Bahrain's National Day: Many Reasons to Celebrate

As Bahrain gets ready to mark its 50th National Day, it is evident that this beautiful island nation has many good reasons to celebrate.

To start with, we have just seen that in this pandemic, Bahrain has been ranked ‘first’, globally, on the ‘Nikkei Covid-19 Recovery Index’ in November 2021.

With a drop in active cases, an increase in vaccination rollout, and a continued adherence to precautionary measures, aimed at mitigating the pandemic, it is no surprise that Bahrain has come on the top.

Citizens and residents alike would vouch for the swift and smooth approach of this country’s leadership, in handling this unprecedented global health crisis.

Several other global indices also show us that Bahrain’s standing is certainly praiseworthy. And these 50 years of sovereignty are worthy of all festivities we can gear up for.

In the World Happiness Report 2021, Bahrain has been ranked third in the Arab world and 35th globally.  Out of over 150 nations surveyed by the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, Bahrain’s position is no small achievement.

On the Human Development Index, Bahrain has also moved up to rank 42nd globally in 2019, three positions better than its 45th ranking in 2018.

Based on average income, education, and health metrics, this United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) HDI report says that Bahrain has maintained its position in the “very high human development” category of the index.

HDI is a summary measure for assessing long-term progress in three basic dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, access to knowledge, and a decent standard of living.

Measured by life expectancy, by the mean-years of schooling among adult population, and also by the Gross National Income (GNI) per capita expressed in constant 2017 international dollars converted using purchasing power parity (PPP) conversion rates, HDI shows us how Bahrain’s metrics can make us proud, when looked at, in comparison with over 180 countries.

From 1995 to 2020, we can see a smooth and steady growth in Bahrain’s position on the HDI.

On the 2021 Index of Economic Freedom too, Bahrain is ranked 4th among 14 countries in the Middle East and North Africa region, and its overall score is above the regional as well as world averages.

Bahrain is also the 40th freest economy in the 2021 Index, according to the Heritage Foundation. Thanks to the excellent work being done by the EDB (Economic Development Board) and the government legislative structures which are constantly striving to make Bahrain business friendly, we can see economic progress.

Importantly, Bahrain still remains the best place in the GCC for expats to live and work despite the COVID-19 pandemic, according to the recently published InterNations Expat Insider 2021 survey.

The survey, which samples key indices related to things like quality of life and cost of living, ranks this country ahead of Qatar, the UAE, Oman, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

Expat Insider Survey 2021 by InterNations - Regional Picture of GCC States

When it comes to customer satisfaction, on Avaya Global Happiness Index, Bahrain topped the index in six of the verticals – banking, telecoms, online retail, in-store retail, utilities and airlines – and came second in the hotels vertical.

In the Global Knowledge Index 2021, Bahrain is now at 55th position. This ranking becomes more significant when we realise that this is a small country among 154 countries surveyed. And also when we realise that for this ranking, GKI includes 155 variables, selected from over 40 sources and international databases including the UNESCO, World Bank, ITU, and International Monetary Fund (IMF), Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and International Labour Organisation (ILO).

Interestingly, on the World Giving Index 2021, Bahrain was ranked first among Arab countries and 12th globally, showing that this nation is generous on charitable and humanitarian work.

In conclusion, I must say, this grossly insufficient column space cannot fully list Bahrain’s many reasons to celebrate. But it argues well, I hope, that we must celebrate. 

A Look Back at the Tylenol Crisis

Early morning, on this day, 39 years ago, 12-year Mary Kellerman, from a Chicago suburb, complained of a sore throat and runny nose. Her parents gave her one extra-strength Tylenol capsule.

But by 7 am, she was dead.

That same day, 29 September 1982, a 27-year-old postal worker named Adam Janus of Arlington Heights, Illinois, died of what was initially thought to be a massive heart attack. His brother and sister-in-law, Stanley, 25, and Theresa, 19, of Lisle, Illinois, rushed to his home to see and console the gathering of family and friends.

They both experienced throbbing headaches, not an uncommon response to a sudden death in the family, and they took a Tylenol extra-strength capsule each. It was from the same bottle Adam had taken a little earlier in the day.

Stanley died on the same day. Theresa died two days later.

Also, on the same day, in a nearby place, Mary Reiner had had a headache after giving birth to a baby. She was given a capsule to lessen her pain. It was a Tylenol extra-strength capsule. She died too, on the same day.

