The World Economic Forum, in Davos, Switzerland, hosts a dynamic, intelligent, and opinionated group of approximately 2,000 international business and political leaders, referred to, in some press accounts, as "rulers of the universe."

As we partake in the broader Davos Experience, we're talking to a large cross-section of participants - leaders of the world's most respected businesses to non-profit practioners at the world's most respected NGOs - for a unique take on this year's Forum. This is what we're hearing after just a couple days (most of this comes from off-the-record conversations with well-positioned Forum delegates, so we are unable to attribute most of it to specific individuals):

Problems and solutions. We spoke with an internationally renowned business leader and seasoned problem-solver, who provided some of his insight and perspective on this year’s Forum:

Healthcare and Afghanistan. We’re on the eve of history for both issues. In fact, they very well could ultimately define the Obama administration. And as different as they are, the approach to bettering both might be more similar than you think. Prevention.

In healthcare, prevention leads to longer, healthier living, at a fraction of the price. This is well documented. But less agreed upon – or even much discussed – is that the same can be applied to national security. That is, the more sustained goodwill we pour into a country, among its people, the more we prevent a costly disaster, in lives and resources, at their hands in the future.

Can you imagine if the US had continued its assistance to Afghanistan in the late '80s after the Soviets withdrew? That is, continued attention, financial and otherwise, not on guns, but on roads and schools and good governance? The Taliban would not have been able to flourish in that environment. Al-Qaeda would not have found safe haven there. 9/11 would not have happened.

And in cases where the US has actually pursued preventionist policies, the outcome has been positive. We see it in parts of eastern and southern Africa as well as Indoneisa.

As we’ve written in this blog before, channeling Bill Clinton: “We can be made more secure by eliminating inequality…. 10-20 countries in eastern and southern Africa… many of them Muslim… love the US.” This, at a time when the US has lost significant credibility internationally. In these countries, nobody has been thinking about Al Qaeda. Why? Because “we have cared whether their kids live or die.” Clinton is referring to America's generous African policies under Bush (that is, America's pledged financial support in the fight against AIDS and other diseases).

Across the ocean into Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world, ill-will towards America had reached alarming proportions in 2005. America’s approval rating was 38%. But after the tsunami, American assistance and goodwill blanketed the country, driving the approval rating up to 60%. In the same period, Osama bin Laden’s approval rating went from 58% to 28%.

With such drastic shifts in poll numbers, you can bet that bin Laden’s recruiting efforts amongst the world’s largest Muslim population suffered a major blow. We can only imagine how bin Laden might have gone from salivating over Indonesia as fertile ground for his network to perhaps averting it altogether. Can you imagine if the same thing happened in Afghanistan or Pakistan or Somalia or Sudan?

If prevention has proven effective and less costly (in the long term) than the alternatives, then why don’t we do it? We’ll offer some perspective on that in part II of this entry (in the coming days). But for now, let’s turn our attention to what Obama says tonight about Afghanistan. Might prevention play a role in his plan?

1. “If you['ve] got enough self confidence in who you are and what you believe in, you ought not to be scared to talk to anybody.”

With Obama’s decision on Afghanistan imminent and Bill Clinton’s World Business Forum speech still resonant, we thought we’d do something of a thought experiment on leadership and decision-making.

What counsel might Clinton give President Obama on Afghanistan? Specifically, how would Clinton break down the current conundrum, and what advice on leadership and decision-making would he offer?

“Should we escalate in Afghanistan? I have three answers: Yes. No. Maybe.

Yes
September 11 has taught us that an unstable Afghanistan is a direct threat to the American people. That’s what makes this so different from Vietnam. Leaving the country will afford Al-Qaeda the same terrorist haven they enjoyed on September 10... and this time without as much resistance from a Northern Alliance.

No
Victory depends on commitment, and you don’t have it from the American people. Not even from your own Vice President. Americans want jobs, not increasing bloodshed abroad. Escalation without commitment will lead to another Vietnam.

