"How (...) we feel as Greeks"? Or Rather, "How We Feel About Greece..."

Peter Economides is the evangelist for re-branding Greece, i.e. Greeks, i.e. showing them for what they really are, as opposed to what others and they themselves think of themselves -- miserable, loser-minded and not surprisingly lacking in self-confidence. Let's hope that many join his bandwagon.

I admit that Peter is addictive and, having listened to him last W-E I looked him up. He is into people and so am I. And being addictive, he has no side effects, other than good ones, so I can say that Economides is good for you, especially if you're Greek.

At one point in one speech, speaking about self-realisation and how one communicates (works on "branding") and he says: "we have to describe /show, Who we are, where we come from, where are going, how we doing it, why..."

The unfortunate answers to a mostly silent majority of Greeks nowadays is "I don't know anymore, from Ancient Greece, I don't know, fortuitously, den variese (oh well, let's not bother...).

Economides points to Greeks who stand out because they shed the constraints of a miserable, depressive, attitude and acted.

These very successful Greeks that stand out because they have genius, resilince, they wanted to do things, and were not afraid to do them against all odds and demons...

The challenge is to rally the silent majority as well; get them out of the rut and into the sunlight -- of which there is much to have in Greece.

For very many years I have felt that a lot of Greece's misery hinges upon the misery of the Greeks and it comes as a great relief that a public figure such as Economides also makes this point.

I.e. the fundamental question is "How we feel, as Greeks"

I will answer that question as well I can through my experience.

First, a small story that may offer more than any of my own analyses and conclusions. There was a very popular and heated discussion -- subject-related heat, not controversy -- on huge special interest site (diy, music & audio) 7-8 years ago. It attracted responses by the minute, as usual, 24/7 and the attendance was impressive as well: industry designers and figureheads were following.
Two of the active posters in this discussion were Greek - apparently as their residence indicated and confirmed later. One young in his 20's, one in his early 60's. Some altercation took place between them, and one responded in scathing tones -- such that it created a lull in the discussion and one other contributor, from Norway and another from the US, both very senior, chipped in to placate what had become an personal affront. The US poster noted that it was just a discussion, an exchange of opinion and of objective info and we are all, at the end of day, friends here -- not only, but we share a common interest! The Norwegian went further: he posted something along the lines of ".. you are both from Greece, a prestigious and very important country, and this is a very international site, so in a way you are representing the country..."

The young poster's response was shocking and saddening and ultimately very revealing: "I have nothing to do with that country, it doesn't represent me, I don't want to have ties..."

The guy was 27 years old at the time, Greek.

I think he said what many Greeks think. And when they do, it is the Administration they think of, the politicians they think of and ultimately, the impression these people give to the outside world. And they say, that's not me!
They say, I am not a genius, not a self-starter, not crazy pioneer -- but, neither am I a thief, lazy, con man, hypocrite, etc. I too am entitled to a country where negativity, corruption, inefficiency... do not prevail!

They say, "as I see things, it is an insult for me to have a GREEK NATIONALITY for all that that represents; yes I am Greek, but I don't want to be linked to "Greece" the brand. I am Greek but not a citizen of Greece...

How can Greeks pull themselves out of this rut???

Re-branding The Political System -- and Politicians?

In a recent speech on Branding, Peter Economides, the branding guru, mentioned the need to "re-brand" Greece. During his speech, he also mentioned that there is a crisis in Greece, but the crisis it is not exclusively Greek -- but it is a global crisis.

It got me thinking.

{By the way, it was the first time I heard Economides speak on brands, branding, and re-branding. And re-branding a country, no less!


What if the crisis is because we are tired of the old, greying, brands many of us live in? Our political systems, our politicians, our democracies and pseudo-democracies...

Do we need to re-brand our political system or at least re-brand our political  procedures and processes?
What if people are no longer buying the "political brand" any more: the people and the processes and procedures?

Economides points out that "brand is what people think of you" or, simply put, your reputation. "Branding is the process of managing what people think of you".
Useful, easy to remember and nifty definitions: clear and to the point.


