The major business schools are teaching entrepreneurship as a staple of contemporary business education. Some may question if entrepreneurship can be taught, the initial idea might not be able to be taught; that is inspiration, but the process to develop the idea is what is important.

It is argued plenty of young people naturally possess a natural entrepreneurial spirit; many have great ideas, but what they don’t possess is the technical skills to design a new product, process or service, build a business plan to finance and market their idea. In short, the idea is the easy part – making an idea commercially viable is the challenge and that is where networks count.

A number of major entrepreneurial business were founded on shoe-string budgets. These high profile businesses began in garages and dorm rooms from Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak founding Apple Inc in Steve Jobs parent’s garage in 1976 to Bill Gates and Paul Allen started Microsoft in 1975 only a year earlier.

Eric Schmidt and Sergey Brin, both PhD students at Stanford University began Google as a research project in 1995; Mark Zuckerburg and Eduardo Saverin began Facebook in Harvard dorm rooms in 2004, but entrepreneurship is not limited to tech start-ups but these businesses are the most conspicuous in the new economy.

Business schools are creating venture labs where projects are developed and budding entrepreneurs are mentored by academic staff and input is provided peers. Industry experts may be brought in to provide technical advice and support; presentations made to angel investors, venture capitalists, bankers or grants officers to finance new ideas.

Business schools are positioned at the forefront of entrepreneurship; I fully believe entrepreneurship should be taught and supported at business schools bringing great ideas to fruition. People have great business ideas but so many start-up businesses fail in the first two years, it is great to see viable business ideas expand and offer employment opportunities to the population.

I love writing blog posts, but this is a means to an end. I first became interested in blogging reading newsprint such as The New York Times and The Washington Post. In the op-ed I would see this particular writer could be found on this blog and so on.

I would love to engage in more creative writing and I am willing to take some training and read text on strategies and styles. Wordsmithing is interesting and challenging, creative writing is appealing, creating a story from personal experiences and stories recited from contemporaries. I see some bachelor of arts courses are offering creative writing options, this is really interesting to me.

Now I need to just find the time, make the effort and find an online course that meets my needs, alternately, I would also love to attend a class so I can create a personal style, interact with students, read and critique their work. Maybe I will start with some short creative writing classes and move to something more significant in the future.

What a great place Marina Bay is, located between the financial district, Boat Quay and the Marina Bay Sands on the opposing bank, Marina Bay is central to the heart of the Singapore CBD and a great place to hang day or night.

Gardens by the Bay sits just behind the Marina Bay Sands and the upmarket shopping complex attached to the hotel, the air-conditioning provides a welcome relief from the tropical humidity, it’s good to allow the air-conditioning to blow some sweat off. During the day there was plenty going on, yachts were sailing around the widest section of the waterway. Although the bay is a little small for any meaningful racing, the bay acts as a great viewing platform.

The Merlion sitting at the mouth of the Singapore River is the photo opportunity all visitors seek to be captured as part of this iconic scene. On the banks of the Singapore River are Boat Quay and a little further up is Clarke Quay. The entertainment precincts are almost deserted during the day but come alive during the evening. With the famed Singaporean law and order, you have no concerns regarding safety in regards to robbery, assault or violence. When I’m in Singapore, I’m happy to head out to Marina Bay for the day, this is a great place to hang.

My career went backwards once we, a state government organisation (who remains nameless) were investigated by the CCC, that is the Corruption and Crime Commission for misconduct.

Now I don’t know the results of the investigation or the recommended course of action, only the person who made the report is notified. Nonetheless, I was the one who made the discovery and began looking into this and notified my work colleagues. After we put our heads together and worked out what was going on, all hell erupted as they were losing overtime payments whilst others who had not done the overtime were paid handsomely. A collaborative approach to leadership and problem-solving is considered textbook after all.

I made sure I informed everyone on an individual basis as to what was occurring and invited them to actually read the full timetable so they could see for themselves what was occurring. As a collective group, we have both a diverse range of views and high intelligence – one would argue higher than those calling the shots.People were both shocked and angered, the details were right in front of them, they just needed to be shown the details. This groundswell grew and a meeting was called where I believe it got very heated, I heard about it the next day but it solved nothing.

I didn’t attend this meeting as I knew this would result in nothing, there would be no changes and they would roll merrily along as they had been doing previously. From this meeting I believe began the genesis of the anonymous CCC report, someone wasn’t happy about what they had just learnt and sought to do something about it – that’s not difficult to deduct.

