate it for personal gain.

Using a sound recording post-February 15, 1972 requires permission from the copyright owner. Because this practice has become common, licensing agencies are serving in the role as agents of owners, including ASCAP, BMI, RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America), and SESAC. In addition a not-for-profit group called the Alliance of Artists and Recording Companies (AARC) has taken on the responsibility for collections and is operating on a global scale by collecting fees for home taping in foreign countries. This is an effort to collect taxes for home duplication of purchased recordings.

Institutions are required to have licenses for using sound recordings and to make annual reports of usage to licensing agencies representing copyright owners. Recent actions by the Copyright Royalty Board suggest that sophistication in technology should allow for automatic reporting of sound recordings, but broadcasters continue to resist this action. A table on page 496 describes the process for licensing, reporting, and collecting royalties.

Despite the best efforts of the Copyright Act and ongoing litigation against piracy, technology continues to press forward and seems to encourage the action around the world. New legislation by the United States Congress including the Intellectual Property and Courts Amendments Act of 2004 prevents fraudulent labeling on sound recordings and imposes stiffer penalties on counterfeit goods including sound recordings and other digital reproductions. Further technological mechanisms are being developed to protect copyright infringement on digital recordings. It is expected, however, that broadcasters will continue to battle the restrictions and find ways to get around the piracy preventions.

Part Three is called: Music Publisher and Writer Agreements and Practices. Of the twenty chapters in this section, the most applicable in higher education and general music management are the chapters on copyright, music for the theatre, and printed music. Copyright is addressed in chapters 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 18, 19, and 20. Knowing the law and staying current with changes and trends in copyright litigation is an essential part of a managers responsibility in music business.

Difficult to express concisely, copyright law has undergone significant changes in its history going back to the U.S. Constitution which states that "the purpose of copyright is 'To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors, the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.' The most recent major overhaul of copyright law occurred in 1976 with the Copyright Act of 1976. When discussing copyright, works that are not recorded or not written down do not qualify for statutory copyright but may qualify for common law copyright for a limited time under the Copyright Act of 1976. Copyright protection is extended for both published and unpublished works, including any recording distributed for public performance. In a sense, although a bit ambiguous, personal recordings placed on youtube are considered owned by the performer and therefore subject to protection under the copyright laws.

Further protection of ownership can be gained through registration of published or unpublished works through the U.S. Copyright Office. Litigation against copyright infringement cannot be enacted without evidence of registration with the U.S. Copyright Office, but registration can also occur after the actual infringement has occurred. Another advantage to registration is to replace lost items due to the Library of Congress keeping and storing all registered items. The idea that an owner can send themselves a manuscript through registered mail and secure registration and copyright protection may have little legal merit. Information on how to register a work is found on pages 95-98 and includes how to fill out forms and select the type of registration preferred.

The Copyright Notice is no longer required to be displayed publicly on a work due to the Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988, but is highly recommended and should included the symbol,  the year, and the owners name somewhere on the document. All published materials, including sound recordings, sheet music, and other materials, are required to be registered within 3 months of publication and should be with the two "Best Editions" available. Transfers of ownership are to be in writing and signed by original owner or authorized agent. The transfer should then be recorded in the Copyright Office. This then allows the copyright notice to bear the new owners name.

Fair Use is a frequently used term but needs to be understood by managers since it is often invoked in educational settings. "Fair Use is the right of the public to make a reasonable use of copyrighted material in special instances without the copyright owner's consent" (p. 102). This allows for book reviewers to quote lines from a book or researchers to use extracts for text to scholarly commentary. If the purpose is primarily educational and is for non-profit usage, then Fair Use can be applied for copyrighted material provided there is not a direct effect upon the potential market or value of the copyrighted work. There are guidelines prepared to address "Fair Use" and these should by duly studied by managers to prevent misunderstanding and abuse of the application. In general, making multiple copies of a copyright work to substitute purchase of the work is a violation of the law. Copying more than 10% of a work and making multiple copies is also a violation of the law.

Case law has further determined that Fair Use is not allowed if it hurts the owner financially, is in competition with the owner, or does not serve the public interest in development of news, art, science or industry (p. 104). While Fair Use does give allowances to educational institutions, it is once again wise to obtain a license from agencies or from a copyright proprietor. It is also prudent to give consideration to copyright ownership and avoid any kind of abuse of the Fair Use allowance in educational settings.

The length of copyright varies but 95 years is a general timetable to consider for copyrighted material. As of this writing, anything written prior to 1918 is now in public domain. Copyright  for joint works created after 1978 are for 70 years after the death of the last surviving author. Copyright renewal is only allowable prior to 2005 and only applies to next of kin or original executors of the estate in question. Termination of transfer of copyright requires written notice and has a window of 5 years prior to 1978 after death of ownership. There is a chart on page 119 outlining the options in termination of copyrights and transfers.

Public Domain is a term that is understood by many to be as "free as air." As musicians and educational institutions become more aware of the usage of public domain, it is decidedly ethical to give attributes to original ownership. This issue is particularly problematic with the availability of free music in public domain on various websites. There are many lists and references of music available in public domain but it is incumbent on a manager to know when a work is public domain or still under copyright. Managers should also keep in mind that an arrangement of a work in public domain means the original is free and available but not the arrangement of the work. A unusual development in Public Domain is the licensing under Creative Commons which allows for any usage of works as long as appropriate attribution is given (p. 130).

