The danger of the Popular Vote
Over the past month, I have explained the US Election process to countless friends, and how the Winner is chosen not based on ‘Popular’ votes, but on a system which weights share of vote by state, based on its share of population (because ultimately this is what drives the number of congressional districts in a state, which in turn decides the number of Electoral Votes a state receives, out of a 538 pot). Not surprisingly, friends have trouble understanding the process since the President represents the People, and the People have a Popular Vote, which represents them as a Population. I have to be honest, the US route to choosing a President does seem overly complex.
But, it did get me thinking. There is of course a third option, which is to assign share of vote based on the influence a state has to decide the ‘fortunes’ of the US (how that ‘influence’ is identified is open to discussion).
When decisions are made in business, about where to put your marketing effort or investment, do you go the way of the loudest voice with the highest visibility (aka your ‘Popular’ vote), or do you select the segment of worth (aka your ‘influence’)? Your marketing strategy will vary greatly depending on which one you choose - and so might the money you make.
It all depends on your goal. If you want to win friends, the easiest choice is often the most obvious one. In practice, this means following the traffic, and taking note of what is trending. However, if you want to be truly effective, perhaps you need to identify the consumers who are worth more, follow their journeys and prioritise their needs above others. After all, one quiet person in your segment of worth could be equal to 100 people with a loud voice. Only a business fool would not choose to put their time and effort on the consumers with the highest return with the only exception being where the highest return is not aligned to a path of integrity, diversity and values.
The idea that a country makes a choice based on ‘area worth’ is highly controversial, as by default it will make some people matter more than others based simply on the postcode they manage to settle in. The influential will get richer still, not in money, but in share of voice, making way for a new type of ‘postcode vote wooing’. Clearly, this is not the right way for an equal and fair society. But what happens when all those in the society will enjoy a greater standard of living if the influential win?
The good news is that according to Harvard Business Review “a country is not a corporation”, and good economic policy is not the same as great business logic. So, a Business Executive could actually be our worst choice for President. In which case, thank god we just got rid of him.
*All views my own*
Sources:
