Archive for Hong Kong

Reaction: Birds of a Feather

On 18 April I went to the Birds of a Feather, BOF, sharing event sponsored by CLP, China Light & Power, and Bright Idea. CLP has been using Bright Idea’s idea innovation suite Webstorm, Switchboard and Pipeline for about 18 months. These BOF events are a way for current users, just the plain interested like myself, and Bright Idea to get together to share their experiences and thoughts on innovation. It isn’t a sales event except for about 20 minutes at the end when Matthew Greeley gives a low-key introduction to innovation and how Bright Idea’s products can support it. It was well-organized and shows a lot of generosity on both Bright Idea’s and CLP’s part.

Everyone (note the big ‘E’ as my Aunt Sue would say) is talking about ‘Innovation’. ‘Managing innovation’ raises the same issues for many people as ‘managing knowledge’; can it be done successfully, how can you manage something so ethereal, how do you measure the outcome and so on? First, I should say I don’t ever truly believe we ‘manage knowledge’ but we can enable the processes around it; how it is created, how to share it, how to avoid losing it, how to recognize it when it becomes a bit hidden and shy. Second, ‘enabling innovation’ is possible if what we mean is letting ideas be proposed by a wide audience, reviewing them for value, supporting them by prototyping and piloting and sharing the results with a wide audience so there is learning taking place that can be applied to the next round of enabled innovation.

Some of the participants had been using Bright Idea’s products for several years and some for only a few months. Everyone agreed the product suite is useful but what I heard over and over again was that the processes around using the product suite were critical. There needed to be focused innovation campaigns within a short period of time, 2 to 6 weeks seemed to be a good, when ideas were collected. There needs to be a hands on ‘campaign management team’ to promote and review the ideas submitted. A lot of ideas would be submitted and people needed to know what happened to ‘their idea’ or they got discouraged and didn’t participate in the next campaign. Even good ideas are not necessarily going to lead to implemented pilots and prototypes and people need to know why. It all takes times so don’t become impatient or anxious. There are different types of innovation and some take much longer than others to implement inside an organization. Realistically, you may not see real innovation impact for 2 or 3 years.

Comments (2)

Reaction: Online Information Asia-Pacific

I went to the Online Information Asia-Pacific exhibition and 2-day conference on this past Wednesday and Thursday, 23 – 24 March, at the Hong Kong Convention & Exhibition Centre, conference program here. There was also a 1-day Business Information Forum which I did not attend. All was organized by IncisiveMedia based in London. I was a member of the ‘Conference Committee’, which means I made some suggestions on speakers, marketing and promotion. The exhibitors were primarily compilers and resellers of information for academic libraries and businesses. Maybe there were 50+ exhibitors. The exhibition was free and there were some free seminars. It seemed to me that there were never more than 50 people at the 2-day conference but someone told me about 100 had registered. Turn-out for both the free exhibition and the conference could have been better but for a first year effort it was quite good. Hopefully, the 2012 exhibition and conference will be better attended.

All of the speakers were good and here is the program. The 1st day was more technological and the 2nd day was more knowledge enabling. Eric Tsui from the HKPolyU facilitated the 1st day. Waltraut Ritter facilitated the 2nd day. Some of the highlights for me were:

David Warlock, from Outsell, highlighted that the tablet is a ‘game-changing’ device like the IBM PC in the 1980’s. Its 5-year projected adoption rate is faster than any new ‘information’ device. What does this mean for information management? He didn’t claim to know that clearly. For me the big change is in ‘usage’. It’s all about ‘gestural computing’. People expect to be able to manipulate the device with a gesture. By the way, I don’t have any gestural devices but I intend to get my first iPhone4 soon.

Bonnie Cheuk, from Citi, focused on the leadership skills to make using Web 2.0 social networking tools work in a large corporate environment. Bonnie has solid academic credentials and deep and successful big organization experience so I listen carefully to what she says. Bonnie has been using Sharepoint at two large organizations to facilitate online interaction, networking and discussion. I would say she is trying to do online ‘Knowledge Café’, ‘Open Space Technology’, ‘Bohm Dialouge’ and ‘Anecdote Circles’. She cautioned about getting over involved in the looking for the ‘best technology’; make what you have work, it isn’t about the technology. She is trying to move away from ‘anything goes conversations’ to focused and structured interactions.
She didn’t say this exactly but I took away that Leaders 2.0 need these traits for using Web 2.0 in their organizations:
• Passion – they must be internally motivated to want to use these tools
• Commitment – they have to ‘stay the course’ and ‘stay on track’ and ‘spend time to learn’
• Openness – they have to both listen to others and give their own opinion, feedback and expertise freely
• Fearlessness – they must stand-up to the nay-sayers, to the people who say ‘I told you this won’t work’