Chapter 19 is called Copyright Infringement. The chapter reminds readers of the cost of litigation and the responsible parties in a copyright infringement lawsuit, which could include licensees, producers, performers, and writers. Whether intentional or not, copyright infringement can still be applied in a lawsuit provided the plaintiff can prove access to the work. Incidental copying of a work without having had any kind of access to the work is not a violation of Copyright laws; however, subconscious copying of a work to which an author had access is considered an infringement (p. 197).

Every chapter in this book is clear and uses legal, concise language to describe the situation or possible violation, making this book an invaluable resource for music managers. The exception to the writing style happens in Chapter 42 called Technology Is a Challenge, Not a Choice. This is one of most entertaining and creative chapters in the book and essential reading for anyone in the music business. Technology is a major game changer for music with greater access for everyone and instant sharing of music files across oceans, resulting in portability and consumer-oriented music production. Technology has blurred the boundaries of copyright, music quality, ownership, licensing, marketing, and purchasing. The result of the ease of technology is also the ease of illegal activity through file sharing and digital downloads.

As in all problems created by humans, there are also solutions to the problems that will likely develop over time. Although every solution has concerns, it is to be expected that for the music business to be profitable, it must alter much of the way it conducts business. As the music business examines these issues, part of the solution will be to provide protection for owners by adding more security devices and examining the digital footprint of the trail of the sharing. This is one suggestion but it is accompanied with other issues such as violations of privacy and the possibilities for entrepreneurship in digital downloads. As the book says on page 460, "Exactly how the industry will look in a decade is not knowable, but only by meeting the challenges of that future today can we ensure a result we can comfortably embrace."

This Business of Music is a must for all music managers to have in their library to be used as a resource for acting responsibly and legally in all situations. The comprehensive approach to the music business makes this book an essential handbook for anyone seeking precise information on the business of music. The thorough index at the end of the book supplements the several pages of resources, charts, and addresses of agencies involved in the music business.

Story time

Stopping at Half Price Books on the way home from visiting our kids in the Metroplex area, I gave everyone 15-20 minutes of book shopping. This is a typical event for us and we each went different directions searching for books in our interest base. For me that involves a few minutes in the collectible books area, a few minutes in history, a few in mystery, and some time in the fiction section. But my book interests are pretty much on hold these days due to taking a full load of classes as I work toward my Master of Business Administration. With this in mind, I still enjoyed walking around the store seeing book titles, smelling the musty smell, seeing the stacks, and marveling at the creative spirit that sparked all these ideas around me. I just really love books.

As I neared the mystery section I saw a man holding a Vince Flynn book. He turned to his wife who was walking toward him and asked her if she had read that particular book. I am not a big Vince Flynn fan, finding his books unnecessarily violent and a little weak in characterization, but I was curious about her answer to his question. She continued walking toward him while holding hands with her 3 year old daughter who was dressed in a pretty little blue dress. The daughter walked along and although unable to see the books higher than her little head, she obviously knew she was surrounded by books. She said to her mother, in a small, sweet voice, "Is this story time?" Her mother said, "It does look like story time doesn't it?" The lady then told her husband that she had read that Vince Flynn book and did not care for it that much. Later I saw the lady with the little girl in the children's section about to read her a story.

Oh, do I remember story time! Mom and Dad would read me a story at home which I loved (I think Dad actually embellished many of the stories written and turned them into his own creations!), but they would also take me down to the local library for story time. At a young age, I learned to love story time and love the musty smell of books. I also learned to respect the creative spirit that sparked all the knowledge and joy around me. My brother, who became a writer, and I have loved books all our lives and in turn instilled the same love of stories and books to our children.

As I walked through the Half Price Books and thought about Story Time, I found myself thankful for the countless stories that exist in books and for the blessing of imagination and creativity. And thankful for parents who taught me the value of great stories, stories that still have meaning today and stories that have stayed with me forever. I have passed these same stories to my children who will likely pass them on to their children along with a love for books. So I want to say to the little girl who asked if it were story time--"Yes, it is ALWAYS story time!"

The Peace Party--Technology in the Future

          A study of the current economic situation will inevitably include the opinion of economists who dogmatically offer their expertise in predicting the future, forecasting either growth in a robust bull market economy or a recessionary bust where the bears win the ultimate economic battle. The result of such forecasting, of which approximately half the economists will be wrong, is to negate the purpose of prophetic, often pitiful, pandering by the so-called experts in the field. This does not, however, slow down the predictions nor should it, for to predict the future is to own it and then to make preparations for what will come. Erroneous though economists may sometimes be, there is wisdom and gain in analyzing, evaluating, synthesizing, and in making conclusions regarding the future of the economy. Yet, in spite of all scientific efforts, it is very difficult to predict human behavior and human responses to economic situations. Such is true of technology. 

When we think we have reached our technological potential, along comes 3-D printing, LEAP Motion, implanted human computers, germ identification through smartphones, thought manipulation, cloning, genetic engineering and modifications, nanotechnologies, and many others that seem to show up nearly every day. In the area of social media, email is old news; Facebook is current but ironically questioned; phone calls are disappearing; texting and voice texts are current; books, journals, and newspapers are antiquated; libraries have become coffee shops, cafes, and mass communication centers. Computers are smaller, more efficient, and more intuitive to human needs than any previous time, and the cloud is providing most of the storage of information without the old burden of hard drives, discs, or physical storage.