In terms of politicians, the brand erosion is not very surprising. Look at what we had and what we have now. Take Churchill, for example. Whatever you may think of Winston Churchill, no-one can really ignore him.
In other words, Churchill was a strong brand and he delivered. In fact, you can tell many things by just looking :

Churchill, left; Stalin, right; Roosevelt, middle.

Churchill's cigar was his logo. As was his drinking -- part of his branding, perhaps.

Now compare these guys with the mediocre, featherweight politicians of today -- I will not choose any, to each his or her own.

Or, how about bankers?

Compare and contrast, say, Giannini (Bank of America) with anyone current; how inventive is the current one?

Compare and contrast JP Morgan, or Warburg or Rothchild, or J Merrill with what we get today; think of Merrill's ten commandments. That was back in 1949..

Of course, there is one revolutionary concept in recent years: microcredit. prof Muhamad Yunus' Grameen Bank. That was revolutionary. It still is.

But for the rest: nondescript, unremarkable, indifferent -- and except for exceptionally high incomes, that is!

Meant to be a random "institution"

Methinks the brand has lost its luster; to paraphrase our friend Economides, maybe the political system, our fundamental institutions and related personalities, have lost their reputation -- i.e the brand was lost somewhere along the historical way.




So, on a more positive note, is our way out of the global crisis just a matter of reviewing and re-branding our political and financial institutions and their minions? 

Is it just a case of urgent rebranding?

Let's call Economides!

Health Tourism: The First International (Integration) Conference In Greece

A very interesting conference on Health Care (In Greece) took place On Saturday 22nd and Sunday 23rd Feb 2014. It was a very rewarding get together of very interesting people from Greece and abroad; the information presented and exchanged was refreshingly pertinent as well... the programme says it all.


The conference was conceived and largely organized by Heathcare Cybernetics' (hCc) CEO, Dr C Constantinides.
The implementation and operational support came from Zita Congress

Dinos Constantinides who, as his name does not indicate, is South African (his Greek language skills are perfect by the way) is the EMEA pioneer on this subject.

Not surprising that he succeeded in bringing together an impressive roster of speakers...

A few quick pointers, gleamed from this get-together:

Health tourism (HT) is a new business - or, should we say, it is only just been recognised as an Industry in and of itself. It is growing, but not vertiginously; Germany is the leader in Europe and grosses 0.9 bill from HT. Singapore is doing well grossing ~0.5bill.


Few countries are working seriously in branding themselves as Health Tourism (HT) destinations; nor surprisingly, countries that are known to offer medically advanced services are leading at the moment: Germany, Singapore.... But they are not alone -- as others are investing and catching up.

You have to brand your country in order to become a HT destination, slowly and after a gestation period.

Greece is, at present nowhere near discovering its own HT "personality", branding.
Interestingly enough, mythology has a God of medicine and, of course, Hippocrates was Greek...

In other words, one of the first centres of official practice of medicine in the world was in Greece!


Modern day Greek authorities know little (if anything) on the subject -- but there seems to be interest and, as often happens in the beginning, a lot of misinformation circulating official corridors and crowding ministers' in-trays.

Greece can offer technologically advanced medical infrastructure in the private sector, albeit in small numbers.

The level of medical practitioners in Greece is exceptionally & surprisingly advanced -- surprising given visibly and apparently low tech and mediocre level of services offered in the Public Sector.

Greek legislation is restrictive to the growth of HT at the moment - but there is hope in the future (e.g. day clinics are forbidden in Greece, etc)

The Tourism part of HT is advanced in Greece and Tourism studies are very good.

Recruiting in the HT sector is typically towards destinations abroad (both doctors, nurses and hospitality professionals).

My personal conclusion:
Very well focused and razor-edge communicated Boutique Operations stand the best chance of growing HT in Greece at the present time & the near future.



This was one very important conference; it also was very rewarding for those who attended. The presentations material is worth investigating!

Excellence: a trendy word, which retains a meaning after all. Thanks to a few inspired people...

Until a forward thinking partner from the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) came up with a way to turn the word into a trendy, hot biz-speak noun, and write 2-3 bestsellers upon it, the use of Excellence had been limited to academia and the occasional adverbial remark as in, "great, excellent!" followed by, "Thank you".