Diane Cmor, from Hong Kong Baptist University, talked about ‘information literacy’ and how that requires a ‘practice’ and a ‘mind-set’ to become a ‘Knowledgeable Knowledge Worker’. A KWW needs these attributes:
• Expertise – stay current and know how to find what you need
• Judgement – know when to stop looking
• Mess tolerant – see past the mess of information and use it, don’t spend too much time on organization
• Multi-focal – see the patterns and embrace serendipity
• Social – share and exchange openly and transparently widely with the world
She had a very good working definition of knowledge:
Regular, wise use of best suited information to build, change and/or challenge knowledge in support of decision-making, problem-solving, innovation and growth.

Waltraut Ritter, from the Asia Pacific Intellectual Capital Centre, explained what ‘Public Sector Information, PSI’ was and how it was opening up around the world. PSI can add value to the economy in many unexpected ways. It requires governments to change their ‘mindsets’ in order to make this ‘raw’ data available openly and easily to their public. The Hong Kong Government will open up traffic and geospatial data next week to the public thru an online website. She pointed out three good links to PSI sources:
United States – Data.gov
European Union – European Public Sector Information Platform
Europena – cultural institutions data

Louise Pemberton, from Kroll, gave an excellent description of ‘real-world’ information management at a risk and security investigation firm. It is all about guiding the users, training and re-training, setting up the same look-and-feel across the Sharepoint sites and emphasizing that not all information in online. Some information comes from people and there are real skills and techniques to use when asking for information from people. Interestingly, Kroll has tried to use some of the Web 2.0 techniques like blogging and expertise pages and they didn’t ‘have much traction’. This is what I’ve also observed and experienced.

Catherine Ruggieri, from Elliott Management, spoke about morphing from a traditional corporate librarian into a hedge-fund Market Data Manager and how she took on the IT Department and won thru persistence and guile. She reminded us all that it’s about making it happen and showing real value to the organization that give information management recognition inside the organization.

Steve Arnold, from ArnoldIT, facilitated a to-the-point panel discussion at the end of the first day on the state of ‘Search’. He kept the panel focused and they had insightful answers. It was a good example of running a structured content meeting.

Paul Corney, from Sparknow, facilitated all of us to give-back what we had gotten out of the conference at the end of the 2nd day. He used these in his introduction to get us started sharing:
• Solutions – make in relevant
• Sound – evokes memory and place
• Space – enables interaction
• Heritage – gives people a starting point
• Stories – enables sharing across the generations of workers in a organization

Leave a Comment

Chinese Character Normalization – Finding People in Greater China

For most of this past year I’ve been working on a project that involved searching for Chinese people in various online databases using their Romanized names or their Chinese character names. When you are searching for someone’s Chinese name inside a database there are some quite thorny issues. With the rise of China as the world’s 2nd largest economy and Chinese people traveling and spending more and more around the world these issues about identifying Chinese people by their names are going to become a part of many knowledge workers day-to-day tasks. Here is the definition of Greater China from Wikipeida.

Most of the time trying to find a Chinese person among many other Chinese people in a database by name is not very successful. Most of the problems are around ‘Romanization’ and ‘Simplification and Traditional Chinese characters’. If you are interested in ‘Romanization’ see this Wikipeida entry. The ‘Romanization’ problem is that there are simply too many methods and no real standard.

In mainland China, people are by law required to use ‘simplified’ characters for their names. This assumes that there is a ‘simplified’ character for that name. In Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan people use ‘traditional’ characters for their names. If you are interested in the difference refer to this Wikipedia entry. In any event, ‘simplification’ is a master stroke of censorship and knowledge control by the mainland Chinese government. Mainland Chinese have difficulty reading books, pamphlets and newspapers from outside of China. What better way could there be of controlling knowledge than by changing the writing system people use every day? Conversely, people from Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan have a difficult time reading ‘simplified’ characters. Some claim it is harder to go from ‘Simplified’ to ‘Traditional’ than from ‘Traditional’ to ‘Simplified’ but I’m not sure. Reading Chinese is always hard for me and I’ve learned both character sets, sort of, up to the 1,000 character mark.

