Uncategorized
By NATALIE ALMSMARCH 6, 2024
President Biden previewed an executive order in his 2022 State of the Union meant to address identity theft and fraud in public benefit programs. As Biden gears up for his 2024 address, the order still hasn’t been released.
Two years after the White House teasedan executive order on identity theft in public benefits during the 2022 State of the Union, such an order hasn’t materialized, leaving stakeholders frustrated at the lack of action to address vulnerabilities and prevent fraudsters from siphoning off government money.
“We continue to work in this area very rigorously across government,” Clare Martorana, the federal chief information officer, told Nextgov/FCW at an event this week when asked about the state of the executive order. “This is top of mind for all of us. We want to make sure that we accelerate people’s use of digital [to access government], but safely, securely.”
The order as it was previewed two years ago was said to be focused on preventing fraud in government benefits programs, which spiked during the pandemic, in part due to identity theft. The Government Accountability Office estimated in September that up to $135 billion in unemployment insurance alone went to bad actors during the pandemic.
“We are working to identify a number of actions that we believe will have a positive impact on digital identity and identity verification,” Caitlin Clarke, senior director at the National Security Council, said at an event in January. “We will be looking to have more work in this area coming out soon.”
Clarke noted that identity is often either the culprit or target in cyber incidents, with bad actors exploiting identity and access management vulnerabilities and targeting identity information to monetize and use it to further additional fraud and cybercrime.
Specifics remain unclear. The Office of Management and Budget declined to respond to questions for this story about the state of the executive order or reasons for its delay. The White House did not respond to outreach for this story.
Political optics, Login.gov and the ‘abysmal’ lack of progress
A 2022 White House fact sheetdesignated Gene Sperling, White House senior advisor and American Rescue Plan coordinator, and the Office of Management and Budget as responsible for making recommendations on preventing public benefits fraud that will be incorporated into the promised executive order.
According to sources familiar with the development of the order, Sperling has been driving its development. He toldreporters last spring that it “should be out soon,” although he noted that getting legal sign-off can be a lengthy process.
The order’s creation has largely been conducted behind closed doors, not open even to other senior White House officials, according to the sources familiar with its development, who added that Sperling has also restricted the cross-agency engagement typically done for policy development.
Identity proofing solutions can be politically touchy, as was evident in early 2022 when the IRS faced bipartisan pushback over its use of facial recognition via vendor ID.me.
Those political optics for any forthcoming order have been on Sperling’s mind, according to sources familiar with development of identity policy. Challenges surrounding the government’s single sign-on service, Login.gov, have also factored into the delays.
Although 47 agencies and states use Login.gov, some agencies have been reluctant to do so.
The IRS, for example, still hasn’t added the service as a gateway to the agency’s online accounts — even after it said it planned to do so in 2022 — as IRS tech officials have hesitated to trust Login.gov’s security features.
A draft of the executive order from early 2023 indicated the White House planned to give a leading role to Login.gov.
But weeks later, the General Services Administration’s Login.gov team landed in hot water for not meeting government digital identity standards, due to their lack of facial recognition capabilities, and for misleading agencies about their compliance. GSA has since announced it would add facial recognition capabilities to Login.gov.
It’s unclear whether and how the focus of any potential executive order has shifted since.
“Meanwhile, the problems tied to identity theft and identity-related cybercrime continue to compound,” said Jeremy Grant, former senior executive advisor for identity management at the National Institute for Standards and Technology, who now runs a trade association focused on digital identity issues, the Better Identity Coalition. “The lack of progress here has been abysmal.”
“The lack of any easy, privacy-preserving way for Americans to protect their identity online is being actively exploited by organized criminals and hostile nation-states like China, Russia and North Korea,” said Grant.
The Better Identity Coalition wants the government to push for identity proofing systems, including mobile drivers licenses, and to have more agencies provide attribute validation services that can be used to triangulate if someone is who they say they are on the internet. Others saythat the government also needs to better help victims of identity theft.
The White House’s own 2023 cybersecurity strategy included action items to invest in digital identity solutions and update related standards. But the strategy’s implementation plan left out digital identity.
“Weaknesses in [identity] are a threat to our national and economic security,” said Carole House — formerly a director of cybersecurity and secure digital innovation at NSC who now works at Terranet Ventures — who also spoke at the January event.