Seven people died in four days, in the same city after consuming the same capsules.

Actually, it was not until a couple of days later that the investigators found the shocking connection between the deaths and the capsules taken by the victims.  More importantly, the investigators quickly called them “murders”.

These were not accidental deaths by spurious medications. These were deaths caused by someone who laced the capsules with the lethal Potassium Cyanide! It was a deliberate deadly contamination by someone completely devious and demented.

Now, as we remember, on this day, that nationwide panic in the USA, we should also remember the great lessons learnt by the corporate world, on the handling of the media amidst this huge crisis; a crisis that became known as the Tylenol Crisis, and as a business management case study in universities. 

We must appreciate how Johnson and Johnson recalled some 31 million Tylenol products from all grocery stores and pharmacies around the world, and destroyed them; a total worth of $100 million which, forty years ago, was a lot of money.

Some may say that Johnson and Johnson went overboard. But there are many others who say that the company took the right response. It even changed the way medications are packed.

According to pbs.org, “Before the 1982 crisis, Tylenol controlled more than 35 percent of the over-the-counter pain reliever market; only a few weeks after the murders, that number plummeted to less than 8 percent. “The dire situation, both in terms of human life and business, made it imperative that the Johnson & Johnson executives respond swiftly and authoritatively”. And respond they did, and swift it was.

This classic corporate communications example used in business schools around the world gives us a valued lesson on how companies must hold on to their values.

Alan Hilburg, the US-based communications and branding consultant, was the guru who crafted the then extremely innovative response to the Tylenol Crisis.

He says in a recent article online that “Crisis management is not about public relations driven ‘damage control’. It’s about business continuity. About affirmative strategic, business-centric actions with a strong focus on the victims in a crisis”.

Unless organizations respond quickly, honestly and decisively to its customers and stakeholders, especially the aggrieved ones, they won’t be seen as those that can build – or as in the case of Johnson and Johnson - rebuild trust and loyalty.

These days, with the high speed of social media communication, and the growing popularity of customer reviews, customers’ needs can be easily understood, and based on that customer experience can be enhanced.

It is of course easier said than done. But, it can be done.

Comic Books – Do they promote stereotyping?

The news that comic books of Tintin, Asterix and Lucky Luke were burnt, along with many others, in Canada is both, shocking and upsetting.

These comic books were the Netflix of my school days.  I had grown up with all those characters, and their friends and families, and I still feel I know most of them personally. And, that’s why it saddens me that, these days, some new-age activists think it is okay to burn those books.

It was a symbolic burning, by a council of schools in Ontario, to show disapproval, for the way indigenous people were negatively portrayed in them. But I find it completely unnecessary and absolutely irrelevant.

The Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau addressed this controversy saying, "On a personal level, I would never agree to the burning of books."

But, strangely, at a government level, he allowed it. He allowed this ridiculous burning of books in this 21st century! A practice we thought was long relegated to medieval history.

In the 1953 dystopian novel ‘Fahrenheit 451’ we have seen books being burnt by an authoritarian regime, in order to thwart independent opinion.  Book-burning has always been a direct assault on the minds of free-thinking men.

In fact, this novel’s writer Ray Bradbury titled it so because it is exactly at this temperature that paper catches fire, and burns.

Now, while I agree that, in books, certain communities may be negatively portrayed, based on the writers' knowledge – or the lack of it – and also on the writers' prejudices, we must also understand that often it is only a perspective. Sometimes it is in fact the perspective of the writer’s characters; and not even that of the writer.

For instance, the cowboy Lucky Luke fights some seemingly lazy, and at the same time, brutal Indians - the Native Americans of the Apache. Does that mean we become disrespectful of the Apache, and generalize them as only lazy and only savage?

According to the stories, he actually shoots faster than his own shadow. Does that mean we believe it??

It is for us to apply our own knowledge and wisdom to discern the truth. And our discernment skill can only increase when we are exposed to a range of differing perspectives.

In Asterix comics, there is strong caricaturing of the Gaulish people, Goths, Arabs, Egyptians, Romans, and even Indians.  But it actually opens up our minds to the reality of our differences; so that we can accept and embrace our differences.

Agreed, that when writing ‘Tintin in Congo’ , the Belgian writer Hergé, had not yet matured into a good cartoonist and storyteller. In fact, he had even later apologized for the way he had characterized African people, with some racist slurs, in his second book.