Maybe
The Afghan people will support that group which cares for their children. Currently, they’re supporting the Taliban, but mostly out of fear. If we helped the Afghans build a sustainable country that was safer and more prosperous for their children, the Taliban wouldn’t have a chance.

The Afghan government is corrupt. We can build schools and train laborers, but buildings and skills will be gone or devalued once we leave, unless the Afghan government is there to support them. It’s unclear whether they have the will, or even the capability, to do that.

Pakistan is unstable; it’s also a crucial partner for success in Afghanistan. If they continue to assist the Afghan Taliban as a way to counterbalance India’s influence, or if a coup replaces the current regime with a much more hostile one, then we’ll have no chance of containing the Taliban along the porous Afghanistan-Pakistan border. Pakistan could be our biggest wild card. Their support is and will be paramount.

Leadership and Decision-making
The considerations are many, related, and complex. Regardless of what you decide, make sure you:
- Have a vision of where you want to go
- Lay out a strategy on how to get there
- Develop specific actions to implement the strategy
And underscore these things with an understanding of not just policy but also of people.

Some of the most difficult decisions I ever made as president were not necessarily the least popular – the unpopular decisions were sometimes easy because I knew what the right answer was – no, the difficult decisions were the ones for which I couldn’t know the right answer… those 10% of presidential decisions that can’t come from policy reports or staff recommendations, but rather must come from intuition. You have to listen and feel your way to the answer. If that happens, the best you can do is level with the people and say that if you’re not right you’ll change.

A great leader is a great decision-maker. You have one hell of a decision to make.”

Bill Clinton gave us a treat at this year's World Business Forum: his framework of the world.

Unlike other speakers at this year’s Forum, Clinton did not use a teleprompter or projected slides. And his paper notes? Apparently just for show – he rarely looked at them. This was the stuff of Bill Clinton legend – speaking off-the-cuff about complex issues in understandable terms. Unfortunately, Clinton fell short of legend this time inside Radio City Music Hall in New York; he meandered and had difficulty staying on point. But his content – why we should care about AIDS in Africa, bombings in the Middle East, and climate change – was no less compelling.

Clinton’s worldview starts with the premise of globalization – although he prefers to use the word “interdependence.” While Clinton rejects the idea that interdependence leads to peace and security outright (See The Complete Idiot's Guide to World War I), he believes it’s possible, if we address three persistent global challenges: inequality, instability, and unsustainability.

Challenge #1: Inequality. “The world is too unequal.” One billion people live on less than $1/day; Half the world population lives on less than $2/day. While people in the developed world live a long time, a quarter of the world still dies from either AIDS, malaria, or bad water (80% of them are children aged five or younger). If global warming proceeds at its current rate, water will become even more scarce, and the developing worlds’ problems aggravated.

“We can be made more secure by eliminating inequality,” Clinton said, citing “10-20 countries in eastern and southern Africa… many of them Muslim… who love the US.” This, at a time when the US has lost significant credibility elsewhere in the world. In these countries, many of which Clinton has visited, nobody has been thinking about Al Qaeda. Why? Because “we have cared whether their kids live or die.”

The lesson is simple and powerful. Focus on the basics and see positive results. In this case, the more we care, the more secure we are.

Challenge #2: Instability. “The world is too unstable.” What seems real one day is gone the next – money, health, security.

In cases, small and large, that span the globe, wealth has diminished like at no other time and to such a degree, since the Great Depression. A local police station in England had to fold because their pension investments in Iceland vanished in the country’s bankruptcy. China, in a short period of time, went from having plenty of cash ($2 trillion in reserves) to not enough (post-crisis they “had nobody to sell to”).