According to Bill Joy the technological advances in genetic engineering, nanotechnology, and robotics are just a few steps away from eradicating the need for humans in the world. He fears that we have advanced so far that technology now owns us and threatens our very existence.[1] Other writers such as Emmanuel Mesthene see a greater purpose for technology as serving human existence and improving upon it provided we are able to adjust to the changing world.[2] The classic piece by Robert L. Heilbroner called Do Machines Make History takes a historical and socially active approach to technology by pointing out how society and technology work together in history through sequential advances.[3] Some see technology as the greatest element for saving the world while others see it as a permanent detriment to all that is right and good. The truth, like most truth, probably lies in the middle of such extreme views.

When the printing press first came into use in approximately 1450, there was likely great fear of the dramatic change and such is true for all new inventions and often new ideas. Despite the human desire to progress and to innovate, we are also programmed to fear change and to prefer the same old system. We love and respect the heritage and traditions of the past but we also recognize the benefits of dreams, of innovation, of putting into reality those imaginations that sparkle from human creativity. Technology is both liberating and constricting. It provides us with great freedom by minimizing distances and providing open access to knowledge, and it improves the quality of life by providing greater safety in transportation, improved medical diagnoses and treatments, improved efficiency in record keeping, protection of information, and sources of entertainment. Brown and Duguid see technology as complementary of human culture, not replacing it.[4]

There is no area of our modern life that is not touched by technology in a number of ways. Our clothes, food, homes, churches, families, and our professions have all been either directly or indirectly created using some kind of technological advancement. But in all matters inherently good, there is potential for evil due to mankind’s ability to corrupt that which is good. While it is not within the scope of this essay to discuss our fallen world and the problems of how a lack of moral fiber may be slowly eroding our culture (a debatable concept when seen through the lens of time and history), it is wise to be aware of the potential issues surrounding irresponsible use of technology.

When we begin talking about technology’s function in society and subsequently mention the need for increased responsibility, we are addressing not simply how technology is used but also its higher purpose. Most definitions of technology see it as “scientific knowledge for practical purposes”[5] or some sort of variation of this idea, making technology a tool or an idea to be used for a practical purpose. The implied antithesis of this idea is that technology is an end in and of itself, serving no purpose whatsoever other than to exist in its own framework. Since a tool made by a human ought to serve a practical purpose, it makes logical sense that technology serves society rather than society serving technology. Comfortable with this idea and certainly recognizing technology’s role in the world, I also see it as serving an additional purpose beyond that of a functioning tool. Perhaps there is a role for technology in serving the emotional and artistic needs.

Artisans have had an uphill battle for respect going all the way back to Plato who although loved art also saw it as a little dangerous to objective thinking. He did not include artists in his “city” due to being suspicious of the emotions that art tends to cause in people. Not wanting to discard emotions completely, he nevertheless reasoned that emotions should have a lower place in the ideal social makeup. We continue to struggle with this today as we try to understand the functional role of art in our practical world. If indeed art serves no purpose other than some kind of aesthetic, emotional need, then by syllogism relationship, technology has no connection to art or emotions. If technology is scientific knowledge for practical purposes and art has no practical purpose, then it stands to reason that technology and art are polar opposites in their makeup, design, and intent. One serves society and the other may hurt it!

Yet further examination of art versus technology begins to unravel the idea that technology only serves a functional purpose, particularly in light of the ubiquity of technology in our society. The vast emotional experiences of technology further support the idea that technology serves society’s need for emotional stability, subjectivism, and aesthetic understanding. This lifts technology to a greater role in culture, nearly ascribing it character traits beyond that of merely being a tool, and, subsequently, making us a little nervous. The more we empower technology, particularly as it relates to our emotional well-being in society, the more we resist the impulse to allow it to determine our own emotional responses. We then exist in a healthy and responsible tension of using technology to our advantage in a multitude of ways that improves virtually every area of life but not allowing it to govern all aspects. In spite of technology’s pervasiveness in our lives, we will always withhold a little humanness, or to put it another way, we will use those qualities that make us human in ways that require technology to serve our needs.

But before pontificating excessively about technology, let us return to the idea of the role of the arts in our world. If Plato were correct, then it is true that emotions are mostly necessary and art has a valuable but limited role in society particularly when compared with sciences or mathematics. This manifests in today’s university curriculum and salary structures across the country. The idea of function is decidedly different from aesthetics and emotions, and we seem to value function over aesthetics in most situations. As I sit in this chair, it serves a functional and necessary purpose. I am not interested in its aesthetic qualities and although slightly joyful at sitting in a comfortable chair, I am not expending great emotional energy studying my feelings regarding this functional item below me. However, if I choose to display this chair on a wall thereby limiting or even extinguishing its functional purpose as a chair, then I have created a work of art. It may or may not be a quality aesthetic emotional experience for the viewer but, nevertheless, since it no longer functions as a chair, it has become a work of art. If the chair is now a work of art, then do I need to question its existence as valuable? Or perhaps my creation of the work of art, primitive though it may be, serves an aesthetic need not easily defined in functional terms. Is it possible, then, that Plato was not entirely correct in his assessment of the role of emotions in society? If, in fact, emotions do play a more valuable role than previously thought, then it would be advantageous to examine technology in broader terms than its functional goals.

