Siam News Network

Use these nine techniques to account for how your customer’s brain could be wired, and seal the deal. Since you’re a reader of Inc., I think it’s safe to assume that you and I have something in common: We both need to sell. You probably have your favorite sales techniques, and heaven knows there are hundreds of books on selling, but in my experience most entrepreneurs overlook one crucial aspect of selling: the way your customers’ brains are built. You will naturally get along with people who are like you. But that leaves out 75 percent of other people—and the worst thing you can do while selling is to approach someone the wrong way. The more you study people, the more adept you will become at identifying the ways they think and behave. When you make the effort to see the world through the eyes of others, you will know how to engage their interests and how to help them achieve their ultimate goals. But here are nine ways to use your brain—and your buyers’—to make a deal. 1. Determine right away whether you are talking to “right-brained” or “left-brained” individuals. They require very different approaches. You notice a Nerf basketball hoop, a scribbled whiteboard, and an abstract painting, you know this person is “right-brained.” If instead you notice a place for everything, an organized bookshelf, and technical equipment, you are mostly likely talking to someone “left-brained.” Using an innovative, intuitive, emotional approach on an analytical, logical, practical person would be a disaster. And vice versa. 2. Determine the influencers and decision-makers behind the sale. They may not be the highest-ranked people in the company, and they may not even be in the room when you make your presentation. Ask if it would be okay to “cc” others in the company on your materials and correspondence. 3. Keep your behavior middle-of-the-road until you know more about the prospect. You don’t want to arrive dressed for a rock concert and discover the other person is in Armani office attire. If you are generally enthusiastic but the other person is restrained, try to tone down your natural inclination to make exclamations. If you are generally reserved but the other person is an extravert, try to ratchet up your enthusiasm, so you don’t inadvertently appear indifferent. 4. You can’t be certain what type of brain your buyer has. Therefore, make sure your presentation appeals to all four types of brains. People who are analytical thinkers want to know the “ROI” right up front. Those who are structural thinkers want to improve on processes. Social thinkers, meanwhile, want to make an impact on a relationship or on the welfare of others. Conceptual ones are interested in connecting the dots. Be sure to discuss how (or if) your solution meets all these different needs. 5. To check for analytical thinkers, listen for words like “exactly” and “precisely.” An analytical thinker first wants the bottom line, to make sure your discussion is worth the time it will take. This type of brain doesn’t want to weigh a lot of options. Quickly provide an overview, then sit back and wait. Be prepared to answer all questions with spreadsheets, data, and research, and do not make a mistake or this individual will lose all confidence in you. If you don’t know an answer, say you will get it immediately after the meeting—then do so. 6. To identify structural thinkers, listen for words like “turnaround time,” “preparation,” “realistic,” “wait,” or “hold on while I get this down.” This type of thinker is concerned about whether existing systems might be affected. Be prepared to list exactly how and when your solution can be implemented. 7. To pinpoint social thinkers, listen for words like “we,” “them,” “our,” “us,” and “you all.” Is this individual concerned about relationships? Another clue is if the buyer asks you personal questions, such as, “How do you feel about the way it affects employees?” Social thinkers are eager to bring in others to the conversation. 8. To find conceptual thinkers, listen for immediate questions about the outcome. Like the analytical thinker, this type wants the bottom line right away, but in the context of the bigger picture. The worst thing you can do with a conceptual thinker is spell out everything in detail. Engage this individual’s attention immediately; otherwise you may lose it forever. You may receive farfetched or unrelated questions. Take every question at face value. 9. Keep your buyer focused on the desired solution. Remember that some buyers have several preferences and it takes them a long time to make a decision. They are weighing rationality, processes, people, and vision all at the same time. Thirty-seven percent of the people in the world fall into this kind of multimodal thinking and probably need to carefully process a decision. Allow plenty of time, even if to you it seems to take forever. You are already familiar with what you are selling; your buyer is not. As you wrap up your meeting, keep in mind what is happening in your buyer’s head. Reassure this person that your solution will generate ROI, that it will not interfere with any other systems, that the human factor is addressed, and that the vision is clear. Remember, it’s not about the way you’re product is wired but rather the way your buyer is wired.

