Category Archives: Leadership News and Views

Leadership news and views culled from the world wide web.

Leadership Development Blogwatch – March 2009

Posted on by
Reply

Best of the Leadership Development Blogs

Whenever we’re unsure about whether we’re including too much leadership development and not enough general business fun and digression on AskTheManager.com, we develop the latest Leadership Development Blogwatch and realize that the blogosphere is so filled with junk science, juvenile opinions and professional hucksters that we should almost be forced to include more about how to develop the next generation of leaders and less of the fluff.

Lucky for us (and you) there are a few great leadership writers on the Web who crank out some terrific advice. This time around, we found a few gems including great articles from the likes of Paul MacDonald and Dan McCarthy (among others), and a couple of worthy posts from our friends at Catch Your Limit Consulting:

Reverse Mentoring

Catch Your Limit Consulting is a strategic management and marketing firm headquartered in Tallahassee, Florida with an office in Richmond, Virginia. …

Striking the right chord  

When I was in high school, (and now, whenever I have the time to enjoy it), my life was music. On any given day, I’d spend at least 3 hours playing my …




Leaders on Leadership: Your Experience + The Leadership Talk …
Collaboration: An Important Leadership Development… Building Trust in the Workplace: A Valuable Topic … Modern Managers Need Leadership Skills · The Listening Leadership Talk · Home-Based Business Leadership Skills …

Great Leadership: Where Have All the Leaders Gone? Open Your Eyes …
In my work, having been responsible for leadership development at three different companies, I see and hear about them every day. It’s a common practice for leaders to take “360 degree” assessments, where they collect feedback from …

Leadership Development Blog » Liars and Outliers – By Envisia Learning
HOT READS FOR THE PRACTIONER. Title: Outliers. Competency: self-development, coaching talent (especially those entering the workforce), performance evaluation, career management …

Intentional Leadership: Chesley Sullenberger: A True Leader
Strategies for Leadership Development in Lean Time… Setting Personal Goals · My (Crazy or Arrogant?) Views on Organizational Cu… Strategic Silence · National Day of Listening · What do Great Leaders Do? …

Traits of a Bad Boss : Industrial Market Trends
The result of hiring unprepared managers or promoting employees to managerial positions without providing proper guidance: “Effective leadership development can ultimately make or break a company’s performance,” …

Succession: Are You Ready? Tackles Toughest Management Challenge
Marshall Goldsmith’s blog from Amazon.com. Goldsmith has been heralded as one of 50 great thinkers and leaders who have influenced the field of management over the past 80 years, while Business Week listed him as one of the most influential practitioners in the history of leadership development. …

Survival Leadership: The Effects of Layoffs on Surviving Employees
Survival Leadership. Leadership Development from a Top Executive Coach. Also, visit www.SteveGladis.com. Leading in a Downturn Economy. Leading in a Downturn Economy Survival Leadership.

Breaking Barriers: “Manage Like There Will Be A Tomorrow”
Dr. Jesse Sostrin is a sought after consultant and speaker working at the intersection of personal and professional development. He is the founder and president of Sostrin Consulting, an organization and leadership development firm …

Leading Blog: A Leadership Blog @ LeadershipNow: Lincoln’s Lessons …
Books · Change · Communication · Creativity & Innovation · Education · Ethics · Five Lessons · Followership · General Business · Government · Human Resources · Interviews · Leaders · Leadership · Leadership Development …

Successful Managers Handbook Develop Yourself Coach Others
D. Bradford Neary Director, Executive & Leadership Development Medtronic, Inc. “No manager’s toolkit should be without it…indispensable.” — Greg Schaefer Manager, Curriculum Development Learning & Development Rockwell Collins …

 

Leadership Lessons from the Stimulus and Obama

Posted on by
Reply

 

The Stimulus, Obama and Leadership

Eight Hundred Billion Dollars. $800,000,000,000.00. That’s a lot of money. When combined with the $700,000,000,000.00 squandered by or scheduled to be squandered by the Troubled Asset Relief Project (TARP), we’re talking about one and a half trillion dollars. In round numbers, $1.5 trillion looks like this: $1,500,000,000,000.00.