But, over time, his stories matured, and there is a beautiful intermingling of cultures, and a great appreciation for differences in his latter books.

For instance, I was fascinated by Tintin’s friendship with a Chinese boy named Chang in ‘The Blue Lotus’ and in ‘Tintin in Tibet’. Similarly, in ‘Prisoners of the Sun’, Zorrino, an indigenous Peruvian boy who makes a living by selling oranges, becomes a good friend of Tintin.

The boy Abdulla is seen as a spoilt brat of a wealthy Emir, from an Arabian country. This boy appears in “The Land of Black Gold” and “The Red Sea Sharks” , and despite his pranks endears himself to Tintin's companion Capt. Haddock.

Some stereotyping is often visible to us, but we should accept it as poetic licence given to writers. We should not be blind to truth, by accepting silly stereotypes.

Burning these books on the pretext of stereotyping, I think, is just like banning ‘Tom and Jerry’ cartoon animations, for violence. 

Both are merely exaggerations with intent to entertain and educate. 

Individual Ethics vs Corporate Ethics

“Água”, he said and pushed aside the Coca-Cola bottles from his table.

With that, Cristiano Ronaldo also pushed down the market value of Coca-Cola, watering it down, by a shocking 4 billion dollars, overnight. And who was happy?

Everyone. Well, everyone except the company’s shareholders.

The following day, even Paul Pogba removed a bottle of an alcoholic beverage placed in front of him at another Euro 2020 press conference.

These bottles, we know, were placed by companies that had bid for and paid enormous amounts of money to get that placing in football briefings. Getting their brands visibility was their main aim in sponsoring these sporting events.

In fact, if it were not for such sponsorships and advertisements, we would not be enjoying many shows on TV or online. 

TV broadcasting rights and online streaming rights are often bitterly contested for, to make revenue from the sponsors. And we all know that, ultimately, advertising pays for the shows we freely watch.

So, here is the question. Did Ronaldo, Portugal’s soccer-team captain and the poster-boy for health and fitness, do the right thing? And did Pogba, France’s midfielder and a professing Muslim, do the right thing?

By standing up for their individual beliefs, and by winning the applause of most of the world, as ‘excellent role models’ for the young generation, did they really act in the best interest of the society and the community?

Maybe yes. But think again, wouldn’t that be a breach of contract? Isn’t it a violation of the agreement between the broadcasters and the sponsoring companies? Can these individual sport-stars act, brashly, to the detriment of their sponsors? If you scare away the sponsors, will they come back?

After all, it is the money that matters. Not only in the business of sports but in many others.

Which is why, on the side-lines - to cash-in on the controversy - Ikea has immediately launched a reusable water-bottle calling it ‘Cristiano’.

The fact of the matter is that, oftentimes, there’s conflict between individual ethics and corporate ethics. One’s individual beliefs may not always be aligned with those of the organization.

I remember cricket tournaments being sponsored by Wills, Rothmans, and Benson and Hedges. All cigarette companies. The contrast was so striking that some cricketers had to publicly declare they do not smoke or encourage smoking.

On the ‘American Idol’ show, I often find it odd to see paper or plastic cups of Coke on the tables of those judges. 

Amidst all that glitz and the glamour on those shiny and smooth stage sets, I find these huge red cups sticking out like sore thumbs. You might call the organizers and judges as suckers. Of not just the drink from those cups, but for the money the sponsors put in. And that’s the truth.

Advertisers seek celebrity endorsements of their products. But if it backfires, like in Cristiano’s case now, advertisers might think twice before sponsoring again.

The fact that Cristiano himself had promoted Coca-Cola in his earlier days is now overlooked. His 2006 advertising campaign for Coca-Cola has now been dug out by social media users who are sharing it online and calling him a hypocrite.

But then, times are different. He is healthy, wealthy, and wise now. He probably regrets that old endorsement now. His individual beliefs may have changed now. And that is understandable.

But, in the same way, organizational ethics should also be understood. 

After Cristiano’s act, Coca Cola has responded saying "everyone is entitled to their drink preferences" and that "players are offered water, alongside Coca-Cola and Coca-Cola Zero Sugar” at these events. So, did the company take away anyone’s choice? No.

The only reason why, I think, Coca cola did not make a big fuss is because the water-bottle Ronaldo raised was also a brand from Coca cola. 

All the same, celebrities must keep reminding themselves that ‘with great power comes great responsibility’.