Democracy Dies In Dullness. The End of Doing Well By Doing Good. Billionaire Legacy Laundering. Plus more! #215

Grüezi! I’m Adrian Monck – welcome!

Please share this newsletter!

–––

1️⃣ Democracy Dies In Dullness

What political promises tell you about democratic choice.

I first met Keir Starmer in 1986. Today, I’m heading to the UK to vote and – by tomorrow morning – he’ll likely be Britain’s prime minister. Britons will get a principled and conscientious leader, committed to public service.

But personal qualities are never really enough in politics.

I’ve been looking at the promises of the major parties and what they reveal about democratic competition in Britain’s current political landscape.

What strikes me most is the substantial agreement between parties on key issues, despite the rhetorical differences. All of them say they’ll:

1. Increase spending on health, housing, defence and infrastructure;
2. Reduce illegal immigration;
3. Tackle the cost of living crisis;
4. Keep Brexit.

Even on specifics, all parties:

• Aim for defence spending at or above 2.5% of GDP;
• Most promise to build 1.5-2 million homes;
• Plan to increase police numbers.

The main differences lie in the scale of spending and their approaches to tax. Left and centre propose bigger spending increases, while the right and far right emphasise tax cuts.

This convergence raises important questions about democratic competition:

• How do voters differentiate between parties when core policies are so similar?
• Does this reflect a broad societal consensus or a narrowing of political discourse?
• How can we encourage genuine policy innovation within this framework?

These are big questions not just for Brits, but for every democracy trying to ensure that its voters keep faith with the system itself.

⏭ British voters are particularly politically disengaged.

–––

2️⃣ The End Of Doing Well By Doing Good?

The business case for diversity? Wobbly. The moral case? Solid.

An influential 2015 McKinsey study linked more diversity to higher profits. It did not lead to a massive upswing in board diversity. But it did provide powerful ammunition for those making a “business case” for something that is – well, just plain fair.

New research is now challenging these findings. The Wall Street Journal reports:

1. The original study’s methodology are being questioned;
2. Academics haven’t been able to replicate the results;
3. Diversity-focused investment funds have underperformed.

This doesn’t mean diversity in representation or thinking isn’t important. It absolutely is.

But as the WSJ’s James Mackintosh argues:

• “Skin colour and sex don’t perfectly capture diversity of thought... A privately-educated Black Harvard Business School graduate would probably think much the same way about business as a white one.
• “A top female New York lawyer may have a similar experience of life—or lack of it—as a male one.
• “McKinsey’s diversity of thought suggestions don’t extend to ... appointing worker representatives to the board, even though their ideas might well be quite different to those of senior management.”

The takeaway?

Box-ticking methods to game social goods aren’t good enough.

Diversity isn’t a performance enhancing measure for profits – it’s about doing what’s right.

⏭ Research: The Most Common DEI Practices Actually Undermine Diversity.

–––

3️⃣ Why Diversity & Harassment Training Doesn’t Work

3 measures that don’t work. 3 that do.

Some new research has some surprising findings about diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

TL;DR? Some of the most common approaches may be doing more harm than good.

Here are three the study suggests reconsidering:

1. Diversity & Harassment Training: Focusing on legal consequences and blame can make employees angry and resistant, potentially increasing discriminatory behaviour.
2. Grievance Procedures: Employees rarely file complaints due to fear of retaliation. Nearly half of all grievance complaints focus on retaliation itself!
3. Job Tests for Managers: May provide a false sense of objectivity while potentially perpetuating systemic biases.

What does work?

• Focusing on accountability (e.g., Chief Diversity Officers);
• Mentoring programmes;
• Family-friendly policies.

⏩️ How DEI became a far right bogeyman.

–––

4️⃣ Billionaire Lessons in “Reputation Management”

What can we learn from super rich legacy laundering?

I just finished a book about Ray Dalio and Bridgewater Associates. Dalio is a corporate “philosopher-king” – the billionaire author of Principles. 

The Fund, by finance reporter Rob Copeland, paints a comprehensive and deeply unedifying picture of Dalio and his leadership – “one of the pettiest bullies you’ll ever meet on the page,” said one reviewer.

So how did Dalio and Bridgewater respond to “tales of breakdowns, tears and surveillance”?