Are there times when technology does not serve a functional purpose for society? Or, to take it another step, can we use technology to enhance our own need for great aesthetic purposes? Can technology actually provide a high level of emotional release and, ultimately, stability for us? The answers to all these questions are affirmative. While there is no question that technology is “scientific knowledge for practical purpose” and that its role is to be a functional tool that benefits both the individual and the collective whole, I contend that technology also serves a dual purpose of providing emotional stability and aesthetics in our culture. Music, art, drama, literature, and all forms of entertainment continue to benefit and develop from technology, and people continue to fill their need for aesthetics through technology. While few natural joys are greater than hearing the birds in the trees and feeling a gentle breeze in the calm peace of the outdoors, we also find satisfaction in turning on a computer and listening to our favorite rock song on Youtube or connecting with an old friend on Facebook or attending a movie or playing a game on the computer, and the list of pleasurable experiences through technology is vast.

Nearly every day we hear about a new technology to enhance artistic experiences or a new machine to help us with an emotional issue. When viewed collectively and globally, technology is ultimately about emotional security, well-being and happiness. Its potential for good and for evil is tremendous and those who use it to perpetrate violence on other humans are to be scorned as anathema in a world where they do not belong. Those uses of technology have no place in society and need to be defenestrated as we seek a world that is violence-free and peaceful for all.

Using technology to advance the human experience both artistically and functionally is to take our creative imagination, our innovative spirit, our God-given intelligence and amalgamate these attributes with technology and change the world. It is the event of human beings interacting with technology through congruent and complementary activities that gives technology its purpose.  Human beings do not always clearly define an action or a behavior but that does not negate the action itself. Technology may be articulated by most people as “scientific knowledge for a practical purpose” but the real truth lies in its application. If we give lip service to technology’s role in serving a practical purpose but, in fact, use technology for an aesthetic and emotional purpose as well, then it is time to redefine it.

The Tucker definition of technology: Technology is scientific knowledge to advance the human experience. This definition is a broadening of the role of technology and gives a greater understanding of what it means to be human, replete with practical and emotional needs. I believe that recent developments in technology are expressions of the refinement of our culture not only in the United States but throughout the world. Yes, there are bumps, obstacles, landmines, and, sadly, nuclear weapons. Yes, there are those wanting to destroy the essence of the human experience through genetic engineering and nanotechnology. Antithetically, there are others who seek to reduce or destroy our technological dependence by returning to the fundamental ideas of our heritage and our culture. Unfortunately, neither of these views is productive and only contributes to the suspicion of technology in today’s world. The preferred view is a balanced one of using technology to advance the human experience.

Most would say that presenting a Utopian and functionally absurd vision for the technological future is to create intellectual and emotional rubbish. But I do wish, regardless of the inevitable criticism, to state my vision. We may be a few hundred years from this idea philosophically, but technologically we are not far from connecting to every person in the world in an instant. I believe that most people desire peace and desire to live their lives without fear of violence. I dream of a time when the world’s population of nearly 7 billion people look at each other across a virtual room and lay down all weapons forever, and I dream of a world of peace, of absolute congruence, and a world where everyone truly has an equal opportunity for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The day this happens, I propose the grandest party in history. It will be a party of joy and a party of peace and an acknowledgement that we used technology for good and to change the world forever.

---

[1] Joy, Bill. Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us, 2001.

[2] Mesthene, Emmanuel. Some General Implications of the Research of the Harvard University Program on Technology and Society, 1967-68.

[3] Heilbroner, Robert L. Do Machines Make History, 1967.

[4] Brown, John Seely and Paul Duguid. A Response to Bill Joy and the Doom-and-Gloom Technofuturists, 2000.

[5] http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/technology, accessed 3/13/2013.

The Power of Imagination

Having always struggled a bit with staying focused on one task and wondering if  my excessive imagination really had a place in the world, it was with great relief that many years ago a well-respected composer once encouraged me to use my imagination to envision new music. He said it was the dreamers who made the most difference in the world.

I am not always sure, however, that he was right. It seems as though we live in a concrete world where our daily lives are simply steps toward fulfilling the objective that is presented. We go about our lives doing the necessary things to meet our basic needs including food, clothing, shelter, companionship, and meeting our calling in some kind of profession. For a student, it is a matter of following the regime of school including classes, studying, and extracurricular activities. For an adult, we tend to live in a type of survival mode of taking care of the business of life from auto insurance, to taxes, to medical needs, meals, families, homes, paying bills, putting fuel in the car, using a smartphone and a computer, answering correspondence, fixing the garage door, painting the porch, watering the plants, and the list of chores continues ad nauseum.

But few if any of these activities require great imagination and, in fact, may be detrimental to creativity and to dreaming. The more we deal with the mundane, the more it becomes the norm, thereby eroding our creativity and our imagination for a different kind of existence. Not unlike the characters in Plato's Cave, who accepted the shadows as the reality and were unable to associate the shadows with real people, we are in danger of living in a world of specificity and pragmatism. As a musician, the more I dedicate myself to the precision of the music in order to be a performer of the highest order, the less creative I become. We tend to sacrifice our human subjective emotional dreams in order to accomplish those tasks requiring less imagination. I, furthermore, have to wonder if our entire educational system is a massive corrosion and eradication of creativity and imagination. Education is about the essentials, the necessities, and, perhaps, that is right and good. Maybe we should be about teaching the necessities and minimizing the non-essentials.