Hard to fathom, really. To give this amount some perspective, imagine this: $1.5 trillion is larger than the gross domestic product (GDP) of Spain. If the stimulus plus the TARP were a country, they’d be the 8th largest according to International Monetary Fund’s 2007 ranking.

So why is it so easy to spend?

While the TARP has clearly not performed as intended – to free up credit markets and salvage well-run financial institutions – at least it was directed with a specific and bipartisan purpose. Virtually everyone agreed it was the right thing to do at the time. (Today, not so much.)

It’s Not a Stimulus Package, it’s Welfare

Let’s stop kidding ourselves, okay? The package the Senate passed this weekend, even though it had more than $100 billion stripped from it, is more welfare than stimulus. It’s more government spending than economic stimulus. It’s more “more of the same” than it is “change you can believe in.”

Obama Needs to Lead

We elected Barack Obama as our 44th President so that he could lead this country through one of the economically toughest times in our history. Tough times call for tough decisions, tough love and tough leadership. Obama has so far failed on all three counts.

Tough Decisions include making the right call based on what is best for America. No one doubts that Obama’s own economic advisors – using their own economic models – show greater job creation and a shorter recession if the stimulus contained more tax cuts and less welfare. So why is Obama afraid to make the tough decisions and do what’s right? Why is the stimulus package just a conglomeration of left-wing leftovers and partisan welfare projects?

Tough Love means making those who made bad decisions live with the consequences of those decisions – even when it means they’re going to suffer. Too many Americans bet on the come that their homes would continue to skyrocket in value. They were wrong and now they’re suffering.




Too bad, we say. Obama should show strong leadership and apply the principles of tough love: you need to get yourself out of any situation you agreed to put yourself into. Sorry, but that’s what’s best for the rest of us.

Tough Leadership means standing up for what’s best for America – that’s his job – and this is going to be the hardest part. Pushing through the “Nancy Pelosi Welfare Reform Act of 2009” is not showing tough leadership and it’s not change – it’s politics as usual.

Step Up, Mr. President

President Obama, that’s not why we elected you. You are not supposed to be the Pro-Socialism Puppet as Rush Limbaugh portrays you. You are supposed to stand for something more. So why are you trying so hard to push through a spending package that will do nothing to save the economy and do everything to grow the government? Are you indebted to those who got you elected? Are you just another Chicago politician?

Leadership means leading. Leading, President Obama, is about shedding the partisanship and the obligations, and doing what you know is right. Leading sometimes means losing your friends; though I can tell you that any “friend” you lose while leading, wasn’t that good of a friend to being with.

 

Leadership Lessons from Corporate America’s Amateur Lobbyists

Posted on by
2

Leadership and the Bully Pulpit

Michael Jackson (no, not that Michael Jackson) loves the bully pulpit. AutoNation’s Michael Jackson, we’ll call him the “non-gloved-one,” is everywhere these days. Officially, he serves as the CEO of the largest automotive dealer group in the US. Unofficially, he serves as the primary spokesperson for all curmudgeons who are good with a hammer (so they think everything is a nail).

MJ seems like a great guy – the non-gloved-one is well-spoken in an everyman sort of way – he exudes both a confidence and an “awe shucks” humility that seem genuine. Great traits for leaders.

Character (on the surface) does not appear to be his problem – Jackson, you see, is quite the character. Our issues with Mr. Jackson stem from his inability to wean himself off his love of the camera and microphone; and his incredibly narrow sense of how to fix what’s wrong with the economy.

It’s Not All about the Cars, Stupid

Certainly, it’s as prudent for this Michael Jackson to advocate for the auto industry as it is for that other Michael Jackson to advocate for unsupervised slumber parties at Neverland Ranch. We get it – your shareholders benefit if the auto dealers benefit – that’s your job.




To this end, Mr. Jackson is advocating (in a big, big way) for Congress to dramatically raise the gasoline tax at a time when Americans need every penny in their collective pocket. An increase in the gasoline tax? Are you serious?

Let’s put aside whether or not a gasoline tax increase will help his industry (though we think its benefit would be dubious, at best). Raising taxes in a recession would be disastrous for the economy, driving consumers to spend less and hurting the overall economic health of all retailers (including the health of car dealers) even more.