In a more interdependent world, a virus in one part of the world can cause more than just isolated deaths, but also widespread panic and disruption. Swine flu has wreaked havoc in both real and perceived terms. It’s closed down school districts in the US, halted the tourism industry in Mexico, and taken the lives of many. The world is, for lack of a better term, freaking out about it. And with every new report of another well-known person contracting it (e.g., President of Costa Rica and Colombia, Tony Blair’s wife, Harry Smith of the CBS Early Show, Landon Donovan of the US National soccer team), the threat feels more real and the worry continues to worsen.

Terrorist organizations remain a major destabilizing force internationally. Post-9/11, they have managed to hit Madrid, London, Bali, and Bombay, not to mention the countless spots in the war-torn regions of the Middle East and Central Asia. At the same time, as counterintuitive as it seems, “we’re more secure because everyone’s working together.” Without collaboration in the intelligence and law-enforcement communities – that is, positive interdependence – several calamities might have occurred: Al-Qaeda in the Balkans, the millennium attack out of LAX, hi-jacked plane(s) from Indonesia to the US, Holland and Lincoln tunnel bombs in New York.

Across the various sources of global instability, the way to address it is the same. The more vigilant and cooperative we are, the more secure we become.

Challenge #3: Unsustainability. “The world is too unsustainable” because of climate change. 95% of “serious scientists” believe that if we don’t cut CO2 or methane, then temperatures will increase, oceans will rise, and 100 million people in coastal regions will become climate change refugees by 2050, having been forced to uproot by Mother Nature and settle elsewhere. In Australia, Conservatives and Liberals are debating, not about whether the problem is real, but rather how to best solve it… everyone agrees it’s a problem.

Clinton also focused on sustainability in the US. He painted a rather dire portrait of where the country is headed if income continues to decline, college costs continue to outpace income growth, and healthcare continues to cost more while covering less (and also outpacing income growth). He cited the need for a new source of jobs every eight years to remain competitive. Solving climate change, Clinton believes, is the way to do that (e.g., “green” jobs and projects). He’s not shy about the size and difficulty of the task at hand, saying that if done right, it “would be the greatest thing since we mobilized for WWII.”

In the challenge of unsustainability lies a significant opportunity for positive change. The country or company or individual willing to invest in it, could save the world’s future, if not own it.

The world in which we now live is vastly different than the one in which Clinton took office. Then, in 1992, there were only 50 websites worldwide. Today, more than 50 new websites were created during Clinton’s speech at the Forum alone. Our world is much more connected. What we do affects others more so now than ever before. The more we understand that, the more willing and able we are to address the challenges of global interdependence… and experience the peace and security associated with it.

What an experience to blog from the 2009 World Business Forum at Radio City Music Hall in New York City (see official Bloggers Hub in photo at right) to bring you insights from the world's foremost thought-shapers and opinion-makers. From Bill Clinton to Pat Lencioni, from George Lucas to T. Boone Pickens, there was no shortage of unique insight or rich perspective. From their powerful speeches and personal stories emerged four main themes.

1. Fail to succeed. Failure is a must-stop on the road to success. Several of this year's speakers failed at or quit something before finding their path and reaching the heights of their success.

• T. Boone Pickens quit his job at a petroleum company at 26 years old. He ultimately started his own, shaping not just the oil industry but the concept of "corporate raider."
• George Lucas was "up to no good" racing cars, before pioneering filmmaking magic.
• Bill George left a potential (and much coveted) CEO position at Honeywell to run a much smaller (and at the time, much less proven) company in Medtronics. He eventually became a storied corporate executive, Harvard Business professor, and renowned leadership expert.
• David Rubenstein quit his job as a lawyer in his late 20's without resistance from his bosses. He also failed in the Carter administration where he was responsible for fighting inflation and "got it down to 19%." All before starting one of the world's most successful and influential (if not controversial) private equity firms.
• Pat Lencioni felt like he failed at Bain & Company for not being a numbers guy. It's that experience which led him to pursue organizational management and become one of the world's leading experts of it.

Failing and quitting - two things we're taught at an early age to avoid - were not only good, but necessary for these industry titans to, in fact, become industry titans.