“It’s a major vulnerability that demands coordinated, strategic action led by the White House,” she said. “Yet we’ve seen no evidence of coordinated architecture and structure for the kinds of efforts that are needed to create the fabric for the future of a digital economy.”
FORT MEADE, Md. – The National Security Agency (NSA) is releasing “Top Ten Cloud Security Mitigation Strategies” to inform cloud customers about important security practices as they shift their data to cloud environments. The report is a compilation of ten Cybersecurity Information Sheets (CSIs), each on a different strategy. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) joins NSA as a partner on six of the ten strategies.
The ten strategies are covered in the following reports:
- Uphold the cloud shared responsibility model
- Use secure cloud identity and access management practices (Joint with CISA)
- Use secure cloud key management practices (Joint with CISA)
- Implement network segmentation and encryption in cloud environments (Joint with CISA)
- Secure data in the cloud (Joint with CISA)
- Defending continuous integration/continuous delivery environments (Joint with CISA)
- Enforce secure automated deployment practices through infrastructure as code
- Account for complexities introduced by hybrid cloud and multi-cloud environments
- Mitigate risks from managed service providers in cloud environments (Joint with CISA)
- Manage cloud logs for effective threat hunting
“Using the cloud can make IT more efficient and more secure, but only if it is implemented right,” said Rob Joyce, NSA’s Director of Cybersecurity. “Unfortunately, the aggregation of critical data makes cloud services an attractive target for adversaries. This series provides foundational advice every cloud customer should follow to ensure they don’t become a victim.”
The CSI for each strategy includes an executive summary providing background information and details about threat models. Additionally, each CSI concludes with best practices and additional guidance.
Read the summary report here.
Visit our full library for more cybersecurity information and technical guidance.
NSA Media Relations
MediaRelations@nsa.gov
443-634-0721
The PPBE Reform Commission has concluded that a new approach to defense resourcing is required to better maintain the security of the American people. Today, we are pleased to release our Final Report, which makes 28 recommendations critical to establishing a new Defense Resourcing System and advancing reforms to the United States Department of Defense’s current PPBE process.
You can access our Final Report and associated fact sheet on our website here: https://lnkd.in/eRAcMhpn.
Ellen Lord Jonathan Burks Lisa Disbrow Eric Fanning Peter Levine Jamie Morin David Norquist Diem Salmon Jennifer Santos Arun Seraphin Raj S. John Whitley
#ppbe #ppbereform #defense #defenseinnovation
NEWS RELEASE
MARCH 6, 2024
The Commission on Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) Reform is pleased to release a Final Report with 28 recommendations critical to reforming Department of Defense (DoD) resourcing processes to meet the demands of the current security environment. These recommendations affect all aspects of the current PPBE process, from strategy and planning to execution.
The Honorable Robert Hale, Commission Chair, expressed appreciation for the significant amount of work and input contributing to this Final Report. “We conducted more than 400 interviews with 1100 interviewees and also engaged in extensive research. We are grateful for the contributions from Congress, the Department of Defense, industry, academia, and all who helped the Commission. We believe that the 28 recommendations in our Final Report will bring about meaningful reforms, and we could not have accomplished our work over the last 24 months without extensive input from across the PPBE ecosystem.”
As a result of its research and interviews, the Commission on PPBE Reform recommends that the DoD adopt a new resourcing system. The Defense Resourcing System preserves the strengths of the current PPBE process, while also better aligning strategy with resource allocation and allowing the DoD to respond more effectively to emerging threats and technological advances.
The Honorable Ellen Lord, Commission Vice Chair, addresses the extensive impacts of the Commission’s recommended reforms. “Our consensus recommendations represent a wide range of reforms ranging from tactical to transformational. They include business system improvements and changes that strengthen the resourcing workforce. Each will help the Department and Congress work together to deliver improved capabilities to the warfighter faster. Some of these reforms will take substantial work and time to implement, but they are worth it—we cannot continue with the status quo and must outpace strategic competitors.”
Congress established the Commission on PPBE Reform in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 to conduct a comprehensive assessment of all four phases of the PPBE process, with a specific focus on budgetary processes affecting defense modernization. The Commission will continue engagement on recommendations until its conclusion in August 2024.
You can read the Final Report here.
A two-page summary of the Final Report is here.