One could argue that part of the woes his industry faces today were directly caused by the very $4 per gallon gasoline he so desperately wishes would return. Jackson’s argument – that his dealers (and manufacturers) will sell more electric and hybrid vehicles with a huge increase in the gasoline tax – is probably a sound assumption… for the short term.

Leadership is more than a Great PowerPoint Presentation

Like Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, Jackson appears to be crisscrossing the country looking for converts. We are not moved.

We cannot buy-in to his assertions that increasing taxes, especially gasoline taxes, is a good idea for what ails car dealers today. Automotive retailers, unfortunately, are selling vehicles today that are built better and last longer than their predecessors. This is really no different that a few years ago, of course. In 2006, when America’s car dealers sold over 16 million new units, consumers felt good about their present and future situations. They were willing to spend $30,000 on a new car even though their current vehicle was running just fine.

Buying a car in 2006 was a discretionary event; ripe with impulses and emotions. Buying a car in 2009 is a necessity event; driven by the need to get from point A to point B. Increasing the tax on gasoline (or raising any tax for that matter) makes any major purchase a necessity event. We will only buy a new car when it becomes necessary for us to do so; and if we purchased one of the 60 million new cars sold in the last four years, we probably don’t need another just yet.

This is why Jackson is advocating a hike in the gas tax. He believes that we’ll be forced to get rid of that 2006 Hummer once and for all. Okay Mike, once we trade in the gas guzzler for a Honda Civic Hybrid out of necessity, then what?

America’s car dealers, especially AutoNation, need Americans to make discretionary purchases to thrive and survive. Discretionary purchases cannot happen without discretionary income. Increasing taxes decreases discretionary spending; decreasing taxes increases discretionary spending. Sorry to break it to you Mike, but it really is that simple.

America Needs Higher Gas Taxes

From national security and environmental perspectives, we would love nothing more than for America to be 100% energy independent. OPEC, and especially the countries that make up OPEC, concern us. America cannot, over the long term, be dependent on “third worlders” for the growth of our economy.

Once our economy stabilizes, it may make sense to raise gasoline taxes. The revenues generated from these taxes could be used to make necessary infrastructure improvements; and the higher price of fuel, as Jackson notes, will drive consumers to purchase more energy-efficient vehicles. It will also drive them to drive less. All good for the environment.

In a recent podcast available on AutomotiveNews.com, Jackson even jokes that he could eventually become a Democrat with his drive for higher taxes. Really? Hey Mike, we’re sorry to inform you that advocating higher taxes probably makes you the Chairman of the Democratic Party today. Interestingly, in this particular podcast Jackson has moved off of his stance of advocating for the immediate tax increases, and has a newly stated goal of increasing these taxes in 2011 or 2012.

Hmm, then why shout from the rooftops for these increases in 2008 and 2009? Wouldn’t Jackson’s shareholders be better served if he lobbied for something that would actually spur economic growth? Perhaps something like a tax decrease?

As much as we like him, we have to tell this Michael Jackson to stick to moon walking and leave the economic decision making to someone (anyone) more qualified. Great leaders know when to use the bully pulpit and when to avoid it. They also understand that just because someone is giving you a microphone, doesn’t mean you should speak.

Circuit City, Where Service Was Never State of the Art

Posted on by
Reply

Circuit City – We Told You So…

In what was probably the easiest call in the last ten years, we told you Circuit City was going to go all the way (read our November 12, 2008 post if you don’t believe us). Back then we said you shouldn’t “be fooled by their reorganization plans; Circuit City is down for the count and not getting up. Lousy leadership is lousy leadership, and court protections will change nothing.

“While Chapter 11 might provide a short-term reprieve and allow them to stock their stores for Black Friday 2008, they’ll not be around for Black Friday 2009. (Heck, they probably won’t make it to Good Friday.)”

We were right, and we just want to gloat.

Circuit City, unable to work out a sale of the company, said Friday it will close its 567 U.S. stores and cut 34,000 jobs. Nice going, guys. Please don’t blame this on the economy. You were the nation’s second-biggest consumer electronics retailer and you failed to build a sustainable business. There’s no excuse.




