Investigating the bedtimes of high achievers in the hope of divining the secret of success sounds a bit like looking to a novelist’s desk placement for the key to good writing. I want my characters to be believable — should I be facing the window? However, there is no doubt that once you start examining the daily schedules of chief executive officers, patterns emerge. Part of the routine is dictated by the job, but a lot of it is the product of outlook and approach. These people live their lives in a very directed way. How do they manage, day in, day out and what can we learn from the habits of seven highly effective people?
‧ First off — and there’s no getting around this one, I am afraid — you have to get up early. Really early: 6am is good, but 5am is better. And chief executive officers do not hit snooze: Most of them claim to leap out of bed in the morning (even though it is basically still night).
‧ Business and domestic life are hopelessly blurred. Leisure activities are as rigidly organized as the office diary — nobody lies in on Saturdays; they get up early and exercise — and everybody seems happy to let work follow them home. Quality time with children is timetabled, which might sound a bit ruthless, but at least they are determined to include some.
‧ It is clear that none of these people gets to do the sudoku in the morning.
‧ They may be in charge of large international companies, but they are absolute slaves to e-mail. Karen Blackett of MediaCom claims to receive 500 a day. For the modern chief executive, dealing with your own e-mail seems to be some kind of touchstone of accessibility. I am not sure what I would do if I got 500 e-mails every day, but I know what I would not do: I would not read them.
‧ Far from giving you a blueprint for your rise to the top, these routines will probably cause you to reconsider the whole idea of becoming chief executive of a major communications conglomerate. For the most part, it sounds horrible. There is no respite at the top of the greasy pole — it is just more of the same. What is the point of being rich and successful if you have to get up before dawn every day to answer 500 e-mails? There are so many other options open to you: wage slave, failed artist, cowboy plumber, local weirdo. The money is not good, but the hours are very attractive.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers