A Deal Of Dread

I would imagine that very soon there will be ATA-boys, pats on the back and high-fives, photo ops, more gushing smiles, and of course the coveted Noble Peace Prize. 

But as we move ever closer to a deal with Iran on Nuclear Weapons Of Mass Destruction all I feel is complete dread.

I wish I could be happy--really I do--because we had a strong and verifiable deal that protected us all, but instead...

I am afraid for the State of Israel--holy to Jews, Christians, and Muslims around the world--as a nuclear capable Iran and their terrorist proxies renew vows to annihilate Israel--only 70 years after the Holocaust that erased 6 million Jewish lives, their souls rising in the billowing smoke of the furnaces of the Nazi crematoria. 

Further, I am afraid for the dimming prospects of true world peace based on the tacit acceptance of an eventual nuclear-armed Iranian regime, still the leading state sponsor of world-wide terrorism. 

Every day, we are bombarded by a cacophony of what seems an unending litany of concessions to Iran:

1) Today, the latest is that Iran wants a complete lifting of the U.N. arms embargo including ballistic missiles. 

2) Yesterday, it was that Iran wants an immediate doubling of oil exports.

3) Last week, it was that rather than gradual sanctions relief for compliance, instead now Iran would get a $150 billion signing bonus  - that is 25 times the annual budget of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard and could be used to finance and carry out yet more global terrorism. 

4) And that for vital inspections for nuke compliance, "anytime, anywhere, unimpeded" of suspicious military sites would now only be a highly watered down "managed access" of inspections.

5) Three weeks ago, the U.S. said that Iran no longer needs to account for the past nuclear weapons research that world representatives from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), had been trying to pry out of them for than a decade. 

6) In March, as part of the framework deal, we learned that Iran's freeze on sensitive nuclear activities would only be 10 years, and even that Iran was calling "unaceptable."

7) Moreover in March, we learned that despite any agreement, Iran was continuing to pursue banned items for nukes and the missiles to deliver them. 

In April, we were reminded of the dangers of failed nuclear agreements when China warned about North Korea's ever expanding nuke arsenal, which critics have pointed out mimics that of the deal with Iran. 

Aside from the dangerous weaknesses in the emerging deal, Iran's hatred for the United States is unmitigated as a general in Iran said just last week that the U.S. remains "our worst, most vicious enemy."

Moreover, as Iran's Parlimant bans access to its military sites, they continue unabated their generational old chant of "death to America."

In these fateful times, when our decisions now will affect the lives of untold millions in the future, let us pray for G-d's mercy.

May the L-rd above bestow the strength of good character, wisdom of our ancestors, and the fortitude of our great heros to ensure a good deal--or no deal at all--with our avowed and undetered enemy--and may he bring a true peace to us all.

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

A Deal Of Dread

Getting It In Writing

So this is funny, this company, Knock Knock makes witty office supply products.

This one is a picture of file folders that say, "Useless documents to provide appearance of importance in meetings."

They have another set of folders with, "Papers to shuffle endlessly thereby accomplishing nothing."

These reminded of the importance of getting things properly documented, in writing. 

Otherwise you get the unfortunate scenario that goes something like this when coming to agreements with others:

- Person #1: "If it's okay, can I get that in writing?"

- Person #2: "You have my word. Don't you trust me?"

The end result is an undocumented verbal agreement, and this is invariably followed, at some future time, by a disagreement, as follows:

- Person #1: "Well we agreed [fill in the blank]."

- Person #2: "I don't recall that. Do you have it in writing?"

When someone refuses to give it to you in writing that is a clear warning sign, and bells and sirens should be going off in your head--loudly--that there is a problem.

The lesson is:

- Get it documented in writing, period. 

- Documents are not useless even if some people use them to look important or they get caught in paperwork paralysis. 

- Verbal agreements are a he says, she says losing game. 

- Avoid getting caught without the documentation that spells it all out--and you can put it in one of these cool folders too.  ;-)

Note: This is not a vendor or product endorsement. 

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Getting It In Writing

A Dangerous Game of WMD

According to ArmsControl.org--in 1994, we reached a historic "agreed framework" with North Korea to "freeze operation and construction of nuclear reactors suspected of being part of a covert nuclear weapons program."

In return, the U.S. would phase out economic sanctions, North Korea would be supplied with 500,000 tons of fuel oil annually, and South Korea would build two lightweight reactors for them.

Fast forward just a decade--by 2005, North Korea declares that it has indeed manufactured nuclear weapons, which are then on display for the world in a nuclear test in 2006.

Today in the Washington Post, we herald another historic deal, this one with Iran that "freezes key parts of their nuclear program."

In return, Iran gets relief from economic sanctions.