After all, we are about the business of life, teaching life skills, health, cognition, problem solving, respect, contributing to society, honesty, scholarship, communication, and many other things that are essential. But I am not talking about the essential, I am talking about using the imagination. I am advocating using creativity, to dream, to alter the current reality, to go beyond the concrete and enter the abstract. We are to become agents of our imaginations and seek after those ideas that are not easily obtained and to enter the realm of beauty of abstracts and the subjective.

Obviously there is a balance we need to achieve in education and in life as we go about the daily business of living. But in our efforts to survive and to help others meet the essential needs of life, let us not forget the power of imagination in reshaping our world and redefining what it means to live a life of joy and beauty.

The Pillow and Old Friends

It was an intense trip to El Paso and one with a mixture of emotions as we buried my mother's only sister. I was glad she was no longer suffering but I will miss her fun personality. She had been an important part of my life and although we were not regularly in contact, the connection was strong going back to my growing up years. Her battle with cancer was difficult and the family dynamics were complicated, but it was still great spending time with my cousin Alan and his lovely wife Shirley. We had a grand time talking about the old days and dealing with some related family business. Most of my brief trip was spent driving, flying, or eating and I left early on Sunday morning to return home (via a couple of hours at the Styx concert, but that is another story!).

When I got on the Boeing for the flight to DFW airport, in my seat was a pretty blue pillow, the type people use on planes to support their necks during trips. Assuming someone on a previous flight had left it there, I asked the person beside me if it belonged to him. He said no, so I placed it under the seat in front of me with my computer case.

As we taxied down the runway for the flight and I felt my eyelids get heavy, I glanced at the little blue pillow at my feet. Ignoring the warning bells going off in my head about potential lice or unknown germs from past usage, I picked it up and put it behind my neck. It felt comfortable and I gave brief thought to buying one or taking it with me when we landed. As we were about to liftoff, I looked over to my right, across the aisle, and saw an older lady staring at me. Curious as to her reasoning--maybe I looked odd or something--but not enough to ask, I nodded slightly and promptly went to sleep. My nap time was full of dreams of flying and of people staring at me, mixed with the earlier thoughts of family and the list of all my goals to accomplish in the next few days.

Upon waking up approximately 40 minutes later, I remembered the staring lady and again glanced to my right. This time the stare was palpable and obviously full of derision. My curiosity was quickly replaced with apprehension, and I decided to read a book and ignore the frightful stare and laser eyes that seemed to bore into me. I removed the pillow and placed it back at my feet. I then heard a gruff voice say, "Excuse me." I looked over at the lady, dreading whatever vitriol would come out of her mouth. She rather forcefully said, "Are you through using my pillow?" At a momentary loss for words, I somehow stammered out, "This is your pillow?" She said it was and I handed it to her with apologies and explained it was resting in my seat when I arrived. She said nothing further and the flight continued with no more evil stares. I supposed she had placed it there as she was getting settled in her seat when I arrived to get settled in mine. Whatever the case, she obviously thought I was trying to steal her pillow.

I found myself laughing over the incident and my own impudence at assuming I could use the pillow. I also thought about her thoughts as she watched me sleeping comfortably on her own pillow. It was all rather funny in a way, but I do hope never to see the lady again!

As I sat in the airport waiting for the next flight and hoping not to see the frightening lady again, I saw a former Stanton student walk by with her two cute children. She is now a financial analyst and seemed very happy. It was great to see her and always a joy to meet up with former students. She was an All-State horn player from many years ago. One of these days, I will try to list all the former horn students who made the All-State band. Great list of people!

The Benevolence of Profits

Much has been written regarding the tension between the selfishness of profits and the resulting benevolences of solid business practices. The tension reminds us that there are no easy solutions to the human problems of poverty, corruption, greed, fraud, indifference, economic pain, and financial enslavement. Will an economic policy that allows for selfish acquisition of property and accumulation of wealth result in gross negligence of the impoverished? Or will a policy of forced coercive sharing of property and communal equality result in shared wealth and a dramatic diminishing of poverty? These questions and more leave philosophers and economists perennially perplexed by the complexity of issues affecting the future of society and culture.

When looking at broad economic policies and how businesses shape communities, cultures, and connected corporate structures, it becomes imperative to study the core of human nature and how economic growth hurts or helps the overall public good. What does it mean to an individual and to a society when a business becomes profitable? Is there a breaking point when individual or collective profits exceed public good?

There are issues connected to incentive, capitalism, greed, profits, responsibility, selfishness, altruism, charity, and social expectations, not to mention interest rates, investments, and banking that all deal with economic policy. Rather than these cloudy issues becoming a philosophical burden with often murky ethical conclusions, it is probably wise and ironically inspirational to view these discussions with optimism and opportunity for clarity of social and economic thought. As in all matters that blend philosophy and utilitarianism, it would be beneficial to examine Aristotle's writings on the subject and take great consideration of Biblical teachings in the process.