For press inquiries or questions, please contact PPBE_Reform@ppbe.senate.gov
Article link: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ppbe-reform-commission_final-report-ppbe-reform-commission-activity-7171008409637474304-Orlv?
One reason the Defense Department can’t get to a clean financial audit has to do with its multiple and outdated financial management systems. The DoD does have
One reason the Defense Department can’t get to a clean financial audit has to do with its multiple and outdated financial management systems. The DoD does have a plan to modernize the systems, but the Office of Inspector General (OIG) finds a little trouble with how officials are going about it. For the latest, the Federal Drive with Tom Temin talked with OIG project manager Chris Hilton and Shelby Barnes.
Interview Transcript:
Tom Temin And fair to say, this was an audit, not so much of DoD finances, but of the systems that make up the financial network there and of their plans to modernize it. That a good way to put it?
Shelby Barnes Yes. So I think that’s a great way to summarize what this audit was. We focused on the DoD financial systems specifically. We reviewed the systems that were subject to the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act. Essentially, this is a law that requires that systems capture data and record transactions properly. And the DoD has established goals to, as you said, modernize its systems environment and to update its systems or stop using some of its old systems by 2028. However, what we found in our audit was that goal wasn’t aggressive enough. And without a more modern systems environment, we found that the DoD will just continue to spend a lot of money on systems that don’t record those transactions properly.
Tom Temin And just to define the scope of this, it’s not just the Pentagon and the fourth estate agencies, but does this also include the armed forces and they’re often multiple financial systems?
Chris Hilton Yes. It definitely includes all of those systems and all those parts and pieces of the DoD. We looked at basically any plans related to maintaining the DoD’s IT system environment and how they impact the DoD financial statements. By the numbers DoD’s IT environment contains over 400 systems and applications and over 2000 interfaces. This complex environment contributes to many of the DoD challenges.
Tom Temin Right. And it’s not simply the multiplicity of them, but in some cases, the age of them and the fact that they can’t interoperate with one another in some cases. Fair to say?
Chris Hilton That is absolutely correct. I think some of the systems that the DoD still uses today are from the 1950s and 1960s and 1970s. Obviously, they weren’t necessarily always intended to produce financial statements. That’s a newer requirement. So those are some of the challenges that the department is dealing with.
Tom Temin Right. Because in the 1950s and 1960s, they could count the beans, so to speak, but they don’t meet what are considered contemporary standards for financial systems.
Chris Hilton Correct.
Shelby Barnes Yes. That’s correct.
Tom Temin Plus, there’s a certain cost in maintaining these old systems, and the multiplicity is a cost multiplier itself. Fair to say. Chris Hilton That is fair to say. One of our highlights in our report is that the DoD maintains 37 purchasing systems throughout all its components and pieces. And obviously, that presents challenges from the perspective of, well, if you have a challenge across 37 systems, and you have to have 37 corrective actions, so that does present significant challenges for the department.
Tom Temin Right. And you mentioned they have 400 systems with 200 interfaces. So that’s even beyond the purchasing systems.
Chris Hilton 2,000 interfaces. I wish it was 200.
Tom Temin Yeah, I didn’t write the third one down on my sheet here. Ok, so we’ve got the full scope of that. And let’s talk about the scope of the plan. That is to say, what do they hope to do by 2028 at this point. What’s their envision for all of this.
Shelby Barnes Yeah. So that’s actually one of the things that we identified within our audit that wasn’t particularly clear. The DoD has multiple plans, all of which focus on a simplified systems environment. That is the department’s desire and that is the DoD’s goal. But what we found was that the plans didn’t clarify what systems the DoD plans to keep and what systems they plan to retire between now and 2028. And so that was one of the things that we highlighted within our report, that the DoD does need to clarify what systems it plans to update, to modernize, and which of those systems it needs to stop using. And we recommended that they stop using them as swiftly as possible.
Tom Temin Right. It sounds therefore like the plan is more of a guidance to a future vision than a detailed modernization plan.
Shelby Barnes Yes, I would say that’s exactly what we found within our audit.
Tom Temin We’re speaking with Shelby Barnes and Chris Hilton. They are project managers in the Office of Inspector General at the Defense Department. And did you find that they’re putting sufficient resources against this modernization effort? And is it in the right place? That is it a CIO project? Is it a CFO project or is it across different boundaries?