However, since there are different character sets a problem arises when someone from mainland China comes to Hong Kong, Macau or Taiwan and start to use their written character name to open accounts at banks, shops, hotels and so on. The same happens when people from Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan go to mainland China. Simply put, people can’t easily read this person’s name. The solution is to ‘transform’ the name into the ‘correct’ character set; ‘Simplified’ Character to ‘Traditional’ Character or ‘Traditional’ Character to ‘Simplified’ Character. It happens all the time when a person opens an account where there details will be input into a database. They write down their name in the character set they are comfortable with using and the person either collecting the names or the data-input person ‘transforms’ this name. Interestingly, all Hong Kong and Macau Chinese people may apply for a ‘home return permit‘ card that lets them cross the border into China easily, and also lets the Chinese government know they have arrived. Their names are always ‘transformed’ into simplified characters when there is corresponding character between the ‘traditional’ character and the ‘simplified’ character. I assume these transformations are more accurate than some of the others. I know some of the transformations between ‘simplified’ to ‘traditional’ are not always accurate. This is due to imperfect knowledge of the mapping rules between the character sets. Sometimes people are in too much a hurry so they simply guess. All Chinese names have at least 2 characters and many, maybe the majority, have 3 characters. Sometimes the transformer will transform 1 or 2 characters and leave 1 or 2 character unchanged.

The end result is that if even if you have a Chinese person’s correct name you may not be able to find it in a database because someone has ‘transformed’ the name. Sometimes you can’t find a Chinese person in a database because you believe their name is written with character ‘X’ but in fact they write it with character ‘Y’. The only way to solve this problem is for the database’s search engine to ‘normalize’ the search. Here is an excellent summary of ‘normalization’ prepared by Michael CY Chan.

Leave a Comment

Part 2: HKKMS & KMRC Lessons from the MAKE award winners – Conference Reaction 2011

Continuing from Part 1…. So, David gave us the 15 minute history of the genesis of his knowledge café. Basically he use to go to these KM lectures in the City and the best part was the conversation in the pub after the talking head. It’s an absolute truth that the ‘afterwards’ ‘coffee/tea breaks’ ‘meeting in the morning’ are the most useful for understanding what will, has or may be useful at a organized speaking event. Afterwards, we had the useful coffee/tea break with excellent coffee, tea and pastries.

We returned and the 8 Make Award winners each gave a 3 minute introduction of themselves ~ at this point I was about ready to scream with frustration ~ where was the Knowledge Café? It was useful to get the introductions but it could have happened at 9:30 and not 10:45. The Hong Kong Make Award winners who participated are: (there are others who did not participate)

– Mr. CHOI Chin Pang, Frederic, Head of Research Centre, HK Police College, HKSAR Government
– Ms Annie KONG, Chief Operations Officer, Print‐Rite Management Co. Ltd.
– Mr. David LEUNG, General Manager of Technical and Engineering Services, MTR Corporation
– Dr. Helen LI, Director of Corporate Logistics, Cafe De Coral
– Ms. Eva LO, Director of Knowledge Management, Langham Place, Mongkok, Hong Kong
– Mr. Eric TSE, Project Manager‐Knowledge Management/PSBG CLP Power HK Limited
– Dr. Ricky TSUI, East Asia Research and Development Leader, Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Limited
– Mr. YUK Wai Fung, Assistant Director, 1823 Call Centre, Efficiency Unit, HKSAR Government

The actual café was in 2 sections. One of the Make Award winners sat at a table and we first listened and then had sort of a conversation about what sort of KM activities and strategies they had deployed or were now deploying. It was a bit stilted because we needed to ‘listen’ to the winner and then respond. Each section lasted about 45 minutes. The second section was much better than the first. By the second section people knew what to expect and there had been the all-important trust established at the tables. This was a point that Nicolas had made earlier in the morning and I heard over and over again at the tables from the Award winners. There must be trust established with the employees before they would participate in any knowledge-sharing activities.

The essential flaw in the programme was that we only had time for two 45-minute sections and there wasn’t enough time to establish a solid level of trust among the participants. At the end, Eva LO, Director of Knowledge Management from Langham Place Hotel said she noticed she wanted to ‘lecture’ and I could observe that in the 1st section but less so in the 2nd section. The format made the Make Award winners the ‘teachers’ and us the ‘students’. So, in retrospect it was better than the normal talking head conference but it could have been better with both more time and someway of minimizing the ‘teacher’ ‘student’ format. Maybe if there had been a general KM topic to discuss this would have enabled more open and fluid conversations. I think we all felt obligated to listen to the ‘masters’ and not ask too many questions.

