After yesterday's firing ... er, "demotion" of Mark Penn, CEO of Burson-Marsteller and Hillary Clinton's chief campaign strategist (and, keynote speaker at next week's SCIP conference in San Diego), by the Clinton campaign, I thought it'd be fun to think over the lessons each of these figures offers us in business.

Mr. Penn finally succumbed for helping out with passage of a Colombian trade deal that threatened Clinton's credibility among blue collar voters in Rust Belt states like Pennsylvania (no pun intended). While this latest news makes his appearance next week at SCIP a somewhat juicier draw than it might otherwise have been without it, the subject of microtrends is something we all need to rethink. I also believe the stronger of the two microtrends so far - the Obama phenomenon - is more interesting than Clinton's equally historic run at the highest office in the land.

First, the New York Times offers some quick perspective on what Penn did right, wrong and otherwise that got him in hot water with, not only Hillary's campaign, but the Colombians as well:

The Colombian government hired the Burson-Marsteller firm last year under a $300,000 one-year contract to help secure passage of a bilateral trade treaty with the United States. Mrs. Clinton, like many Democrats, has opposed the deal, saying it is unfavorable to American workers. On Saturday, the Colombian government fired Mr. Penn’s firm, saying his efforts to distance himself from them were an insult.

There has been a long history of resentment toward Mr. Penn within the Clinton campaign because of the feeling that he was letting his business interests trump the interests of the campaign. People from the beginning have questioned why he had not recused himself from his role at Burson-Marsteller.

Although the end of the primary season is drawing near, campaign aides said Mr. Penn’s demotion would change the internal dynamics of the Clinton camp, with a more collegial atmosphere replacing the first-among-equals structure Mr. Penn created around himself.

Mr. Penn worked his way into the Clintons’ favor during President Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign. He provided the polling used by Dick Morris, then an influential adviser to Mr. Clinton, to create Mr. Clinton’s small-bore campaign strategy, much of it aimed at wooing so-called soccer moms with positions like support for school uniforms and for the V-chip to monitor violence on television.

When Mr. Morris had to quit in 1996 because of his association with a call girl, Mr. Clinton’s campaign went on “seamlessly,” Mrs. Clinton wrote in her memoir, “because Mark Penn continued to offer the thoughtful research and analysis.” He remained for the second Clinton term and through Mr. Clinton’s impeachment trial, demonstrating, among other things, one of the virtues that the Clintons prized most: loyalty.

In 2000, Mr. Clinton’s vice president, Al Gore, initially considered hiring Mr. Penn for his presidential campaign, but he decided Mr. Penn was too devoted to the Clintons to offer him objective advice. Mrs. Clinton, who described him in her memoir as brilliant and intense, shrewd and insightful, hired him for her first run at the Senate.

Mr. Penn and his business partner, Doug Schoen, began their polling firm in 1977 when they worked for Edward I. Koch’s campaign for mayor of New York. They went on to become deeply involved in campaigns for politicians in other countries, including Menachem Begin in Israel in 1981. He also advised David N. Dinkins in 1989 in his successful New York mayoral race over Rudolph W. Giuliani.

Mr. Penn advocated that Democrats did best when they campaigned from the center, although this did not always sit well with others in the party. His clients have included the Democratic Leadership Council and Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, defeated in his Democratic primary and now an independent.

Mr. Penn described his philosophy in his book, “Microtrends,” published last year. Because of “niching,” he wrote, “there is no one America anymore” but “hundreds of Americas.” His extensive polling led him to believe that “Americans overwhelmingly favor small, reasonable ideas over big, grandiose schemes.”

Well I have a microtrend for you - the fact that, on the 40th anniversary of the assassination of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. a black man stands at the gates of the Whitehouse! That's kind of a big deal, don't you think? Maybe it's more "megatrend" than "microtrend" but you get the picture.

Barack Obama has good reason to present us with an opportunity to analyze his success using tools from the business world. Indeed, my good friend Bill Warren's quote of the day today reminded me that Fast Company Magazine just ran a cover story on him all about the way to create a brand in this day and age:

"Whatever you do, don't hurt Barack!" It was the afternoon of Super Tuesday, and the Chicago sky threatened snow. Senator Barack Obama had just returned to his hometown as voters in 22 states were making history by choosing between a black man and a white woman to be the Democratic nominee for president. The road-weary candidate put off calling fund-raisers or leading one last rally. Instead, he headed over to a downtown gym to play basketball with his nephew, his brother-in-law, and a few buddies. He needed to take a few minutes to chill out, and hoops was his therapy.

