Bob Lutz, former vice chairman of General Motors, has just released his book "Car Guys vs. Bean Counters: The Battle for the Soul of American Business".  I'm not reading it.

The title says it all - an internally focused, internally embattled company that just cannot get beyond their own corporate walls.  If there is a battle for the soul of American business - and I think there is definitely a battle - it's about shareholders.  The battle that I'm concerned about is the one that pits serving customers against serving shareholders against serving employees. 

It seems that the group that is best organized seems to win in this battle.  Shareholders are very well organized.  Sometimes employees are well organized - at least certain groups of them.  Rarely are customers organized, but they still have concrete ways of making themselves heard in loyalty and defection rates.

I still hold fast to the notion that the best way to serve shareholders is to serve customers and employees well.  Balancing what's valued by customers with what's valued by employees creates a virtuous structure that creates organic growth possibilities. 

Sadly, organic growth can't hold a candle to an attractive merger, acquisition, or divestiture.  Nothing like a big transaction to get the organized shareholders and their financial advisors all happy with themselves.  Nevermind the well documented poor track record of these transactions just a short time later.

I think it would be cool if we could figure out a way to create a balance of power in business that achieves something like the balance of power in US government.  Not that I'm asking the government to figure it out, but that somehow we could breathe life into the loftier notions of what it means to run a sustainable enterprise.

I'd read a book about that topic.

Have you noticed the devolution happening in advertising to men?  It's been mildly annoying to see so many brands embrace the idea of their customers as lowbrow - cretins who drink copious amounts of beer, are single-mindedly focused on sports, are physically unattractive, are poorly dressed - and kind of stupid.  The trend to elevate this dismal portrayal of men as not only real, but worthy, is just as hard to swallow as the days of June and Ward Cleaver.

The latest ad from Klondike offers a prize to the husband who endures 5 seconds of listening to his wife.  I read a couple of reviews that found this deeply misogynist, but I found it deeply the opposite.  (Actually there's a word to describe hating men, but misandrist just doesn't seem to fit.)  What kind of brand - what kind of ice cream lover - are we observing here?

There was a period of time when the word aspirational found its way into most brand positioning and creative meetings.  Then the word authentic began to emerge.  I just don't see the authenticity in the Klondike ad, and in many of the portrayals in TV advertising.  It's like "The Hangover" - it's just a big joke, isn't it?  But I'm not laughing.

Contrast that "humor" with the wildly popular ABC sitcom "Modern Family".

"Just when we were thinking it couldn't be done, ABC's "Modern Family" has single-handedly brought the family comedy back from the dead.

All the performances are terrific, but what makes "Modern Family" work is its relentless portrayal of recognizable family life. Creators Steven Levitan and Christopher Lloyd...have given us a comedy that is sharp but not cruel, amused but not judgmental. It's hard not to see yourself, or your mother, or your kids, or your sibling, reflected clearly in one scene at least, and to laugh out loud anyway." - Mary McNamara, LA Times

Marketers and agencies may be focused on what gets noticed, and what sells, but "Modern Family" gives us all reason to aim higher.  It's not only terrific work, it's commercially successful.  Let's not settle for less.

I met a friend for lunch the other day - he had attended a church committee meeting the previous night and shared his unspoken thoughts.  One of his church leaders had just returned from a conference and was brimming with ideas.  She wanted to share her ideas, solicit new ones, and inspire the committee to act.  There was just so much great work to be done!

My friend said he wanted to ask "What are we trying to accomplish?"  "What is the purpose of this effort?"  The answers were important to him as a way to evaluate the ideas, and perhaps think of others.  But he didn't ask the questions.

He didn't ask them because the momentum of the leader and the group was focused on discussing the ideas.  He didn't ask them because he didn't want to derail the leader's enthusiasm.  He didn't ask them because the meeting looked like it was going to run long, and asking the questions would surely make it run even longer. 

Despite incredibly busy lives, most of us are not too busy to attend meetings, not too busy to work on new initiatives, and not too busy to give our thoughts on how best to get work done.  Sadly, we are almost always too busy to ask the important questions.  So we work and work and work, and to what end?  Growth is still stalled, margins are still squeezed, and we can't find the elusive silver bullet.

The truth about mission, vision and strategy is that it's hard to do well.  Even if we take the time, all too often the efforts result in ambigous statements that fail to give the direction that is so needed by our people.  But when it is done well - when the statements are clear - when the communication is inspiring - we are poised to achieve great things.  We can begin to work on the things that propel us in the desired direction, and begin to question the things that do not.  Setting the organization's strategic direction is one of the most valuable skills a leader can possess.  It is also incredibly rare.