What’s amazing about the retail bankruptcies during this recession: KB Toys, Mervyns, Linens ‘N Things and now Circuit City; is that none of them are surprising to us. If you ever stepped foot in one of these stores and compared them to their biggest competitor (Toys R Us; Macy’s; Bed Bath and Beyond; and Best Buy, respectively) you’d know who was the best and who was not. You’d understand that it would not take much to cripple these also-rans.

Whether it was another big box selling the same goods or Wal-Mart, Circuit City never stood a chance. They could not be expected to survive even a slight downturn if their leadership was unwilling to have the singular goal of building a sustainable business. Their selection was inferior, their prices appeared non-competitive, and their salespeople were clearly on commission. It was never “fun” to shop at Circuit City, and the leadership should have recognized this.

That was their job. Of course, the employees could have told them… if they bothered to ask.

Leadership Development Blogwatch – January 2, 2009

Posted on by
1

 

Best of the Leadership Development Blogosphere

We scoured the Leadership Development posts and articles for the past several weeks to find just those precious few that deserve your attention:




Are Leaders Born Or Made?
Marshall Goldsmith and Howard Morgan studied the progress of 88000 managers who had been to leadership development training. The people who returned from the training, talked about it, and did deliberate work to apply their learning …

Growing Leaders From Managers
Another leadership development opportunity is carefully providing nascent leaders with a low risk opportunity to demonstrate their abilities. These opportunities manifest themselves through leadership assignments on special projects or …

Five Tips For Leading with Integrity
I just released Five Tips For Leading With Integrity and wanted to share those with you here. Leaders must embrace and maintain steadfast ethical standards. They must foster the company’s commitment to employee stewardship and …

How Resilience Can Make or Break a Leader
Jack Welch, in his extraordinary book “Winning” notes resilience as one of the most important characteristics a leader can have: “The fourth characteristic [of senior leadership] is heavy-duty resilience. Every leader makes mistakes, …

Leave Me Alone! and other Leadership Development Strategies
For the past few months I have been seeking the advice of established philanthropic leaders from across the country to hear about what they did in their first few months on the job, how they balance work and home, and how to balance …

Real Leaders Eat Last – The Psychology of Leadership in the New …
… Designing individual effective leadership development programmes to groom next generation leaders within your company; Utilising “Real leaders eat last” and other unconventional concepts for leading staff in the new millennium …

Leaders on Leadership: Leadership Power Stress: (Part 2) Three …
Like many leadership development tasks, it is best to engage the services of a qualified executive coach. This is part 2 of a 2 part article on Leadership Power Stress by author Patsi Krakoff. In part 1, we examined the …

Doing It Right: Passion Part VI – Sacrifice
Let’s say you have preached about leadership development. Have you allocated resources to teach and engage the front line leadership in the organization? Don’t tell me where your priorities are. …

Coaching Tip: The Leadership Blog: Changing Minds within a Culture
“The crux of leadership development that works is self-directed learning: intentionally developing or strengthening an aspect of who you are or who you want to be, or both.” Primal Leadership by Daniel Goleman, Richard Boyatzis & Annie …

Trust Isn’t Everything — It’s The Only Thing
Coaching, Leaders in the News: Good News, Leadership Development. When Sam DiPiazza, CEO of PriceWaterhouseCoopers, appeared for an interview and student Q&A, he spoke of a childhood lesson that shaped him. Click on “losing the public …

 

Leadership Lessons from a Dead Socialist

Posted on by
1

Leading in the New Millennium: Pay for (Lack of) Performance

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.” – Upton Sinclair

Although Sinclair’s words were uttered in 1935, they ring especially true when applied to the leadership void we face today. While Sinclair, a socialist, didn’t speak these words to decry the inattentive state of management during the Great Depression, his words speak volumes when applied to the CEOs, boards of directors, and other executives of the failed and failing businesses of this Great Recession.

We’re still a few months away from the first of many Lehman Perp Walks, though it’s important to note we believe that Sinclair’s quote can be equally applied to the senior leadership of Lehman as it could to the senior team at Enron.  