2. Be human. Aligning what we do to who we are is critical. How we work must better reflect who we are as human beings - more emotion and creativity, less reason and structure.

• Gary Hamel believes we're in the midst of a revolution in corporate management and leadership because corporations aren't human. They're not as adaptive or creative or engaging as we are, as people. They have to be to survive.
• Kevin Roberts thinks emotion is actually more important than reason, particularly with customers. Reason leads to conclusion, but emotion leads to action.
• George Lucas believes art - to be true art - is about emotional connection; It's about telling a story in a meaningful way. The same can be said of business, specifically the thing at its very core: persuasion. There's no such thing as persuasion if not for telling a story in a meaningful way.
• Pat Lencioni believes that the emotional intelligence of an organization is its true competitive advantage. So many companies focus too much on how "Smart" they are and much too little on how "Healthy" they are.

The challenge here is how: How do we become more human as professionals, as leaders? As Jim Estill put it - he's a blogging colleague from the Forum, former CEO, and current Board member of RIM (the maker of the Blackberry) - "Leadership is messy." We want to know it in rational terms but we can't because it's not. Realizing that is the first step.

3. Challenge short-termism. We all know that taking the long term view trumps the short-term one. In fact, this year's World Business Forum opened with a Hollywood-style short film containing sage advice from proven leaders about taking the long-term view. But how do we do it in today's 24/7 world? It boils down to one thing: Leadership. Specifically, three key ingredients: Courage, Faith, and Commitment.

Take the case of Bill George, whose remarks opened this year's World Business Forum. When he was CEO of Medtronics, he did not shy away from telling his investors that if they were looking for a quick buck, they could invest elsewhere.

• Courage. He had the courage to take the long-view, sacrificing potential short-term wins for long-term payout.
• Faith. He had the faith to believe that, in the end, long-termism would win.
• Commitment. He had the commitment to stick with it, even, when competitors with the short-term view might have appeared to be fairing better than his own company.

Ultimately, Bill's leadership paid off. In 10 years with Medtronics, he took the company's market value from $1B to $60B. It's no wonder his book, True North, about authentic leadership, is a critically acclaimed best-seller.

4. Do One Thing. In a more interconnected world, the little things we do have an even bigger impact. Several headliners at the Forum captured the spirit of this concept.

• Kevin Roberts started the "Do One Thing" (D.O.T.) campaign at Saatchi & Saatchi where he has challenged employees to commit to doing one thing to positively impact their environment.
• Jeffrey Sachs called for global scale cooperation for our global scale problems, particularly in finance. Because one thing that a banker in New York City does can collapse entire economies (see Iceland), oversight needs to be broadscale and shared.
• Bill Clinton spoke at length about "shared costs and shared benefits" in an increasingly interdependent world: "No matter how constrained we are, we all have a role to play." He drove the point home with a story about a young man in Haiti who secured excess sawdust and paper from community businesses to make cooking brickettes. In doing so, he was able to sell them at just 1 cent a piece, down from 5 cents a piece. This young man - in collaboration with others - reduced the cooking bill for many by 80%. In a country where the average income is about $1/day, that makes a huge difference.

In the fabric of this year's World Business Forum lie true success secrets... personally, professionally, and as a global community: Be human. Take the long view. Embrace failure. Do one thing.

If we can do that, we can change the world.

Hi Kernels. Are you ready to pop? Just two more days until the 2009 World Business Forum. The headliners this year are impressive. Be sure to check in for real-time insight and inspiration from:

Patrick "Pat" Lencioni, author of best-selling book The Five Dysfunctions of a Team and founder of organizational management consultancy The Table Group, embodies what The Popped Kernel is all about - follow your passion, even in the face of risk, to reach your full potential. We interviewed him recently to understand who he really is and what's behind his success. Here are a few takeaways from our conversation (we plan to post the audio interview soon).