Among those on the court would be his old friend -- and major contributor -- John W. Rogers Jr. Rogers is the founder and chairman of Ariel Capital, an investment firm with some $13 billion in assets under management. He is a neighbor of Obama's in Hyde Park and has traded elbows with him on the hardwood dozens of times. But as Rogers left for the gym, he was accosted at the door by his colleague, Ariel president Mellody Hobson. A friend of Obama and his wife, Michelle, Hobson knew that Rogers, usually a shy sort, could be aggressive on the court. So she implored him to go easy on the senator: "He can't look all beat up!" It wouldn't be good if the candidate showed up on TV later that evening with a black eye.

Hobson had no need to worry, and not because Rogers held back. As Obama has been known to joke before he hits the boards -- or the podium -- "Relax, I've got game. I've got plenty of game." Super Tuesday proved him right: On the court, his team won two of three contests, and he walked off without a scratch. At the polls, he took 13 states to Hillary Clinton's 9, generating momentum that would build from the Potomac to the Pacific and, in some eyes, make him the Democratic front-runner.

The fact that Obama has taken what we thought we knew about politics and turned it into a different game for a different generation is no longer news. What has hardly been examined is the degree to which his success indicates a seismic shift on the business horizon as well. Politics, after all, is about marketing -- about projecting and selling an image, stoking aspirations, moving people to identify, evangelize, and consume. The promotion of the brand called Obama is a case study of where the American marketplace -- and, potentially, the global one -- is moving. His openness to the way consumers today communicate with one another, his recognition of their desire for authentic "products," and his understanding of the need for a new global image -- all are valuable signals for marketers everywhere.

"Barack Obama is three things you want in a brand," says Keith Reinhard, chairman emeritus of DDB Worldwide. "New, different, and attractive. That's as good as it gets." Obama has his greatest strength among the young, roughly 18 to 29 years old, that advertisers covet, the cohort known as millennials -- who will outnumber the baby boomers by 2010. They are black, white, yellow, and various shades of brown, but what they share -- new media, online social networks, a distaste for top-down sales pitches -- connects them more than traditional barriers, such as ethnicity, divide them.

That last paragraph was Bill's quote... Anyhow, at the end of the Fast Company article, the author turns to thoughts on how Obama could help "Brand U.S.A." as well:

BRAND AMERICA

Should Obama become president, his leadership style -- not to mention his brown skin and African name -- could give a new face to the image America telegraphs to the rest of the world. "It's already made a difference that a minority could rise this far through the democratic process," asserts Harvard's Quelch.

That brand U.S.A. has suffered in recent years is indisputable. According to the Pew Charitable Trust Global Attitudes Survey, updated in the spring of 2007, the country's favorable ratings have declined over the past five years in 26 of 33 countries -- including most of our European allies -- and are particularly negative in the Middle East. A BBC International poll from 2007 is even more dismaying: A survey of 26,000 people in 25 countries shows that three out of four disapprove of how the United States is dealing with Iraq, Guantanamo, global warming, Iran, and North Korea.

"It's a constant discussion point in international business," says Keith Reinhard, whose DDB Worldwide has offices in 99 countries and has been the steward of such premier global brands as Hasbro and Anheuser-Busch. "We're seen as culturally insensitive on a personal level, and on a corporate brand level," he says. Determined to do something about it, Reinhard dipped into his own pocket in 2002 and started Business for Diplomatic Action, a coalition of marketing, political science, and media professionals aimed at improving the standing of America in the world through business outreach. (He has scaled back his work at DDB to work for the coalition full time.) After commissioning research and testifying before Congress, Reinhard can distill his advice to brands to one word: Listen. "Everywhere I go, from CEOs to people on the street, I hear the same thing," Reinhard told me as he rushed between conferences in Frankfurt, Germany, and Doha, Qatar. "The U.S. needs to listen to the world."

This is precisely the strategy that Obama professes in international relations: to engage, even with countries that have been viewed as America's enemies -- in much the same way that businesses from McDonald's to ExxonMobil often find themselves engaging in places where regimes are not necessarily to their liking. Obama's strategy is not one that all geopolitical experts agree with, but it is consistent with how American business has conducted itself. It is also consistent with his criticism at home of what he terms "a politics that says it's okay to demonize your political opponents when we should be coming together to solve problems."

Obama's candidacy and its call for change may already be resonating in countries that have lamented U.S. policy but still want to believe in the promise of American leadership. "That Obama exists has already begun to recalibrate the way the world sees us," Reinhard contends. "This is a good thing."

"LOOKING FOR A CHANGE"

Sitting at the bar in the Chicago Hyatt on Super Tuesday, I scarfed a burger before rejoining the Obama press circus. My 24-year-old waiter seemed bored by the chaos, but took some time to admire my iPhone and chat. He'd known only a Clinton or Bush in the White House, he said. "I'm sort of looking for a change." Then he caught sight of Obama on CNN over my shoulder, tossed his dreadlocks, and smiled. "But that guy," he patted his chest, "he makes me believe."