I don’t know the exact details or when the report was made, I tend to believe it occurred not long after this meeting once the details had become known to all. Ok, so this doesn’t implicate me at all, in fact, whilst it doesn’t exonerate me, it certainly brings into doubt their claims that I was the one who made the report.

So I was dragged into the office for bullying, threatening and abusive type behavior – I was yelled at, threatened and abused. This was later denied, but if it didn’t occur one has to ask, how do I, a person held deliberately out of the loop know about this actual report? So whilst I have lost all opportunity for advancement at my current employer, I know I could at least keep them under pressure and keep them accountable. I have frequently asked these people to “show me your proof” and I am yet to receive a satisfactory answer.

The now legendary German luxury fashion and style empire was founded by Hugo Ferdinand Boss at Metzingen near Stuttgart in 1924. His first business failed in 1931 due to the crushing economic conditions imposed on Germany following the loss of the first world war. After settling debts with creditors, Hugo was left with six sewing machines finding success after joining the Nazi party. Hugo was appointed official supplier of uniforms to the SA and SS guards of Nazi Germany.

Although Hugo was heavily fined for his Nazi party support in the World War II aftermath; his company survived transitioning into a suit making business. Hugo died in 1948 before being unable to realise the vision of the fashion business he created in the post war era. In the aftermath of the destruction of the second world war, the male fashion industry was rejuvenated with Hugo Boss leading the charge.

The 1960’s and 1970’s saw Hugo Boss suits setting the benchmark for style and quality. The Hugo Boss brand was transformed into an international fashion powerhouse taking a focused leadership position in men’s clothing, fragrances, footwear and accessories. The Hugo Boss brand of today maintains its leadership position dominating high end retailing built on the foundations of style and quality.

Living in Perth, we grow up around the beach and although I am no expert on the surf lifestyle we have an issue with people getting caught in rips and I guess I have an obligation to warn beach goers on the dangers of getting caught in rips.

Waves hit the beach with a large water deposited on the shore, that water has to go somewhere and the is back out to the ocean. That water rushing back out carves channels into the sand creating a path for the water to flow. The channel is relatively deeper water than the rest of the shore where the waves generally don’t break in that area. When you are looking you will see a flow of water back out, this may be darker in colour, may be turbulent and may have weed or other contaminants flowing back out to sea.

So what do you do if you are caught in a rip? Well, firstly you don’t try to swim against the rip as this will cause fatigue and severe risk of drowning. I would recommend floating with the surf, sure you get dragged out to sea but if you conserve energy then you will move out of the area and can allow the waves to hopefully push you back to shore. You can’t swim against a rip, no one can so you are really left with little choice except to maintain buoyancy until you are dragged out of the channel and then work out what to do after that.

I am viewing with much interest the trade war being fought between the United States and China. I can’t say I’m a huge fan of Donald Trump, neither can I say I hate him either. Sure his mannerism annoy me, but that is my problem and I can easily block that out.

What I am interested in is policy and I get the feeling Dr Peter Navarro is advising the Trump administration on China policy and more specifically the trade war based I what I have he has published regarding China policy. What we do know is China has been a destination for Western economies to set up manufacturing facilities for some time now.

We also know that China required international firms to partner with Chinese firms to manufacture goods, there is ample evidence that Chinese firms are exploiting this requirement and stealing intellectual property and processes. The cost of doing business in China is increasing along with the risks. CEOs and Boards received massive personal remuneration benefits to move manufacturing production to China but workers were disadvantaged.

The cheap wages in China created, or distorted depending on your views, a cost effective manufacturing regime – especially at the lower value item spectrum. Manufacturing costs are now rising and CEOs are looking to new low-cost countries to set up manufacturing facilities. Certainly low value manufacturing had distinct advantages in the low cost environment of Chinese manufacturing production. Supply chains had already been established in China, a low cost workforce existed and not a great deal of training was required.

The US tariff policy is designed to drive up the price of Chinese manufactured goods at a time as wages and costs are rising internally in China. We know that China is an export based economy, it is not a consumer economy so Chinese manufactured goods are vulnerable to an economic slowdown, the tariff policy is designed to target demand not supply. The purpose is to improve the trade balance between the United States and China, it is actually in China’s best interest to negotiate as they will be the losers here. The pressure to transfer technology must also be addressed during these negotiations, this is an important objective.