Beginning with the conclusion of this essay, I must express the John Wesley belief that we are required to make all we can, save all we can, and give away all we can.[1] Adhering to these principles demonstrates a profitable outlook, a meaningful strategic plan, and a measurable ethical worldview. Acting according to these principles and with balanced equality is consistent with business growth, personal attainment, and corporate benevolence. All three support the idea of individual and collective achievement in the business world.

Greed and selfishness are two character traits that have been traditionally regarded as evil flaws in our basic human makeup that we should work diligently to squelch and ultimately defenestrate as not being worthy of virtue and ethical practice. We have watched movies, read books, and listened to many sermons ranting against the terrible vice of greed, convinced beyond question that the world has suffered greatly from the vicious selfishness of personal acquisition and unbridled corporate profit taking. We further propagate and substantiate this attitude of resentment by finding examples of unmitigated greed in personal lives as well as in the practices of many businesses. 

While there is no question that exorbitant and unrestrained profit taking by individuals and institutions have resulted in shocking abuses as well as a deplorable lack of sensitivity to those suffering from poverty, at the same time, we do need to give economic consideration to the economic benefits of monetary gain. We may be appalled at the vast wealth that many people and corporations have accumulated but it is essential to remember that accumulation usually is a long process that involves economic growth and progress. Even those rare instances of instantly acquired wealth causes further growth, albeit somewhat immediate, in the economy. 

A word of how economic principles work is order at this point. Every time a material good is exchanged for money, regardless of the amount, the economy benefits in some kind of way. A growing economy is one where trade occurs in a robust system of supply and demand. Unless a person places money under a rock and never uses it, the economy will grow from the trade itself or the event of the trade. If a serious investor purchases 10 million shares of a company and those shares go up $1 causing the investor to sell his shares at a profit, then the economy benefits. If he or she then decides to spend the $10 million dollar profit on a new yacht, the economy benefits. If he or she takes the gain and puts it in the bank, the economy benefits through interest rates and loans. But if the gain is buried in the ground, the economy stops benefiting through the inactivity of the profit. If he or she decides to give away the money to various charities or causes, the economy benefits by furthering the trading power of the money.

This becomes complicated when a closer study of charitable giving reveals situations where reinvestment of profits is paradoxically more benevolent that giving freely to those in need. In spite of the seemingly "nice" gesture, there are times when excessive and unregulated giving ultimately results in a painful recessionary economy that could bring all business to its knees, not to mention entire cultures and civilizations. "Charitable giving may not be the most effective way of solving world poverty. Indeed charitable giving may even distract from finding the best solution - which might involve a complex rethink of the way the world organises its economic relationships, and large-scale government initiatives to change people's conditions. If that is so, then the effort put into charity might be better devoted to pressuring governments to bring about needed change. And governments might be more likely to focus on dealing with poverty if they weren't being helped by charities." [2]

This is not to say that charitable giving is economically untenable in today’s world. Responsible giving and responsible causes help keep the economy moving forward as people are given the tools they need to be productive. Individually there are certainly times when a donation or an act of selfless benevolence is the right thing for the circumstance, particular when the situation is out of the hands of recipient. But it is worth thoroughly examining what charity actually means to an economy, to an individual, and the cause it is seeking to benefit. No economic act of selfishness nor selflessness goes without a cost and such is true with any form of charity or benevolence.

But what is the role and responsibility of economy if not to allow and encourage trade and growth in order to meet personal and collective needs? In a free trade economy, people have the incentive to develop ideas, to work hard, to increase their trip, and to improve their current conditions. An open economy of supply and demand without excessive manipulation by regulation and unruly restrictions allows for the system to work to the betterment of everyone. In a perfect world, supply and demand meets everyone's needs over time and keeps an economy thriving at a high and consistent rate. Yet we do not exist in a perfect world. In a free market economy, all people work according to their needs and the supply works hard to meet the demands for products and services. It makes for an ideal libertarian world apart from the constant and unwieldy burden of governmental interference in our lives at every level.

The libertarian position is certainly strong and to be respected for its love of freedom and for broad consideration of all people, but the libertarian position assumes a type of goodness that resides in human beings to make the best decisions over a period of time. It is that of an optimist unable to recognize the potential for corruption and fraud, and the potential for people to relish or at least ignore the suffering of others. Some humans have an unlimited capacity for inflicting pain on others and remaining selfishly ignorant of the plight of other people and, in some cases, entire cultures.

Examining the concept of altruism has been a common practice for philosophers since the anti-altruistic positions of Ayn Rand. She proposed an "objectivist" philosophy of selfishness and self-interest as serving the greater social needs, advocating that every person should seek to improve him or herself through entrepreneurship, diligent effort, commitment to excellence, and economic capitalism. For some who choose to stretch the concept, her approach leanes toward the modern idea of libertarianism. On the surface, objectivism makes logical sense in its personal imperialistic pursuit of individual happiness that collectively benefits culture through artistic and economic growth and improvement. But the philosophical position begins to fall apart when seriously studied in terms of the impoverished and the disabled. Turning a blind eye to the suffering is not within the social guidelines of ethical responsibility and should never be glorified as a virtue. Objectivism as a philosophical position to be studied is certainly valid but when viewed as a practicing virtue, it does not have the strength of ethical responsibility and further points to a world without social consciousness. Objectivism, however, is not without merit, and its contributions to identifying profit goals for corporations are constructive for building a strategic model for success. Profits in business are not only to be expected but are virtuous in their basic design. It is when objectivism ignores social responsibility and human sensitivities that it loses its validity. 