Enron and Lehman: Two Peas in a Pod

Let’s compare Ken Lay and Dick Fuld – two monosyllabic managers with their eyes on their own bank accounts and little regard for their employees or their shareholders.

Enron’s Lay claimed he had no responsibility for and little understanding of the risky and illegal ventures of his management team that bankrupted the giant company.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

Assuming Lay was telling the truth when he feigned ignorance regarding the schemes that brought down Enron, it’s easy to assume that he did not want to understand – he was making too much money in his ignorance.

Lehman’s Fuld claims his company and he were, in effect, victims of the housing and credit crisis. Dick Fuld made over a half a billion dollars during his 14 years as CEO of Lehman – that hardly qualifies him for victim status. Moreover, Fuld made his hundreds of millions all while allowing his company to dive into riskier investments requiring insane amounts of leverage.




When Fuld is finally brought to answer under oath for the enormous bankruptcy he orchestrated (his congressional testimony in October was a joke), he will no doubt claim he didn’t fully understand the credit default swaps and other risky investments his team was helping create.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

So What Must We Change?

Clearly shame and public humiliation aren’t enough to sway America’s CEOs to always act responsibly and in the best interest of the company’s shareholders. Case is point: Merrill Lynch CEO John Thain recently requested he be awarded a bonus of $10 million for 2008. Without going into Merrill’s ‘08 financials (or lack thereof), let’s just say that Thain proved, if nothing else, he has incredible nerve. (Boards of failed companies, generally, don’t even face shame or public humiliation – they just move on like carpetbaggers.)

Given the speed at which many companies are collapsing, it seems that even the alleged pay for performance packages that reward a CEO for some short term positive movement of a company’s share price are ineffective. Fuld had the gall to argue in front of congress that he delivered terrific shareholder value during the first 13 of his 14 years as CEO. Big deal, Dick, tell that to the September 2008 shareholders and employees.

Leaders as Stewards

CEOs, like US Presidents, serve at the pleasure of their constituents. Presidents serve at the pleasure of the American citizens; CEOs, allegedly, serve at the pleasure of the shareholders (the owners of the company). No matter how many years of prosperity a CEO has delivered (via shareholder value), a sudden bankruptcy that destroys a 158-year old company proves that the CEO was no steward; that personal gain (including stroking his own ego) was his primary (and possibly his only) goal.

If our business leaders fail to act as stewards, then our boards must act. If our boards fail to act, shareholders have little recourse beyond civil remedies that generally fail to change behaviors. Civil penalties for underperforming and/or incestuous boards are insufficient to stem the tide of bad leadership we’ve faced over the past decade.

Perp Walks for Boards

It’s time we criminalized the lazy, incestuous boards who fail to protect the shareholder. It’s time that more than a few directors received several years behind bars for every billion in shareholder value they failed to protect.

If you think what we’re requesting is akin to advocating the death penalty for jaywalking, you’re way off base. We asked someone who sits on three Fortune 500 boards (who spoke to us on the condition of anonymity) what made them feel they were qualified to sit on so many boards while leading another large company as CEO. Their response: “Listen, I get about $100,000 from each company for four meetings a year. I think I can handle it.”

Four meetings a year – unfortunately, that’s how far too many board members view their duties. What’s worse is that your “performance” (i.e. networking) on one board leads to appointments to other boards. Rock the boat, and you’re not asked to join the other boards.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

Amazing how a socialist like Sinclair can teach us so much about capitalism.

An Update to our Leadership Lessons from Brett Favre

Posted on by
Reply

Brett “Cuatro” Favre and the Leadership Lesson of Humility

When you’re wrong, you’re wrong. The best thing to do is admit it. We are certainly humble enough to admit it.

At the beginning of the 2008 NFL season we predicted that the New York Jets would finish the season no better than 8-8… we were wrong. (See our August 27, 2008 post.)

The addition of Cuatro, which we predicted would not be enough to help the Jets make the playoffs, was indeed not enough to help the Jets make the playoffs. We were right on that point (and yes, we do like to gloat). The New York Jets finished the 2008 season 9-7 and fired Head Coach Eric Mangini today (read the New York Daily News story here). It seems Cuatro leaves a wake wherever he goes.