Excellent has gone a long way since then, showing its high potential by blooming into a concept: "excellence". Accordingly, "excellence" became the subject of many a (oft heated) discussion and monographs as well.

Throughout the times, excellence, loosely approached, has meant "better than very good". It's one step higher, as in, good, very good, excellent,. It becomes "exceptional". Very good is repeatable whereas excellent is the exception to very good: it is even better.The idea behind the word seen as a concept is, how about if this excellent were something to strive for, i.e. repeatable as a way of doing things rather than as a result of having done thing and achieved a certain result (better than "very good", as it were).

Accordingly and often nauseatingly, lots of server space has been wasted on writing and speculating about this - and much of this is best left where it is -- in well-deserved obscurity. However, every now and then a point of view appears that goes beyond stereotype to embody its own merit.

One such statement -- point of view, if you will -- on the concept that attracted my attention for its simplicity came from the CEO of Agna Group, Mr Vasil Naci (aka Vassilis Natsis): "Excellence is an attitude, a mindset, an action, a philosophy. It is an asipration..." This embodies, in fine, most of what most others have had to say on the subject. That is nice: rather than speculate and philosophize, Mr Naci actually writes what he believes and knows about it and, as these things are wont to be, it is short. Because, presumably, he knows well what he believes and he uses the word to exemplify his belief. We appreciated this. We also appreciated the fact that this is not the standard stereotypical CEO pronunciamento, the boss pontificating to the minions accompanied by appropriate fanfare: it is just a sentence and a half contained in a limited circulation booklet edited by the Agna Group's own Leadership Academy and intended, presumably, for internal consumption.

I would beg to agree as well as differ slightly from the (undoubtedly inspirational and inspired) Mr Naci.

I would say that "excellence" is, indeed, an attitude or a day-in day-out way of doing things; but the way I would put it is, "constant improvement for its own sake".
In this sense, excellence presupposes a personal life-philosophy of believing in what you do well, for its own sake -- i.e. not expecting recognition and praise from any other than yourself.

It is difficult to be alone, though, is it not?

Maybe not, because loneliness is a state of the mind; as a friend once told me, "when you are alone you are with together with everyone, when you are with one person, you are only with that person..." (Margarita Xanthakou, anthropologist )

Public Image Under Public Scrutiny -- How Critical (Is the Scrutiny?)

Is the answer: it depends on the Public? Or maybe, how trusting is the Public in question without falling into conspiracy theory territory?

Mr Jack Martin, CEO of Hill & Knowlton Strategies, a communications & PR company, asserts that the Public has definitively established itself as a pivotal parametre in corporate or political success -- specifically, the trust of the public. 

The idea is that the internet has brought information (as well as misinformation) to the home, immediately, and raw - unedited by the subject of this information, that is. And leaders can count of 24x7 media scrutiny. Thus being the case says Jack Martin, you have to be straightforward and transparent; communicate directly rather than through an intermediary. And this is a good thing.

I would agree, wholeheartedly. I would also agree that gaining and maintaining the trust of the Public is primordial, and that it is a good thing...

Only, the public is still (?) very partisan; could it be that building and maintaining trust can be manipulated just as efficiently today as,say, in the '30s when Dr Goebbels effectively invented and launched grand scale media advertising and political PR campaigning?

I think it can: after all, the global reach of information and the access to global information today does not mean that the media channels cannot do their own editing. They do.
National TV is still very influential, not only in countries where I-Net home penetration is low and, don't forget, few people check their news online from independent sources. For that matter, how dependable are independent sources, anyway?

In the '30s, the centre of the world was the square where Hitler was scheduled to appear in midst of music, fanfares, and the like. My father had some experience of this and it was, in his words, fascinatingly done - people were in a trance.

I don't think that things are much different today, despite the internet...

There is, however, one major difference between now and then: misinformation. It is slowly dying -- as we know it from Hitler to present day politicians.

Why? Because anyone can check on line the veracity of any purported fact reported or claimed by any speaker!

Misinformation is the trade mark and favoured bait for Public consumption, used by politicians and
authoritarian regimes. It would seem that they will have to find a new method -- or block access to the internet, or certain sites on the Net.

Not a moment too soon!