Barack Obama may not win his party's nomination. And even if he is nominated, he may lose at the polls. If that happens, pundits will be quick to point out strategic or tactical missteps, and some will say America just isn't ready to elect a black man as president. Such a pat analysis is to be expected. But there is no question that the brand of Obama -- what he represents to the next generation of Americans -- is important. A business that ignores this message does so at its own peril.

As a frustrated Republican (there are a lot of us these days) more than a little disappointed with the Bush administration's disastrous run and tragic legacy, I think you'll find Obama appeals to us far more than either Clinton or McCain ever can. It got me thinking about whether there is a way to anticipate how these kinds of situations would play out with different types of voters more reliably.

Which reminds me, this coming Wednesday April 9th beginning at 1:00 PM Eastern / 10:00 AM Pacific, Aurora WDC will have as our guest Dr. Niall Fraser, chief scientist at Open Options Corporation, to discuss "Using Game Theory to Predict Competitive Behavior", in a 75-minute webinar hosted by Derek Johnson, Aurora's director of research and chief operating officer.

Click this link to register now, as seating is limited.
https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/751047505

While I was reading up on Game Theory I started thinking about the road to the Whitehouse by the three leading contenders still in the race - Senators Clinton, McCain and Obama. Then, I came across a short but intriguing essay on the Open Options site thinking about how Obama should position himself for maximum effect and best attainable outcome from a game theory standpoint - here's an excerpt:

The analysis showed that if players followed their direct interests, the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the Super-delegates, and John Edwards would not favor either Clinton or Obama early. Furthermore, Hillary Clinton would likely not increase her negative messaging against Barack Obama out of fear of offending the DNC and Super-delegates until her prospects were particularly precarious. On the Republican side, Sen. Obama will have to deal with John McCain aggressively seeking ownership of key Democratic issues.

The Open Options process also revealed the DNC as the player with the most effective power in the issue. Surprisingly, DNC is a hidden opponent to Sen. Obama because the DNC simply want a clear winner in the nomination race. In fact, there is a danger outcome that could potentially spell disaster for Obama. This outcome may be brought about by the strong desire of the DNC to unite the party against the Republicans by firming up the Presidential nomination early. The DNC has the option to pressure either candidate but the model demonstrated that this would be an ineffective measure against Sen. Clinton. Given his young age, however, Obama may be deemed to be less determined to fight until the bitter end. Therefore, the DNC may pressure Obama to withdraw if they see a crack in his resolve to remain in the race. What makes this even more dangerous for Sen. Obama is the fact that the DNC’s actions may cause the previously uncommitted players, the Super-delegates and John Edwards, to follow the DNC’s lead.

After identifying these potential outcomes, the Open Options process shows how Sen. Obama can improve his situation through clever maneuvering and by taking advantage of some key relationships. The report gave four key recommendations to Obama:

Act firmly – To avoid DNC pressure, it is crucial that Obama shows no weakness in his resolve to stay in the nomination race.

Show dignity – Even if Sen. Clinton increases her negative messaging, Obama should not respond directly but emphasize his message of unity and hope.

Seek alliances – The analysis revealed that Edwards is an uncommitted player who urgently wants to make a decision. Either candidate could potentially secure his endorsement by aligning with some of his key issues.

Support spiritual values – The game-theoretical tools also exposed how Obama could profit from McCain’s strained relationship with the Evangelical voters; in particular, if Obama embraces some of the Evangelical values, he can lead McCain to abandon his pursuit of key Democratic issues and even influence McCain’s choice of running mate.

A unique feature of the Open Options process is the way that the recommendations and predictions are clearly tied to the inputs gathered from the client. Even though the game-theoretical tools make calculations that are inaccessible to the human mind – in this case analyzing 8,388,608 outcomes – the results are made transparent. Through a combination of observation slides and tactics charts, insights are gained that directly support the predicted outcomes and recommendations.

Try to join us Wednesday if you'd like to ask Dr. Fraser directly about this phenomenon - seating is limited so register today.

Meanwhile, let's hope Obama continues to articulate his leadership through to the convention, because he represents the first credible cross-over leader since Ronald Reagan brought "Reagan Democrats" into the fold in the early 1980s. And if I can help usher in a new era of bipartisanship as one of the "Obama Republicans", so be it; given a choice between Hillary Clinton and John McCain, I might just stay home this November... and that's one scenario that may be what both of Obama's opposing campaigns are hoping the rest of us do as well.

Finally, please join us next week in San Diego and you can ask Mr. Penn yourself what he thinks of all this, as well as, Dr. Fraser and all of us from Aurora. Hope to see you there.

We're in booth #311 and we'll be blogging as much of the meeting as we can on the CI network at Ning that went up a couple of weeks ago, so if you're going to be there as well, be sure to sign on and join in the fun of covering a meeting like SCIP 2008 together.