Dr Peter Navarro has been discussing these issues for a long time now in his macro-economic classes and books, this is his prime opportunity to re-balance the equation. His aim I’m guessing is not to annihilate Chinese manufacturing but to use tariffs to force Chinese leadership to compromise or suffer massive losses when their currency is already stretched. The next question is, will the US federal government follow the advice of this well respected economist.

I have my Facebook newsfeed set up with news stories from around the world with sites including the BBC, Al Jazeera, The New York Times, The Straits Times, The Australian, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Jakarta Post, Bangkok Post and Reuters just to name a few.

What I have learned is firstly never read the comments sections on these reputable news sites as they are inundated by morons. Then secondly, if you are stupid enough to read the comments section, under no circumstances make a comment as you will be a target for these horrible trolls whose sole purpose in life is to attack other people through the anonymity of their fake profiles.

I have heeded neither of these principles and time and time again I feel I have lost a little brain power after reading some of these people’s comments. Sure I tell myself I am researching people’s views to assist me with blog posts, I like to try to view all aspects of an argument. However, the volume of crackpot opinions borders on the unbelievable.

However, after reading the vast majority of the comments sections, I feel the education system has let these people down. Surely these people are not serious, then they attack each other with abuse and bullying behaviour. I stupidly stumble into these comments section and let myself down by firstly commenting and secondly replying to their pathetic responses – no more of this.

I kept my intentions pretty quiet, I made sure nobody was aware of my career plans, I hadn’t resigned yet but I had informed my manager in confidence of my intentions to seek alternative employment opportunities.

My intention was clear, I wanted to complete my obligations with my current employer before moving on to my next challenge. I didn’t want anyone to know, this had become a toxic work environment with so much infighting, backstabbing and undermining that I wanted to just complete my obligations without any further drama and leave without fanfare.

Our team leader had retired and I thought it was fitting that I go at about the same time. This was a good time to be leaving, I had no energy for the job now, no enthusiasm and no patience for fools – I wanted out. This was the right time, I knew it and so did many others.

I had already packed up my desk and private possessions I had collected over my 13 years of employment. I hadn’t told anyone, maybe they thought packing up my desk was an end of year clean up as I hadn’t let anyone know on this final week of the year as I really didn’t want to explain the whole situation to everyone.

I will have to return for a week or so just after the Christmas break but I can’t see me working more than 2 weeks. I have 3 weeks paid leave planned starting mid December, my desk has been cleared so I don’t have to return if the need arises. I just wanted to hand over programs I had been running but I don’t even need that as it isn’t my problem anymore.

My final day of 2018 disgusted me, the total lack of respect shown to the two longest serving members of the staff was unbelievable. I really don’t want to work at a place that treats their staff so poorly, the leadership vacuum that has infiltrated this workplace has allowed a toxic work environment to prosper.

Leadership is all about influence; however, this is not the type of influence I want to associate myself with. I am glad I am out of there and I feel a just pure sense of relief, this is such a good time to build new employment opportunities, networks and I can work in an environment free from this form of behaviour.

As an insider looking in, the whole Brexit debate is astonishing, a referendum was held some time ago now and the people voted – what really is the issue? This has been a long running drama, how long has it taken and why is it even being contested?

Apparently now a segment of the population are unhappy with the vote and calling for another referendum. What happens if the result is the same? Call more referendums until you get the actual vote you really want? If the vote is closer, will there be discussion that public sediment is changing so a third referendum is required after the non-exit lobby undertakes further discussion and advertising?

Will leaving the EU give the United Kingdom more autonomy? I suspect so – from my discussions with people and I am aware this is a generalisation; it would appear the younger generation want to stay and the older generation want out. The EU is holding out, they are playing winner take all at the moment.

I can see that because the EU wants to make it unpalatable for further sovereign nations to exit the EU, they are trying to build the United States of Europe but they are dealing with independent countries with a long history who don\’t want to hand control of their country to a central government. No country wants to lose their national identity and the richer more efficient countries don\’t want to subsidise the poorer inefficient countries – I can see that.

The EU wants to erect barriers to prevent further nations from exiting, this however creates an atmosphere of distrust and a lack of respect for EU processes and membership. Just recently we saw the issues with Greece, then Portugal and also Ireland who wanted out after their debt crisis. The EU may have bailed these countries out but their residents ask at what cost?