We ended with one of those excellent Hong Kong 8 course Chinese lunches and some good conversation. As David said in his introduction its always the ‘afterwards’ which is the best.

Leave a Comment

Part 1: HKKMS & KMRC Lessons from the MAKE award winners – Conference Reaction 2011

I went to the HKKMS/KMRC Knowledge Café style conference last Friday. This was billed as ‘an exercise in KM. Rather than a highly structured morning of speakers and Powerpoint presentations , we are just setting a few boundaries: choosing a good venue, the start and end time, and of course, the purpose – to allow those interested in KM a chance to hear from those organisations that won awards from the Hong Kong Most Admired Knowledge Enterprise (MAKE) judges.’

Well, OK, it sounds good but the proof is in the pudding. We started with some introductory remarks by Prof. W.B. Lee, head of the Industrial & Systems Engineering Department, which sponsors the Knowledge Management Research Centre, KMRC, and runs some excellent under graduate and graduate programs with strong KM components and then some more remarks by the President of the HKKMS, Les Hales. They both emphasized that now Hong Kong has a critical mass of KM professionals. It does with more than half-a-dozen good KM programmes in the city. Take a look my Education page for a pretty comprehensive list of the Hong Kong Knowledge Management programmes here.

I’ve done some digging thru LinkedIN and got a little World Bank KM timeline going here. The keynote speaker was Nicolas Gorjestani, formerly the Chief Knowledge & Learning Off icer, at the World Bank, from 2000-2007. Nicolas is the 3rd person I’ve met over the years who had/has a leading role in the World Bank’s knowledge management programme. The other two are Stephen Denning, programme director of KM at the World Bank at unspecified times, and Madelyn Blair, Division Chief at the World Bank 1978 – 1988. They are all very interesting people. However, I remain a bit bemused by the idea that KM at the World Bank should be some sort of ‘global’ benchmark for KM practices. The World Bank is THE BLUE CHIP aid agency. Can we, who are working in much more day-to-day mundane organizations, learn from something that is so unique and special? For the same reason, I don’t think holding up MicroSoft, Apple and IBM as examples of good or bad corporate management is very useful.

Nicolas gave a passionate talk. He believes KM is about making the connections between people. This is a core KM belief and it’s true; people are who make it all happen. He thinks KM is not about organizing ‘knowledge’ – e.g. libraries, repositories, documents, records. Of course, every corporate KM programme I’ve ever seen has a big component of organizing all this ‘explicit’ knowledge. It isn’t sexy but it is necessary. He puts a lot of emphasis on ‘trust’ and how ‘trust’ is required before anyone will share ‘knowledge’. He had an amusing example of the ‘new matrix organization’ at the World Bank with lateral connecting layers (sausages) who renamed themselves Network Heads or Network Anchors because they didn’t want to be called Network Facilitators or Network Co-ordinators. My observation is any matrix organization creates a guerilla war to turn itself into a hierarchy and most of the time the guerilla war wins. He emphasized the importance of un-learning and leaning from failure. The World Bank will run a ‘Fail Fair’ next week which sounds like a wonderful idea. My idea is that success and failure are close companions and we should not forget that sometimes what was initially thought of as a failure turns out to be a success or vice versa. I’m slightly skeptical of Nicolas’ idea that the 20th century was about rigid hierarchical organizations and the 21st will be about organic, fluid and more human organizations. I think he is confusing ‘rich’ country issues and ‘emerging’ country issues. China, India and Africa are now quickly ramping up with large hierarchical organizations in many business and government sectors. Are these really different from how Europe and the Americas, note I’m including North, Central and South America, developed and expanded throughout the 19th and 20th century? I don’t think so. Europe and the Americas have been rich for so long now that their organizations need to cope with the unique issues of size, aging work force, shrinking work force, expansive expectations from the workforce, which makes them by necessity place more emphasis on the ‘human’ side of the organization.