Chris Hilton I would say there are definitely putting a lot of resources in the area. I think our audit found that there was approximately $4 billion they spent in 2022 on these financial management system. And I think that’s one of the challenges we identified, obviously, from the perspective of you’re spending so much on these systems that aren’t going to get you where you want to go in the current year. And if you just kind of do things as swiftly as possible, like Shelby mentioned, they will get the department to a lot better place.
Tom Temin I mean, is there a strategy to say take within one of the armed services, for example, or in something like [Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA)], which is a large component agency, and just consolidate within that piece that component, which would maybe eliminate dozens. And then try to get the Air Force and the Army and DISA together. I’m just making that up, but that idea.
Shelby Barnes There definitely are goals that each of, you mentioned, like the Army, Navy and Air Force, they all have their own goals, the plans that we were looking at work for the entire DoD. So I think that what you’re speaking about definitely exists at that individual component level. Our review just determined at the entire DoD level. Was the plan detailed enough to get the department where it wants to go?
Chris Hilton I would also add to that that there’s significant initiatives there to move the department in the right direction, and there are indications that they’re doing so. I know, for example, U.S. Marine Corps, they transition to a modern ERP in an effort to attain a clean on their opinion. So there is definitely traction there. I think one of the biggest things talking about, like it being a CIO challenge or a CFO challenge or a military department challenge, is really a team effort. And this is one thing that Mr. Stephens, the deputy chief financial officer, has really focused on. This is a team effort being DoD. DoD is not going to get across the finish line without everyone pushing in the same direction. So that’s one thing that has been a laser focus of the department. It’s really like this is a team effort, both horizontally across CIO and CFO, but also vertically down to the components and up to DoD.
Tom Temin And what were your major recommendations then?
Shelby Barnes So one of the most significant recommendations that we made was for the department to create a strategy where it basically determines for all of its systems, whether or not they’re going to update their system or if they are going to retire and stop using that system. Essentially, the DoD needs to we believe that the strategy is important because the DoD really needs to wrap their arms around what they have now, and they need to determine what’s going to remain and get those systems updated so that they can start producing good and reliable data.
Tom Temin And these financial systems, are these a subset of the business systems that comprise the DoD? Because they’ve had several runs at business system modernizations over the years, at least the 20 years I’ve been looking at it closely. There have been several gambits to try to get around the business systems, financial systems, a subset here?
Chris Hilton Yeah, there are actually, approximately 4600 DoD IT systems, and only about 5% of them currently fall in the category of financial management systems. So it’s a actually a quite small subset of the bigger DoD system environment. And obviously trying to get our arms or DoD trying to get its arms around that environment is needed, obviously, to produce good financial data and hopefully obtain an audit opinion.
Tom Temin And in general on the plan they have, which doesn’t have the detail that you feel they do need, but their plan to 2028, is this basically an in-house effort or do they have integrator support and programmer contractor support?
Chris Hilton It’s kind of a mixed bag. I mean, obviously there’s a lot of contractor support in this effort. So it is diverse I guess, in how they’re addressing the issue.
Tom Temin All right. And would you say that this is an urgent set of recommendations, this audit. And this publication.
Shelby Barnes I would say yes. We feel that this audit report and this recommendation is really imperative. We know that the DoD is working very hard and putting a lot of resources towards modernizing its systems. But we feel that some of the recommendations within this report are really going to put the department on the right track to modernize their system environment, maybe quicker, and that has a direct impact on so many things operationally. And then also the financial statement office.
Tom Temin And your memorandum went to the secretary, the deputy secretary, the undersecretary, the Comptroller, the CIO, the auditors, and so on of the different armed services. They know they’ve got a problem, fair to say.
Chris Hilton That’s fair to say.
Tom Temin And did they generally concur with your recommendations?
Chris Hilton Yes. Actually, we had 31 recommendations, quite a few. They concurred with all but one, and the one that they didn’t concur with we did ask for further comments. And I think we’re kind of headed in the right direction with that one as well. So they know it’s a problem. That’s one thing we did find during our audit was there’s already a lot of efforts going forward. We’re just making sure that they’re best positioned to make maintain systems that produce good data, uses taxpayer dollars efficiently. And like Shelby said, obtain an audit opinion by 2028.