When vast profit-taking of a business overrides human values and then results in the pain and suffering of other people, the motive and the practice must be reassessed. The profit motive is a strong one and can be vastly and mutually beneficial to many, or, rather sadly and in some cases, terribly harmful. As in any endeavor that is inherently good, profit has the potential to govern all thought and become a god in and of itself. Our desire to worship something is real and pronounced, causing us to fill the emotional void in our lives with something. For a Christian, this gap or void is filled with God, resulting in supplication and redemption of our natural inclinations. Yet regardless of a person's religious preference or beliefs, the fact remains that we tend to fill our lives with some kind of deity. Our natural inclination is to deify those things which may not be virtuous in all situations, and to honor those ideals that fit our own personal makeup. The result is often obsessive and perhaps addictive behaviors including problems with alcoholism, drugs, sex, and even money. We read and hear each day about criminal behaviors caused from drugs or stealing or other such destructive forces. When the purpose controls the person, the person’s humanity is eroded to the point of serving the wrong deity.

To be fair, there is nothing wrong with having a strong philosophical and pragmatic purpose, and for a business that purpose is profit. The profit motive is a good one and companies that focus their core business on making profit are successful. In a grand sense, this follows the admonition to "make all you can" and to use your talents accordingly. A good company seeks to increase its profits by expanding its business and thus creating greater value. This can be done in a multitude of ways including investing profits back into the business, increasing productivity, raising prices, marketing globally, or acquiring other businesses. But a business must always be mindful of its original purpose of making profits by staying targeted on its origins and avoiding unnecessary and often debilitating expansion.[3] The point to be made is that creating a profitable business is hard work and requires energy, planning, marketing, productivity, accounting, inventory, and mostly lots of consumer or business to business demand. When a business is profitable, everyone gains, including the producer, the agency, and the consumer.

Any book, article, speaker advocating for a skewed position that says profitable businesses are not socially responsible are simply ignorant of what business means and how the economy works. It is an erroneous position to claim that the purpose of a business is to be ethical or to serve the public good. A corporation with that motive will fail in its enterprise unless, of course, it is a charitable, non-profit organization, in which case it is questionable to call it a business. The purpose of a business is to generate a product or service that makes profits for the business. To summarize the teachings of Michael Porter, Professor at the Harvard Business School, business is not about besting the competition or commanding a market share, it is, rather, simply about profits whether the company is large or small.[4]

As a business increases its earnings, the profits are often reinvested in products or, in the case of the wise CEO, in personnel. A business that values its employees works to create value in them and in their work. This is expressed in many ways with compensation being an important part of that value. When employees are duly compensated for their work, the result is often loyalty, trust, accountability, and higher expectations. Profit is a strong motivation for business owners and employees benefit from increases in the business, unless, of course, the compensation is artificially contrived. Such is the case for increases in the minimum wage requirement.

It is not within the scope of this essay to delve into the economic problems of minimum wage except to demonstrate how a false wage increase mandated by the federal government actually results in unemployment and loss of productivity. When employees are compensated for achievement and for producing beyond their initial expectation, the monetary benefit extends to the entire company as profits are increased. But when an artificial wage minimum is imposed on a business, unless the business has either had a shockingly profitable quarter or unless the business is deliberately mistreating its employees, the new wage will likely result in unemployment or reduced hours. Keep in mind that the best companies, recognizing the value of its employees, will compensate employees according to its own profit margin. When a minimum wage is required, many companies will not be able to meet that demand and will find other ways to remain solvent.

In a well-intentioned gesture, minimum wage tries to help everyone and ensure compensation that is adequate for putting food on the table and a roof over the head. In some sense, that does happen, but the contrived program of minimum wage generally does more harm than good for a society. It takes away incentive and forces a business to react to the constraints of its own financial picture. Granted there is some research arguing for minimal employment damage after a minimum wage increase, and certainly not all companies are hurt by the requirement.[5] In general, however, an ethical and responsible business suffers under the federal interference of wage minimums.

This then brings us to what it means to be an ethical and responsible business. Keeping in mind the admonition to "make all you can" and the reminder that profits are not in and of themselves problematic and, indeed, often generate the kind of economy that carries with it social responsibility, at the same time, the principle only works well with those businesses who recognize the role that businesses play in the collective gain of societal improvement. This includes supporting education, families, the legal system, social contracts, entrepreneurship, and altruism. In a subtle or not so subtle way, all businesses support these ideals through their diligent effort at turning a profit. Each time a product is produced where the trade for the product improves the value for the consumer as well as the producer, society gains in a multitude of measures.

But there is a personal and corporate line where profit without responsibility has negative social and ethical consequences. Those consequences are not necessarily economic, although argument could be made that selfish hoarding of wealth does not serve an economic gain for many people, but the consequences are likely to the heart and soul of the individual or, in the case of a business, the core of the company. Just as personal morality is potentially eroded through a series of self-destructive actions which include but are not limited to: stealing, lying, cheating, inflicting pain, and abuse, so also is a business's core eroded through similar actions. Contending that corruption and vice always result in failure is rather naive and unsupported by evidence; but there is no question that consistent and heinous corruption is damaging and usually detrimental to achievement and long-term success. This is evidenced by the immediate fame and ultimate demise of stars such as Oscar Pistorius and Lance Armstrong both of whose deplorable conduct took authority over their fame and achievements.