Here on LinkedIn, Dalio attacked Copeland’s integrity and motivation, calling The Fund tabloid, sensationalist, and inaccurate. He hired lawyers to pursue the author and his publishers.

Did Dalio’s strategy work?

Though some of the book’s reporting appeared in the WSJ where Copeland once worked as a reporter, The Fund didn’t merit a review in its pages. In May, Dalio appeared at a WSJ event to promote his own latest book about the global economy.

The FT qualified its review of The Fund with:

“In [Dalio’s] defence, if an intrepid journalist like Copeland dedicated themselves to unearthing and detailing all our own worst aspects, it would surely also reveal a lot of awkward moments for most of us… It’s all so overwhelming that the inclination is almost to doubt the reporting.”

Dalio has – on the surface – successfully faced down a litany of serious claims in a way that perhaps only the very, very rich can.

Some people might take Dalio’s example as a masterful defensive playbook for organisations or individuals facing serious allegations.

It is not.

Any responsible organisation with good governance should follow this very basic advice:

1. Acknowledgement: Recognise the gravity of claims – even if some specifics are disputed. 
2. Set out your position clearly: Provide clear, factual information for any allegations disputed, without attacking the credibility of those making the claims. Communicate it to staff, and to everyone outside who needs to know.
3. Be transparent: Commission an independent third-party to review policies, practices, and specific allegations. Invite current and former employees to share their experiences confidentially. Commit to sharing the findings.
4. Take immediate action: Address undisputed issues straight away – e.g. improved workplace culture and reporting mechanisms.
5. Leadership accountability: Have top executive or governance leadership address the issues directly, taking responsibility. Emphasise the organisation’s commitment to a safe, inclusive workplace, acknowledge past shortcomings.

It’s easy to write.  

Hostility, hubris, and anger often overcome humility and chastened reflection. 

The organisational and governance dynamics that led to a crisis can compound problems when it comes to responding.

Ray Dalio no longer runs Bridgewater Associates. Its current CEO said recently “We’re proud of Ray being a part of our history.”

History, of course, is continually being re-written.  

⏭ Dalio published The Coming Great Conflict last week. It isn’t about team building.

–––

5️⃣ Countering Disinformation

Explaining how it works make people less susceptible.

Ever wondered how we can combat disinformation in our increasingly complex digital world? A new study has just shed light on this critical issue, looking at people in Germany who had Russian ancestry and how they viewed the invasion of Ukraine.

The takeaways?

1. Identity Matters: People with ties to Russia were more susceptible to pro-Russian disinformation about the Ukraine war. Our identities influence what information we trust.
2. So Does Media Exposure: Higher consumption of Russian media correlated with greater vulnerability to disinformation. A reminder to diversify news sources.
3. Pre-emptive Action Works: A simple, visually appealing intervention significantly improved people’s ability to spot disinformation. Once people understand how disinformation works, they’re less susceptible to it.
4. It’s Universally Effective: It worked for everyone, regardless of their background.

What does this mean for us?

We need to be aware of how things we take for granted about ourselves can shape our perceptions.

But more importantly, we now have evidence that simple, scalable interventions can make a real difference in fighting disinformation.

⏭ The American ex-cop peddling Russian disinformation.

–––

6️⃣ What Automated Disinformation Looks Like

Using ChatGPT to spread propaganda and lies.

“Here are some things to keep in mind for context. Republicans, Trump, DeSantis, and Russia are good, while Democrats, Biden, the war in Ukraine, big business, and pharma are bad.”

“Please rewrite this article taking a conservative stance against the Macron administration’s liberal policies in favor of working-class French citizens.”

These screenshots are from instructions that were – somewhat foolishly – left in the copy on a Russian disinformation website operating in French and called in typical conspiracy-bait fashion Vérité Cachée (Hidden Truth).

You can see that they don’t have just one target – they pick from a whole menu.

⏩️ France’s battle against Russian Disinformation.

–––

7️⃣ The Biggest Chinese Firm You Never Knew

Fascinating FT film looking at Pinduoduo.

⏭ Pinduoduo runs Temu – a prime destination for bargain-hunting Americans.

–––

If you enjoy this newsletter – please recommend it!

Best

Adrian