I talked recently with a colleague who was passed over for a senior leadership role.  The feedback was that she was clearly the better candidate when it came to leadership and strategy.  The company felt more comfortable, however, with the candidate who brought specific operational experience they needed.  To me, this seemed a terrible decision for the company, and for the people who were anxiously awaiting a new leader.  But at least the meetings will run on time.

The torn envelope is on my desk - it was sent by a father who lives about 40 miles north of me.  He saw a craigslist posting for my son's dirtbike gear and emailed me over the past few weeks.  He finally decided he wanted to buy the gear, and asked if I would ship the gear to his house if he sent me a check.

I wrote back and said I would be happy to ship if he added $10 to the price.  And, oh by the way, I would prefer if he paid a PayPal invoice.  You see I hadn't decided to trust him.

No problem at all he said, but would I mind if he sent a cashier's check instead of using PayPal - he wasn't sure where his password etc. were.  I was impressed - a trip to the bank to get a cashier's check seemed like a lot of effort.  I said sure.

Friday's mail arrived with the envelope as promised.  When I opened it, a plain piece of white paper was folded over two fives and two twenties - fifty dollars cash inside the envelope.  I was taken aback by this man's trust.  Trusted the post office - trusted me.  And I felt honored by his trust - and somewhat embarrassed by my lack of it.

Is craigslist helping us be better neighbors?  Could be.  The messages they send are clear - deal locally and things will be good.  These are your neighbors, after all.  Quite ironic that technology enables the delivery of this message.  Technology that connects us to neighbors we haven't yet met, and warns us to avoid scams from distant places.  Reminds me of the small rural town I grew up in.

I like the feeling of being trusted by this father.  Next time I think I will try it myself - makes for a better neighborhood.

The big news this week was the departure (do we still say firing?) of BP's CEO Tony Hayward.  Several headlines I read called him the "fall guy".  I guess I thought he was actually responsible.  A fall guy/scapegoat is punished for the errors of others...and wasn't it Hayward himself who actually blew it in nearly every public forum held about the oil spill?

 I'm not feeling any sympathy for CEO expectations.  In my own experience, these are the same expectations we all have of each other.  Tell the truth.  Don't be an arrogant jerk.  Take responsibility for your actions.  Say you're sorry when you screw up. 

Sure it's worse when the media covers it, and customers and investors get to watch the whole thing.  But really it's all about integrity, and I'm pretty sure that was written into Hayward's job description.  But if you don't have it when you get the job, the PR experts aren't going to be able to help you develop it on the fly.

In smaller news, A&P replaced their CEO for the fourth time in less than a year.  I thought the comments from WSJ readers were quite amusing and also quite interesting.

Amusing:

Their stores are Food Museums and Christian Haub knows absolutely nothing about how to run a Company. No one can fix this. Cut your losses if you own the stock, avoid the stores unless you are starving on an island and there are no alternatives.

 Interesting:

It's rather disturbing that Mr. Martin will receive a $1million salary on top of 1.5 million shares and stock options along with a possible $276,000 payment if he stays until February. A&P is crying hard times but is willing to waste such massive amounts of money on one man while cutting much needed help from the bottom.

There are many good workers who work in A&P stores that make the company it's money and these people don't see even a modest increase in salary or full-time positions. As for myself, I was told that I was going to receive full-time within my department a few months ago. The VP approved it to my Produce Merchandiser and I was told it was a go. Then after about 2 or 3 months it came down in an email that the policy of a full-time hiring freeze was still in effect and somehow the VP was overridden.

If A&P refuses to replace full-timers when they retire and only fill the gaps with $8.00 an hour part time help, as in mine and many other cases, the company will be facing some major pains down the road. When product doesn't get to the shelf and the departments look messy, customers will be pushed away. People who only look at numbers all day won't understand that and you can't expect to cut corners in areas where the money is made. Paying someone $1 million at the top while your backbone rides on those making $8.00 an hour is not smart business.

I don't shop A&P, but I do shop WalMart and Copp's - a regional grocer.  At least in my shopping area, it seems the strategies of these two retailers are converging.  Increase the emphasis on private label, and reduce the selection of branded items to streamline inventory.  It's an unexpected turn of events for me to watch these very different businesses compete on the same strategy.  Makes shopping a whole lot more challenging, as my favorite brands and products get harder and harder to find.  Not to mention how it just plain ticks me off. 

Well maybe this new CEO at A&P will find a growth strategy.  That would be news worth reporting.