The words Country and Company both begin and end with the same letters, but they are built on different principles, exist for different reasons, and require different kinds of people to lead them. I believe a short debate, especially on the day of 1st 2012 presidential debate, might trigger some thoughts for the readers to ponder over, and help decide who we want to elect on Nov 6 as our next President.

A Country has domiciles or residents, whereas, a Company has employees. A Country’s core responsibility is to provide a safe, prosperous, and vibrant place for its residents to build their dreams/families, whereas, a Company’s responsibility is to develop competitive products and services and earn a profit while still ensuring the safety and growth of its employees.

People and their well-being come before everything else in a Country, whereas, revenue with a profit comes before anything else in a Company. If the Country is not doing well especially during tough economic times, the leader of a Country can never consider sending some of its people off to a different place. Whereas in a Company, if the revenues and profits are not coming in as expected, it is very common that employees (people) are let go. The people who were let go are still part of the Country, and remain the responsibility of its leader. Another interesting difference is that in a Country people are expected to pay in so many different ways (e.g. taxes) to live safely and build their dreams, whereas in a Company, they are expected to work to get paid.

A Country’s leader, just by the sheer responsibility for all its people, must always lead with the heart and act with the head. A Company’s leader, by the sheer responsibility to earn a profit, must always lead with the head but act with the heart.

I am sure you all agree with me that the United States of America is definitely a Country that stands for-liberty and for-justice, and not a Company that stands for-profit. So, who is the leader we want to elect on Nov 6:

- Who can lead with the heart while still making intelligent decisions with the head;

- Who can look at all the people as an asset, and not a liability;

- Who can take responsibility and care for all 100% of the people, and not just those who make a profit.

Thoughts?

Perhaps, have this at the back of your mind when you watch the debate tonight. Thank you for reading this far.

I think you make several great points, and I will keep this in mind as I watch the debates.

You also remind me that although they have many characteristics in common, for-profit organizations are different from non-profit organizations.

We should not treat every organization the same way!

 Great point, Adam. Glad the elections are behind us and all of us now have to work together to accelerate America's path to prosperity of the 1990s. Here is a quote from Navi Radjou from a HBR blog he wrote about our company's vision - "...Is demography destiny? I used to believe so. But these days, I think that depends on how a country leverages its human capital. Merely boasting a big population doesn't confer superpower status to a nation. The quality of its human capital must match its quantity." Click here to read the full article: http://bit.ly/mentorcloud1

Ravi, I really like that.

The quality of our human capital matters as much as quantity.

I wonder how that can be actionable.