See the original post:
What’s Going On In Your Customer’s Head?

Taiwan’s opposition Democratic Progressive Party leader Tsai Ing-wen made history by being the island’s first female presidential candidate, but her wider-than-expected defeat last Saturday to incumbent Ma Ying-jeou of the Kuomintang has raised questions about the future of her moderate approach.

Ms. Tsai finished with 45.6% of the vote to Mr. Ma’s 51.6%, a loss that prompted her to say she would resign as DPP leader.

A professor before she became a politician, Ms. Tsai is often credited with lifting the pro-independence DPP out of the mire after former president Chen Shui-bian’s rocky and scandal-ridden tenure at the helm.

“She brings gentleness and sensibility to the party,” Joseph Wu, a former Taiwan envoy to the U.S. and a top advisor to the DPP, said shortly after the election. “She is also very capable in facilitating talks between the factions in the party and consolidating opinions.”

That conciliatory leadership style and approachable personality were what drove her surging popularity both within and outside the party, he added.

But Ms. Tsai also won support by dialing back the DPP’s pro-independence rhetoric, analysts said. An example of that more moderate China policy was her appeal for further dialogues with Beijing and her promise to accept all 16 cross-strait trade agreements signed under Mr. Ma’s leadership.

Although she adamantly rejected the 1992 Consensus—a tacit understanding between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party that Taiwan and China are one country but each is free to define the term as they see fit—her proposal of a new “Taiwan Consensus” did not completely shut out the option of an eventual unification, a sharp detour from the policy pursued by Mr. Chen.

Despite that softening, Ms. Tsai’s candidacy still did not appear sit well with leaders in Beijing, who warned that any deviation from the 1992 Consensus would compromise the growing harmony on the Taiwan Strait. During the campaign, the “Taiwan Consensus” became one favorite points of attack for Mr. Ma and the KMT, who pointed to it as evidence that Ms. Tsai was naïve to the realities of cross-strait relations.

Yet some analysts said they expected Beijing might still be open to dialogue with a Tsai administration — a notion considered far-fetched during the previous DPP regime.

What effect Ms. Tsai’s loss will have on the party’s platform remains to be seen. The fact that she lost by six percentage points – late polls had her losing by between 3% and 5% — is already being interpreted by some as an indictment of her decision to emphasize social equality and her deviation from the party’s anti-China orthodoxy.

“Obviously, a campaign focused on social justice was not enough to excite the traditional DPP supporters,” said Wu, adding in the future, the party should incorporate more of the possible threats to Taiwan’s sovereignty under the KMT such as China’s continual interference in Taiwan’s quest for more international participation.

Shelley Rigger, a professor of political science at Davidson College expressed similar views, saying that while Ms. Tsai should be lauded for restoring burnishing the DPP’s image, she might have overlooked a key constituency – the “green” pro-independence die-hards—who might constrain the DPP from moving to the center.

“[Tsai] did as well as anyone could have done at pacifying the deep greens, by refusing to accept the ’92 consensus, and at the same time minimizing the role of those ideological issues in the elections, by trying not to talk about that anymore than she had to. The result was still hitting that 45% ceiling,” she said.

Ms. Tsai’s tenure as party leader will officially terminate on March 1, the DPP said, and it’s unclear what she plans to do next. She has said she plans to maintain an office and rumors suggest she may take the reins at a think tank she helped set up.

Analysts say Beijing is concerned less about Ms. Tsia’s future and more about who her successor might be and whether that person will continue the moderate stance she has championed.

“Beijing takes a great interest in the DPP’s leadership because there is always a chance that the DPP might return to power. But I think no matter who becomes the next DPP chairman, the party will retain the more moderate stance,” said Shih Cheng-feng, a dean at National Dong Hwa University.