Yet, even now as we celebrate this historic agreement, the Iranian President is not dismantling but rather demanding the right to keep their atomic program.

Moreover, just last week, according to USA Today, Iran's Supreme Leader Khamenei called Israel a "rabid dog" amid chants of "Death to America!"

Online, The Diplomat confidently says this time is different, "Iran is not North Korea," because "Iran is cosmopolitan" and "prides itself on international engagement."

Yet, according to PBS, The Islamic Republic of Iran is far from both of these with a "Supreme Leader who exerts ideological and political control over a system dominated by clerics who shadow every major function of the state."

And Amnesty International writes that Iran has a history of "widening crackdown on dissent that has left journalists, students, political and rights activists, as well as clerics languishing in prisons."

Lest we forget, that Iran is the country that held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days, threatened to annihilate Israel, denied the Holocaust, asserted that the U.S. itself was behind 9/11, and is the "most active state sponsor of terrorism" in the world.  

Oh, how very cosmopolitan!

While we all would hope and pray for a sincere and lasting peace with Iran, this agreement seems to spell a deja vu world of scary WMD cat and mouse, all over again.

(Source Photo: here)

A Dangerous Game of WMD

Creating Win-Win and Enterprise Architecture

We are all familiar with conflict management and day-to-day negotiations in our everyday leadership role in our organizations, and the key to successful negotiation is creating win-win situations.

In the national bestseller, Getting to Yes, by Fisher and Ury, the authors call out the importance of everyday negotiation and proposes a new type of negotiation called "principled negotiation".

“Everyone negotiates something every day…negotiation is a basic means of getting what you want from others. It is a back-and-forth communciation designed to reach an agreement when you and the other side have some interests that are shared and others that are opposed. More and more occasions require negotiation. Conflict is a growth industry…whether in business, government, or the family, people reach most decisions through negotiation.”

There are two standard ways to negotiate that involve trading off between getting what you want and getting along with people:

Soft—“the soft negotiator wants to avoid personal conflict and so makes concessions readily in order to reach agreement. He wants an amicable resolution yet he often ends up exploited and feeling bitter.”

Hard—“the hard negotiator sees any situation as a contest of wills in which the side that takes more extreme positions and holds out londer fares better. He want to win yet he often ends up producing an equally hard response which exhausts him and his resources and harms his relationship with the other side.”

The third way to negotiate, developed by the Harvard Negotiation Project, is Principled Negotiation.

Principled Negotiation—“neither hard nor soft, but rather both hard and soft…decide issues on their merits rather than through a haggling process…you look for mutual gains wherever possible, and that where your interests conflict, you should insist that the results be based on some fair standards independent of the will of either side.”

In principled negotiation, the method is based on the following:

1. People—participants are not friends and not adversaries, but rather problem solvers
2. Goal—the goal is not agreement or victory, but rather a “wise outcome reached efficiently and amicably”
3. Stance—your stance is “soft on the people, hard on the problem”
4. Pressure—you don’t yield or apply pressure, but rather “reason and be open to reasons”
5. Position—you don’t change your position easily or dig in, but rather you “focus on interests, not positions”
6. Solution—the optimal solution is win-win; you develop “options for mutual gain”

In User-centric EA, there are many situations that involve negotiation, and using principled negotiation to develop win-win solutions for the participants is critical for developing wise solutions and sustaining important personal relationships.

• Building and maintaining the EA—first of all, just getting people to participate in the process of sharing information to build and maintain an EA involves negotiation. In fact, the most frequent question from those asked to participate is “what’s in it for me?” So enterprise architects must negotiate with stakeholders to share information and participate and take ownership in the EA initiative.
• Sound IT governance—second, IT governance, involves negotiating with program sponsors on business and technical alignment and compliance issues. Program sponsors and project managers may perceive enterprise architects as gatekeepers and your review board and submission forms or checklists as a hindrance or obstacle rather than as a true value-add, so negotiation is critical with these program/project managers to enlist their support and participation in the review, recommendation, and decision process and follow-up on relevant findings and recommendations from the governance board.
• Robust IT planning—third, developing an IT plan involves negotiation with business and technical partners to develop vision, mission, goals, objectives, initiatives, milestones, and measures. Everyone has a stake in the plan and negotiating the plan elements and building consensus is a delicate process.
  

In negotiating for these important EA deliverables, it’s critical to keep in mind and balance the people and the problem. Winning the points and alienating the people is not a successful long-term strategy. Similarly, keeping your associates as friends and conceding on the issues, will not get the job done. You must develop win-win solutions that solve the issues and which participants feel are objective, fair, and equitable. Therefore, using principled negotiation, being soft on people and hard on the problem is the way to go.

Creating Win-Win and Enterprise Architecture