Markets are Partisan -- and that is Good

It is a given that people dislike partisanship and President Obama won the election partly on the platform of moving county into a post-partisanship age. In his first significant legislative bill, he did not succeed in overcoming a partisan result – the bill was passed on a nearly straight party basis. Jay Cost, however, makes an interesting case against bipartisanship in Three Cheers for Partisanship! Briefly, Cost asserts that partisanship is a result of real differences in people’s views of things and that it is what gives political parties any useful identity. A majority of people are not well informed on the nuances of issues, but they do affiliate with a party based on its brand identity. Bipartisanship blurs this brand identity and is likely to confuse people on the different world views.

This rings true when you apply to business. In a “partisan” market, products vie for positions based on differences. It is these differences (often embedded in brand images, but also having real attributes) that help consumers choose. When choices become indistinct within some product category (or market) the consumer is put in a tough position. First, consumers are typically not well-informed on many products they buy. The positioning and branding of these companies (and products) help consumers make choices on all kinds of products. Without these distinctions made, imagine how hard it is to decide on the thousands of product (and service) choices made each year (I do this everytime I am in Costco!). Our minds would not only be confused but overwhelmed.

In cognitive psychology parlance, these brands help form schemas in our brains to allow us to make much quicker (but not always correct) decisions. In fact, the classic marketing book by Al Ries and Jack Trout says it all in the title—Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind.

Partisanship and Markets are both taking their lumps these days -- but there is another side that should be considered.

Vancouver

I am writing from Vancouver, Canada -- spending 3 days facilitating a leadership training course for Electronic Arts managers. Being in Canada you would expect it to be cold -- and it is. Funny thing though is that Vancouver is usually not this cold -- so the natives say. In fact, we got a little snow today and the traffic got crazy, making Kansas City not look quite so bad on the driving in bad weather front. Actually, Vancouver is only a couple hours from Seattle and has similar weather.

The trip is the first stamp on my passport, but the experience has not been that inspiring. Spent 2 hours trying get past the border. First we waited over 30 minutes just to get to an agent, then were swooped into the building to be interrogated by a border guard. Interesting interrogation: "Why you coming to Canada?" . . . "What do you do that a Candadian company cannot do?" . . . and so on. Found out we needed special work permits to enter the country. They spent over an hour determining this. I think it would have been easier to simply visit a friend!

Rockhurst will look good when I am back on Friday.

Catch me if you Can . . .

This past week was pretty much a lost one for me -- I spent it at home sick. I did have a chance, however, to see the movie, Catch me if you can, based on the story of Frank Abagnale a convicted con artist.

The movie is about the relationship between the con artist, with DiCaprio playing Frank Abagnale, and FBI agent Carl Hanratty (played by Hanks). I was especially interested in Hanks' character as he spends much of the movie just missing out on catching his man (who by the way was only 16 when he started his schemes). The movie had Handratty withstanding every abuse possible from the sleight of hand of Abagnale, yet also shows leadership in the way the FBI agent tries to get the con man to change his thinking. For example, one late scene has Abagnale, after being given the opportunity to trade his jail cell to work for the FBI, reverting back to his old ways and leaving town as a bogus pilot. Handratty is there and confronts the young man but does not stop Abagnale. My conclusion was that Handratty was trying to get Abagnale to make the choice to come back -- it had to be Frank's choice, not imposed by authority.

So I was interested to learn more about this Carl Handratty character. But there is no Carl Handratty, though his character is largely based on that of FBI agent Joe Shaye.

In fact, director Steven Speilberg probably changed the name because of license they took in creating the character. There was no one agent focused on Abagnale, but a whole team. The Handratty character was created to tell us about Abagnale. Actually, the decision by Speilberg makes sense because it is his job to tell a story -- otherwise it is a documentary.

Still, I came up empty, and a little disappointed, in my search for that true, unconventional leader. Beware of those words "based on a true story."