Then Nicole Sy, from the KMRC, Knowledge Management Research Centre, explained how the MAKE awards winners are assessed. The MAKE awards, Most Admired Knowledge Enterprises, are assessed by judges from business, government and academia. The criteria is established by a UK based consultancy named Teleos which support and enables THE KNOW NETWORK, ‘A global community of knowledge-driven organizations dedicated to networking, benchmarking and sharing best practices leading to superior performance.’ Teleos is rather mysterious. I’ve been told it’s a small British KM consultancy but I can’t confirm this thru Google or LinkedIN.

Award winning is very important because it gives recognition which in turns ensures continuing support from the powers that be up that dreaded hierarchy, or matrix or hybrid hierarchical matrix. In Hong Kong, we give awards for everything from Young Leaders to Best Marketing Campaign to most successful English essay and we like to announce the winners loudly and publically. I suspect it is linked to the British school tradition of prefects, best boy, best girl, sports days and the like.

David Gurteen was the facilitator for of Knowledge Café. I heard his presentation last year at the HKKMS conference in Hong Kong. I also attended a half-day work-shop on how to run a knowledge café. I’ve run a few knowledge café this past year so I was really interested to see how David would run this ‘conference’ knowledge café. More to follow in my next post …

Comments (1)

March – Busy Month for Knowledge, Information & Records Management in Hong Kong

Hong Kong has an interesting range of Knowledge, Information and Records Management events in March; check them out on my blog’s events page – Drinks, Luncheons, Seminars, Knowledge Cafe, Exhibitions, Conferences. Five which are notable for me are:

– HKKMS/KMRC are going to have a non-conference without so much time devoted to the dreaded talking head. Let’s hope David Gurteen pulls this off.

– David Gurteen & Mark Pixley are running a one-day “KM Unworkshop: Making KM Projects Work.

– Bonnie Cheuk from Citi will talk on social media barriers, knowledge sharing and Web 2.0. There are very few KM people with as much real world business experience in how to make KM work as Bonnie.

– A big conference exhibiting and probably too many talking heads – Online Asia – is a chance for many working in the area to gather, see and share knowledge on how, where and what to find.

– Hong Kong Records Managers are having a long waited gathering sponsored by Recall Hong Kong Ltd.

Leave a Comment

Web 2.0 and a very public Hong Kong/Macau Family Feud

Hong Kong and Macau have had front row seats at a very public family feud over Stanley Ho’s fortune. The 89-year-old tycoon’s 3 living wives and 16 living children are positioning themselves for their share of between 2 and 3 billion USD, mostly in gambling and property assets. Rich people’s fighting in Hong Kong and Macau is very common and normally confined to private meetings and courtrooms followed by press conferences and newspaper articles. However, this feud has moved onto Youtube when one of Stanley’s lawyers posted 3 videos. This seems similar to the Wikileaks approach/philosophy of not having any secrets. I have no idea if it will help one-side of this family feud or the other-side.

Posting these videos on Youtube goes against the view ‘the Chinese’ like to be closed and secretive. Local culture in Hong Kong and Macau is a blending of Chinese, British, Portuguese, Japanese and American influences. Openness and transparency are not the norm but is that something truly Chinese? Maybe so, maybe not. I’m more than a bit suspicious of ascribing things to being ‘Chinese’. This is a good example of the 2 extremes for how to communicate; one open using Web 2.0 and putting it out there for everyone to see and one closed with controlling and censoring communication channels.

Leave a Comment

Grant money for KM consultancy in Hong Kong

“The Professional Services Development Assistance Scheme (PSDAS) is established by a Government allocation of HK$100 million to provide financial support for projects which aim at increasing the competitiveness of Hong Kong’s professional service sector as a whole, or of individual sectors, in external markets including the Mainland market. In addition, projects aim at enhancing the standard of professional services in Hong Kong are also eligible.” They accept applications from management consultancy groups and individuals. The deadline is 31 March 2011.

Leave a Comment

2011 – Ruminations on this blog

I”m interested in Knowledge Management as someway of organizing my thoughts around how work gets done, how people cooperate and conflict, how information get’s organized and how technology get’s used for these purposes. I did a MSc in KM from HK Polytechnic in 2008/2009. This was quite useful for someone like me who had worked for 30 years on the fringes of KM. This is the beginning of the 3rd year for this blog. It’s useful for me to make some connections between all the above. The process of searching for events for the events page makes me keep up to date and sometimes I even attend these events. In 2011 I’m going to restrict the events to those in Hong Kong, Macau or Guangdong province (I’m going to call this greater Guangdong) unless there is a strong connection to these local KM communities.