To add insult to the Jets’ injury, they missed the playoffs because the quarterback they jettisoned in favor of Favre, Chad Pennington, led last year’s 1-15 Miami Dolphins to the playoffs by defeating the Favre-led Jets. That’s karma; and in leadership, karma can be a bitch.

We also predicted that Brett Favre would throw more interceptions than touchdowns in 2008. Well, we were wrong on that point, too. Favre threw exactly 22 touchdowns and 22 interceptions – pretty crappy for a future Hall of Fame QB, but still not what we predicted. While we admit we got that one wrong, we do want to point out that Favre still led the NFL in interceptions this year – in fact, he threw 22% more INTs than the next closest QB. (Perhaps he should change his number to 22.)

The Green Bay Packers, who let pride and ego get in the way of a good decision, finished the season 6-10 – a far cry from the 13-3 they enjoyed with Favre in 2007. The leadership lessons we pointed out in our July 17, 2008 post still ring true: Brett Lorenzo Favre is more important than the team (in his mind); and get out in front of issues early, speak the truth and stay firm in your convictions (we warned the Packers not to capitulate – they did).

Interestingly, unlike last year when the Favre-led Packers were in the playoffs, both the Green Bay and Favre have plenty of time off to rethink their 2008 leadership blunders. Something tells us they learned nothing from the experience – their lack of humility keeps getting in the way.

Coming Soon to a Theater Near You: Freakonomics, The Movie

Posted on by
2

Freakonomics: The Movie

During my extended time off between Thanksgiving and Christmas, I sat down with accomplished entrepreneur and filmmaker Chad Troutwine to discuss the most ambitious documentary ever to pique the interest of the editors of AskTheManager.com.

For those of you unfamiliar with Chad’s work, he is a founder (along with Markus Moberg) of Veritas Prep, one the finest and most prestigious GMAT preparation and graduate school admissions consulting companies in the world. In addition to his business interests, Chad has served as a producer or executive producer for many wonderful films.

His latest project involves taking one of the most interesting and controversial business books ever written and turning it into a feature length documentary. Freakonomics, for the few of you who’ve not yet read it, is likely one of the five best business books ever written. Although not a leadership development or management training book, Freakonomics is both a fun read and an eye-opener into real world economics. More social commentary than Economics 101, Freakonomics, by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, is one of those rare books that provides something for everyone, especially for those outside the field of economics.

While the editors are not seeking to turn AskTheManager.com into a blog about Freakonomics – the book’s authors Levitt and Dubner already maintain a terrific one at NYTimes.com that (like the book) is both an economics lesson and a quirky look at humanity – we are very interested in the upcoming documentary and we do highly recommend the book.


To satisfy some of my own curiosity around the Freakonomics documentary, I cornered producer Chad Troutwine – keeping him from his Holiday shopping – and peppered him with ten tough questions:

TheManager (TM): What made you think that Freakonomics would make a good film?

Chad Troutwine (CT): The real answer is that I thought it deserved to be a film, more than I was convinced it would be a good one. I’m pretty evangelical when it comes to this subject. I want as many people as possible to learn about Freakonomics. Film is a remarkable medium to reach a mass audience. It gives people who don’t really read much the chance to enjoy the material, but it also offers the three million readers a way to enjoy Freakonomics in a brand new way. Besides, I really wanted to meet some of the amazing characters that Levitt and Dubner found for the book.

TM: Have there been any other projects that made you feel this way?

CT: Yes, but none as strongly as Freakonomics. I’d still like to adapt Liar’s Poker, the brilliant Michael Lewis autobiography about 1980s Wall Street excess. It seems particularly timely today. Brush With the Law would make a spectacular film. It’s the joint memoir of a Harvard Law School student who became addicted to gambling and a Stanford Law School student who occasionally smoked crack during his third year. It’s Fight Club and Trainspotting meet The Paper Chase, but it’s a true story. 

TM: Freakonomics is such a great read with many desirable topics, how did you select the main topics for the film?