Tom Temin And in the meantime, we could use a few years without continuing resolutions that might help.
Tom Temin is host of the Federal Drive and has been providing insight on federal technology and management issues for more than 30 years.
Follow @tteminWFED
Article link: https://federalnewsnetwork.com/defense-main/2024/02/for-dod-financial-management-systems-a-not-so-pretty-picture/
The Justice Department’s Antitrust Division, Federal Trade Commission and Department of Health and Human Services jointly launched a cross-government public inquiry into private-equity and other corporations’ increasing control over health care.
Private equity firms and other corporate owners are increasingly involved in health care system transactions, and, at times, those transactions may lead to a maximizing of profits at the expense of quality care. The cross-government inquiry seeks to understand how certain health care market transactions may increase consolidation and generate profits for firms while threatening patients’ health, workers’ safety, quality of care and affordable health care for patients and taxpayers.
All market participants — including patients, consumer advocates, doctors, nurses, health care providers and administrators, employers, insurers and more — are invited to share their comments in response to the Request for Information. The agencies seek comments on a variety of transactions, including those involving dialysis clinics, nursing homes, hospice providers, primary care providers, hospitals, home health agencies, home- and community-based services providers, behavioral health providers, as well as billing and collections services.
Submit your comments no later than May 6 at https://lnkd.in/giKq84Nt
Read more: https://lnkd.in/guw6YyrZ
Article link: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/usdoj_the-justice-departments-antitrust-division-activity-7170802747749883904-E-nE?
By ALEXANDRA KELLEYFEBRUARY 27, 2024
In conjunction with nine other countries, the U.S. released six new principles intended to guide a global 6G wireless connectivity adoption.
The White House issued a joint statement together with the governments from Australia, Canada, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Sweden and the United Kingdom on a series of new shared principles on 6G spectrum research and development.
Shared on Monday, the six principles are focused on securing global telecommunications infrastructure and will help inform relevant policy adoption. They include installing technology systems that protect national security; secure individual communications and privacy; work with industry partners to set inclusive international standards; cooperate to enable interoperability and innovation; ensure global connectivity is both affordable and sustainable; and manage spectrum allocations.
“We believe this to be an indispensable contribution towards building a more inclusive, sustainable, secure, and peaceful future for all, and call upon other governments, organizations, and stakeholders to join us in supporting and upholding these principles,” the press release reads.
Sixth generation — or 6G — spectrum is the planned step up from 5G that is currently under development in many nations to allow for greater data transmission at a faster rate across digital networks. As the foundation for modern communications, including the personalized and hyperconnected internet-of-things, telecommunications infrastructure and its security at a hardware and software level have become a geopolitical talking point.
The shared principles aim to foster an international agreement in how to develop and deploy more secure 6G technologies and architectures. This includes researching how more emergent systems — namely artificial intelligence, software-defined networking, and virtualization — can be leveraged for greater security and interoperability.
Finland and Sweden are home to telecom companies Nokia and Ericsson, respectively, which were listed as industry partners in research on 5G wireless communications prototyping by the Pentagon in 2020.
By contrast, China — home to telecom provider Huawei, whose systems have been prohibited by U.S. oversight agencies due to spyware and surveillance concerns — is notably absent from the list of nations joining the 6G principles.
“Collaboration and unity are key to resolving pressing challenges in the development of 6G, and we hereby declare our intention to adopt relevant policies to this end in our countries, to encourage the adoption of such policies in third countries, and to advance research and development and standardization of 6G network,” the release said.
Article link: https://www.nextgov.com/emerging-tech/2024/02/us-signs-international-principles-6g/394506/?
An Initial Assessment of Growing Risks
Published Feb 13, 2024
by Tobias Sytsma, James V. Marrone, Anton Shenk, Gabriel Leonard, Lydia Grek, Joshua Steier
- Related Topics:
- Artificial Intelligence,
- Banking and Finance Legislation,
- Cybersecurity,
- Social Media,
- United States
DOWNLOAD EBOOK FOR FREE
PDF file 0.4mb
Research Questions
- What are the emerging threats that the U.S. financial markets face, and what are the risks they pose?
- How might these evolving threats be detected, and what countermeasures might be taken to protect U.S. financial markets?