On the corporate level, we have watched Enron, Tyco, WorldCom, AIG, Bernie Madoff, and many others rise to the surface as dead fish destined to decay on a dry and deserted beach. These businesses suffered not just from creative and corrupt accounting practices but also from a lack of scruples, integrity, and social responsibility to shareholders and culture at large. Their infrastructure from the top down crumbled due to unrestrained greed, selfishness from leadership, poor business planning, and a shocking lack of honesty and integrity. It was not that their desire to be profitable exerted control over their actions; it was more that the leadership's lack of moral fiber and social responsibility caused the individuals to be misguided in their profit seeking decisions.

An analogous look at this could provide greater clarity on this problem of blame and historicity. I knew a former student who fell into hard times and had trouble supporting herself. She had recently lost her job and had no immediate solutions to putting food on the table. While there were many solutions to this problem including charitable organizations in town, temporary day employment, loans, family, friends, she chose instead to steal some food from a local grocery store. Had she taken a minimum of food for a meal or two, perhaps the store would have been a little more redemptive in its punishment of her action. But as she was taking the food, she began to consider the personal benefit of more. Her cart grew in volume and she left the store with nearly $200 worth of food. In visiting with her later and listening to her story, I asked her why she felt compelled to steal and why she stole that much. She could not answer very well except to say she put aside her personal scruples and decided to see how much she could steal.

Food is a natural expectation for our bodies just as profits are a natural expectation for businesses. There was nothing wrong with the young lady's desire to eat, but her methodology was seriously flawed, resulting in community service and a criminal record. She put aside her virtue, replaced it with vice, and faced the consequences of her action. On a much larger scale, the above named companies did the same thing. When leadership seeks after profit without considering how the virtuosity of their methodology, the result is potentially criminal.

The crime in stealing is the act in and of itself regardless of the amount. The crime, no matter what a criminal may claim, is not in getting caught, and the virtue is not escape from public notice; the crime is the act of stealing or lying or cheating or any number of legal and personal iniquities. When leadership or CEOs or managers accept the lack of honesty as normal or even right, the result is mass deception on a global scale, ultimately affecting thousands or millions of people and thereby defenestrating all social responsibility. The problem with such actions is not in seeking profit nor even greed by itself, and the problem is not poor planning and then getting caught, nor is the problem quantifiable by amounts of money taken, the problem rests with individual and corporate integrity and ethics.

In the marvelous book Greed and Corporate Failure, the authors examine the mistakes of several major companies already mentioned. Although the use of the word "Greed" is used in a negative light, and I maintain it is actually more of a virtue than a vice and knowing that quibbling over semantics of a word is not productive, the book does remind us of how easy it is for corporations to fall into the vicious trap of poor accounting and corrupt management. Even with strong internal controls, honest governing boards, and competent accountants, when leadership practices a philosophy of dishonesty and fraudulent reporting, the end result is corporate failure. WorldCom, for example, had several protective devices in place but still sank due to a lack of virtuous behavior by one CEO. "WorldCom did have a few excellent and experienced directors who would never have tolerated even marginal accounting practices, let alone fraud, had they known about them. But the board only met, on average, quarterly and the meetings largely involved formal presentation from management rather than detailed discussions. With weak internal controls, ineffective external auditors and a laissez-faire audit committee, outside directors had little chance of detecting the fraud."[6]

The stories of WorldCom, Tyco, and Enron are big and markedly public examples of corruption and fraud. While major loss of millions usually makes headlines, of equal or greater concern are the many levels of dishonesty and unethical practices that occur in lesser amounts or unknown corporations about which we never hear. But regardless of how much or how often or in what way these things occur, in the end we must continue to advance the cause for virtuous actions in personal behavior and in corporate practice. To do so is to act responsibly for the greater social good of how business benefits all people in a robust and exciting economy. 

In conclusion we return to John Wesley’s encouragement to make all you can, save all you can, and give away all you can. It is time for all people and businesses large and small to commit themselves to profit making, to building an inventory for the future, and to contribute to those in need. Such is the responsible role of the businessman and  in those desiring to create value in the business. Rather than finding fault in successful business, it is time to applaud them for their achievements while exhorting them with great patience and wisdom to practice a watchful and compassionate action on the impoverished, the widows, the orphans, and on the disabled. But without undue criticism, we should all be mindful that many times profits are a form of benevolence in this complex economic world.

---

[1] http://www.umcmission.org/Find-Resources/Global-Worship-and-Spiritual-Growth/John-Wesley-Sermons/Sermon-50-The-Use-of-Money, accessed 2/26/13.

[2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/charity/against_1.shtml--accessed 2/24/2013.

[3] Zook, Chris and James Allen. Profit from the Core. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business Press, 2010, pp. 23-62.

[4] Magretta, Joan, Understanding Michael Porter. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business Review Press, 2012, pp. 19-35. 

[5] http://www.businessforafairminimumwage.org/news/00135/research-shows-minimum-wage-increases-do-not-cause-job-loss, accessed 2/25/2013.

[6] Hamilton, Stewart and Alicia Micklethwait, Greed and Corporate Failure: The Lessons from Recent Disasters. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006, p. 77.