CT: I let the prospective directors pitch me. First, I had to get them to agree to join the project. I described my cinematic vision with as much clarity as possible, and shared my passion for the material with them. I suggested several possible topics – including ideas that emerged after the book was published. Morgan Spurlock was great. He said something like, “As long as it doesn’t have anything to do with food or terrorism, I’m in, man.” Because Morgan was willing to commit to the project so early, it gave me instant credibility when I approached Academy Award winner Alex Gibney and the other accomplished filmmakers.   

TM: What influence, if any, did the directors play in selecting the topics?

CT: The directors chose their own topics, but I retained a veto position. I required each director to submit a treatment. If I approved, that was the topic. I rejected a couple of ideas, actually.

TM: What influence, if any, did the authors play in selecting the topics?

CT: That’s a good question. Co-authors Dubner and Levitt have shown interest throughout, particularly Dubner. They trusted me to oversee that part of the process, so our contract gives me sole responsibility. One director team pitched a story idea that required a lot of participation from Levitt. He graciously agreed, and I think it will turn out to be one of the most engaging segments.

TM: Was there a topic covered in the book that you felt was too taboo for film or too hard to deliver to a traditional audience?

CT: No. Abortion, racism, cheating, classicism, crime, terrorism, and myths about child safety were all fair game. The main premise was enough of a hindrance: taking economic analysis and making it entertaining. Fortunately, Levitt and Dubner already conquered that challenge in grand style. We’re simply emulating the model that they created. One subject was off-limits. Because Sudhir Venkatesh was writing his own book, “Gang Leader for a Day,” we were contractually obligated to avoid using material in the chapter “Why Do Drug Dealers Still Live with Their Moms?”

TM: What is the most important thing you hope audiences take away from this film?

CT: Running regression analyses and mining rich data sets are extraordinarily valuable endeavors for brilliant people like Professor Levitt because the results offer so much utility for everyday life. He can interpret the data and impart findings – often directly contradicting widely held beliefs – that can help us all be wiser parents, more informed voters, savvier business people, and better decision-makers. If we succeed, our film will inspire audiences to see the merit in challenging conventional wisdom. I’m not sure I can turn economists and sociologists into rock stars, but I hope that “thinking freakonomically” becomes synonymous with sound judgment and high intelligence. That’s pretty sexy to me.

TM: What has been the most rewarding thing for you (personally) about working on this project?

CT: We’re not done yet, but I feel a real sense of satisfaction that I was able to orchestrate what is already being hailed as the greatest collection of documentary filmmakers ever assembled. Moreover, this is, ostensibly, my first film as a lead producer. If Freakonomics can permeate the popular culture and inspire people to think more like Levitt and Dubner, and then act accordingly, that would be the ultimate.   

TM: If you were a tree, what kind of tree would you be?

CT: I would be a deciduous tree in autumn. Is there any other answer?

TM: No, not really… As a producer, where do you get both your motivation and your inspiration?

CT: I’ve never fully understood where I get my motivation or my inspiration.  Maybe that question is best left to others to interpret based on what I create and how much I accomplish.

…

Troutwine is eyeing a late summer 2009 final cut for the film, with a theatrical release possibly later in the year. For those of you (like us) who cannot wait, here is a list of the named directors, the working titles of each segment and current status for their respective segment:

  • Morgan Spurlock: “Would a Roshanda by Any Other Name Smell as Sweet?” (post-production)
  • Rachel Grady & Heidi Ewing: “Applying Freakonomics to the Young and Nimble Mind” (filming)
  • Alex Gibney: “Who Cheats and How Do We Catch Them?” (pre-production, filming begins January 2009)
  • Eugene Jarecki: “Abortion and Crime” (pre-production, filming begins in January 2009)
  • Fifth Segment: TBD  

We think we know who the will direct the fifth segment (and we’re thrilled if it turns out to be correct), but we were sworn to secrecy and despite our overall lack of journalistic integrity; we do plan to keep this secret. Sorry…

…

Between now and the film’s release, may we recommend you enjoy the books Chad Troutwine mentioned in his interview. We’ve read all three and highly recommend them:

·         Freakonomics

·         Liar’s Poker

·         Brush With the Law

Additionally, if you’re looking to get a daily fix of Freakonomics, we recommend you drop in on Dubner’s and Levitt’s blog.