The resilience and stability of the U.S. financial system is critical to economic prosperity. However, the rapid pace of technological and geopolitical change introduce new potential threats that must be monitored and assessed. The authors of this report explore emerging and understudied threats to the financial system, focusing on risks from social media, advances in artificial intelligence, and the changing role of economic statecraft in geopolitics.
Drawing on historical examples, the economic literature, and discussions with subject-matter experts, the authors assess the potential costs and likelihood of four threats: attacks on financial trading models, bond dumping by foreign holders of U.S. debt, deepfakes used to spread misinformation, and memetic engineering used to manipulate beliefs and behaviors. Their analysis suggests these threats pose a limited near-term risk of significant economic damage because of the interconnectivity of global finance and existing safeguards. However, the gradual erosion of financial resilience and institutional trust over time could make attacks more impactful.
Key Findings
- Emerging threats to U.S. financial markets—such as attacks on AI-enabled financial models, bond dumping, deepfakes, and memetic engineering—pose a limited risk of significant economic damage because of the high costs of such attacks to adversaries and existing market safeguards.
- Risks may increase because of geopolitical tensions and advancing technological capabilities that alter adversaries’ cost–benefit calculations.
- The most significant threat is not an abrupt event, akin to a “financial 9/11,” but rather a slow and steady process, akin to “financial climate change.” This phenomenon could occur when disinformation or misinformation diminishes public trust in markets, consequently complicating the distinction between reality and fabrication and thereby escalating market volatility.
- Data privacy regulations could limit the threat posed by AI-augmented disinformation campaigns. Regulations would make it harder for malicious actors to collect detailed data that could be used to create and disseminate highly customized messages to influence individual behavior.
Recommendations
- Proactive risk management solutions could prevent losses. Advancing AI is likely to play a key role in determining whether an adversary can carry out a successful attack. Thus, policies that encourage the responsible development and use of AI technologies can act as important safeguards to financial stability.
- Apart from regulatory policy, economic policies that encourage competition in the AI foundation model market could also increase resilience in the financial sector. Reliance on third-party foundation models could create new sources of systemic risk in the financial sector. Encouraging competition in the market could expand the options available to financial institutions looking to incorporate AI into their operations.
- To address evolving threats, regular economic wargames that simulate and assess financial vulnerabilities should be implemented. These exercises would identify weaknesses and shape proactive countermeasures. Previous research has proposed an “Economic Joint Chiefs” framework, which could enhance these wargames by providing a dedicated structure and centralized expertise for their coordination and analysis.
- Bringing together stakeholders in finance, technology, geopolitics, and national security could result in a new understanding of how these threats might evolve over the next decade.
This research was conducted within the International Security and Defense Policy Program of the RAND National Security Research Division.
This report is part of the RAND research report series. RAND reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.
Article link: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA2533-1.html?
by The Dalai Lama with Rasmus Hougaard
February 20, 2019
Summary.
The Dalai Lama shares his observations on leadership and describes how our “strong focus on material development and accumulating wealth has led us to neglect our basic human need for kindness and care.” He offers leaders three recommendations. First, to be mindful: “When we’re under the sway of anger or attachment, we’re limited in our ability to take a full and realistic view of the situation.” Also, to be selfless: “Once you have a genuine sense of concern for others, there’s no room for cheating, bullying, or exploitation; instead you can be honest, truthful, and transparent in your conduct.” And finally, to be compassionate: “When the mind is compassionate, it is calm and we’re able to use our sense of reason practically, realistically, and with determination.”
Over the past nearly 60 years, I have engaged with many leaders of governments, companies, and other organizations, and I have observed how our societies have developed and changed. I am happy to share some of my observations in case others may benefit from what I have learned.
Leaders, whatever field they work in, have a strong impact on people’s lives and on how the world develops. We should remember that we are visitors on this planet. We are here for 90 or 100 years at the most. During this time, we should work to leave the world a better place.
What might a better world look like? I believe the answer is straightforward: A better world is one where people are happier. Why? Because all human beings want to be happy, and no one wants to suffer. Our desire for happiness is something we all have in common.
But today, the world seems to be facing an emotional crisis. Rates of stress, anxiety, and depression are higher than ever. The gap between rich and poor and between CEOs and employees is at a historic high. And the focus on turning a profit often overrules a commitment to people, the environment, or society.