Our KM community is very fragmented. There are formal academic KM programs at a few of the universities, take a look at the ones I know about here. There are many KM related groups, societies, organizations and forums in greater Guangdong, see here. This diversity is good. I’m trying to offer a place here that pulls the information about these groups and their activities together. Knowledge Management in greater Guangdong would be better if we knew what was going on besides receiving lots of emails from many people. There are many events, a few organizational websites but no central website to find a cross-section of all of them. I’m trying to give us such a place. Keep me posted on any KM type of events in 2011 and I’ll post them here.

Leave a Comment

Re-ignite reaction

I went to the Re-ignite conference this past weekend in Hong Kong. This is part of the Hong Kong’s 2nd Asia Consciousness Festival. Gino Yu from HKPolyU’s Design school has been the driving force behind the festival. The theme was ‘rediscover your life’ or ‘rediscover what is possible – personal and organizational transformation’. I arrived on Saturday afternoon around 2 and stayed until end of the day on Sunday. Upon arrival there was a yoga class with Lawrence Milman, who has developed ‘freedom yoga’. More like yoga with a smile and we still did the Om. This was followed by a workshop run by Gino about non-verbal communication; we looked into our partner’s eyes for five minutes. Different types memory recall and memory construction (telling un-truths) can be mapped to eye-movement. At the end of Saturday there was a session of staged talking heads on social entrepreneurship. These were good and thank-fully they only had 18 minutes so there was none of the fatal ‘conference lecture syndrome’. Joy Tang from Taiwan is working on bringing sustainable development to Ghana with the One Village Foundation. This is real knowledge transfer in action between Ghana and Taiwan. Todd Darling from Hong Kong talked about founding and running a organic food distribution company, Home Grown Foods, and involved in a successful sustainable restaurant in HK’s Soho, Posto Pubblico. The rise of sustainability and environmentalism is quite amazing over the past 10 years here in south-east China. John Fitzpatrick talked about starting a furniture design business based on modular bamboo shelving. Todd and John’s stories made me reflect that so many local Chinese HK people have stopped trying to start anything new. I hear so often that it’s impossible to start a business in Hong Kong. I wonder why this has happened? Scot Frank talked about solar cookers for rural communities in the Himalayans. I would have liked to heard more about the the distribution system.

Sunday morning was more talking heads but interesting ones. Jeffrey Martin explained how you need to match your emotional development to the sort of therapy you were going to try. This is quite sensible and helps to explain why one technique works well for some people but fails and even harms others. Stefania Lucchetti talked about time management. Can we ever get beyond email? Stefania has a useful perspective as a working attorney and a new mother.

There was a long coffee break for useful chatting and strawberry cream puffs. Joachim de Posada “the marshmallow man” talked about delaying gratification as a good indicator for future success. Ivy Ning came up and described herself as “in the climate change business”, hmm, I guess it is a business these days. She talked about Spiral Dynamics of Clare Graves ~ a bit towards the L. Ron Hubbard end of the spectrum. A beautiful coloured spiral showing personal evolution. Ivy is about to have a baby so had that wonderful mother-to-be glow.

Three experiential sessions (I had to look this word up) ~ it means learning thru physical activity. The yoga and interactions sessions the day before had also been experiential sessions. I’m learning here. The first was run by Judith Hovetter on Feldenkrais Method stretching. I’ve done some stretching classes before so I now good it can make me feel. Judith made us very slowly make one very long whole body twist and at the end of 30 minutes we all felt completely relaxed. Steven Ng explained and made us do some qi-gong and tai-chi exercises that were effective. If you live in Hong Kong and want to know more about chi and how to hold it then I recommend contacting Steven.

The end of the day were sessions by Rafael Bellavita, Gen Kelsang Tonglam and Gary Hart. I couldn’t really follow what Rafael was talking about ~ the link between investing and spiritual transformation. Where was the link? He made better investment decisions because he meditated. Gen Kelsang Tonglam was inspiring. Undoubtedly being a rock-star handsome Buddhist monk has its advantages (and possibly a few disadvantages). He explained about being ‘of the world’ with the World Peace Cafe in Wan Chai was better than being cloistered. Gary Hart is a scientist who has attained that level of nothingness, living with no thoughts talking constantly to him all the time, which is the goal of so many meditation techniques.

Comments (1)

« Newer Posts · Older Posts »