I consider our tendency to see each other in terms of “us” and “them” as stemming from ignorance of our interdependence. As participants in the same global economy, we depend on each other, while changes in the climate and the global environment affect us all. What’s more, as human beings, we are physically, mentally, and emotionally the same.
Look at bees. They have no constitution, police, or moral training, but they work together in order to survive. Though they may occasionally squabble, the colony survives on the basis of cooperation. Human beings, on the other hand, have constitutions, complex legal systems, and police forces; we have remarkable intelligence and a great capacity for love and affection. Yet, despite our many extraordinary qualities, we seem less able to cooperate.
In organizations, people work closely together every day. But despite working together, many feel lonely and stressed. Even though we are social animals, there is a lack of responsibility toward each other. We need to ask ourselves what’s going wrong.
I believe that our strong focus on material development and accumulating wealth has led us to neglect our basic human need for kindness and care. Reinstating a commitment to the oneness of humanity and altruism toward our brothers and sisters is fundamental for societies and organizations and their individuals to thrive in the long run. Every one of us has a responsibility to make this happen.
What can leaders do?
Be mindful
Cultivate peace of mind. As human beings, we have a remarkable intelligence that allows us to analyze and plan for the future. We have language that enables us to communicate what we have understood to others. Since destructive emotions like anger and attachment cloud our ability to use our intelligence clearly, we need to tackle them.
Fear and anxiety easily give way to anger and violence. The opposite of fear is trust, which, related to warmheartedness, boosts our self-confidence. Compassion also reduces fear, reflecting as it does a concern for others’ well-being. This, not money and power, is what really attracts friends. When we’re under the sway of anger or attachment, we’re limited in our ability to take a full and realistic view of the situation. When the mind is compassionate, it is calm and we’re able to use our sense of reason practically, realistically, and with determination.
Be selfless
We are naturally driven by self-interest; it’s necessary to survive. But we need wise self-interest that is generous and cooperative, taking others’ interests into account. Cooperation comes from friendship, friendship comes from trust, and trust comes from kindheartedness. Once you have a genuine sense of concern for others, there’s no room for cheating, bullying, or exploitation; instead, you can be honest, truthful, and transparent in your conduct.
Be compassionate
The ultimate source of a happy life is warmheartedness. Even animals display some sense of compassion. When it comes to human beings, compassion can be combined with intelligence. Through the application of reason, compassion can be extended to all 7 billion human beings. Destructive emotions are related to ignorance, while compassion is a constructive emotion related to intelligence. Consequently, it can be taught and learned.
The source of a happy life is within us. Troublemakers in many parts of the world are often quite well-educated, so it is not just education that we need. What we need is to pay attention to inner values.
The distinction between violence and nonviolence lies less in the nature of a particular action and more in the motivation behind the action. Actions motivated by anger and greed tend to be violent, whereas those motivated by compassion and concern for others are generally peaceful. We won’t bring about peace in the world merely by praying for it; we have to take steps to tackle the violence and corruption that disrupt peace. We can’t expect change if we don’t take action.
Peace also means being undisturbed, free from danger. It relates to our mental attitude and whether we have a calm mind. What is crucial to realize is that, ultimately, peace of mind is within us; it requires that we develop a warm heart and use our intelligence. People often don’t realize that warmheartedness, compassion, and love are actually factors for our survival.
Buddhist tradition describes three styles of compassionate leadership: the trailblazer, who leads from the front, takes risks, and sets an example; the ferryman, who accompanies those in his care and shapes the ups and downs of the crossing; and the shepherd, who sees every one of his flock into safety before himself. Three styles, three approaches, but what they have in common is an all-encompassing concern for the welfare of those they lead.
The Dalai Lama is the spiritual leader of the Tibetan People. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989 and the U.S. Congressional Gold Medal in 2007. Rasmus Hougaard is the founder and managing director of Potential Project, a global leadership and organizational development firm, and the coauthor of the new book, The Mind of the Leader: How to Lead Yourself, Your People, and Your Organization for Extraordinary Results. He has created an app that will help you develop mindfulness, selflessness, and compassion in your leadership.
Article link: https://hbr.org/2019/02/the-dalai-lama-on-why-leaders-should-be-mindful-selfless-and-compassionate?
healthcarereimagined 