Party heavyweights Frank Hsieh and Su Tseng-chang are widely speculated to be vying for the seat, though some political commentators on the island say the party should allow up-and-coming stars, such as some of the current DPP county magistrates, to have a shot.

Whether or not Ms. Tsai tries her luck again in 2016, her contribution to the DPP seems likely to be remembered as revolutionary, in a moderate way.

– Jenny W. Hsu

Measured on a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis that adjusts for price differences, China in 2009 stood as the second-largest economy in the world after the US, although in per capita terms the country is still lower middle-income.

In 2009, the global economic downturn reduced foreign demand for Chinese exports for the first time in many years.

The People’s Republic of China is the world’s second largest economy after the United States by both nominal GDP ($5 trillion in 2009) and by purchasing power parity ($8.77 trillion in 2009).

Available energy is insufficient to run at fully installed industrial capacity, and the transport system is inadequate to move sufficient quantities of such critical items as coal.

The two most important sectors of the economy have traditionally been agriculture and industry, which together employ more than 70 percent of the labor force and produce more than 60 percent of GDP.

A report by UBS in 2009 concluded that China has experienced total factor productivity growth of 4 per cent per year since 1990, one of the fastest improvements in world economic history.

The market-oriented reforms China has implemented over the past two decades have unleashed individual initiative and entrepreneurship, whilst retaining state domination of the economy.

China now ranks as the fifth largest global investor in outbound direct investment (ODI) with a total volume of $56.5 billion, compared to a ranking of 12th in 2008, the Ministry of Commerce said on Sunday.

In 2009, global ODI volume reached $1.1 trillion, and China contributed about 5.1 percent of the total.

China reiterated the nation’s goals for the next decade – increasing market share of pure-electric and plug-in electric autos, building world-competitive auto makers and parts manufacturers in the energy-efficient auto sector as well as raising fuel-efficiency to world levels.

In large part as a result of economic liberalization policies, the GDP quadrupled between 1978 and 1998, and foreign investment soared during the 1990s.

Even with these improvements, agriculture accounts for only 20% of the nation’s gross national product.

In terms of cash crops, China ranks first in cotton and tobacco and is an important producer of oilseeds, silk, tea, ramie, jute, hemp, sugarcane, and sugar beets.

Horses, donkeys, and mules are work animals in the north, while oxen and water buffalo are used for plowing chiefly in the south.

Coal is the most abundant mineral (China ranks first in coal production); high-quality, easily mined coal is found throughout the country, but especially in the north and northeast.

There are also deposits of vanadium, magnetite, copper, fluorite, nickel, asbestos, phosphate rock, pyrite, and sulfur.

China also has extensive hydroelectric energy potential, notably in Yunnan, W Sichuan, and E Tibet, although hydroelectric power accounts for only 5% of the country’s total energy production.

Other leading ports are rail termini, such as Lüshun (formerly Port Arthur, the port of Dalian), on the South Manchuria RR; and Qingdao, on the line from Jinan.

Read more here:
What Next for Taiwan’s Opposition?

That might be a good thing. Here’s why. (Hint: It has to with your brain–and theirs.) Some people at work are going to rub you the wrong way. You return from a trip, review the memos on your desk, turn on your computer—and immediately get a message from that guy in accounting, who says he needs your expense receipts ASAP. You’re steamed. You’re asked to schedule a short meeting with two staffers. A woman from marketing spends 15 minutes talking about her vacation swimming with dolphins. Now, you’ll need another meeting. You’re vexed. Neither of these individuals was trying to annoy you. In different circumstances, you may rely on those very same skills you found irritating. We all make snap judgments based on others’ behavior when we meet them, and we often take their behavior personally when we shouldn’t. You don’t typically have access to the inner-workings of your colleagues’ brains, but you need to know how to interact productively with them. The work I’ve done in brain and behavioral psychology allows me to predict the tone, temperament, and dynamics of human interactions at the office. In a workshop, I already know who is the most forceful and the most amenable, who naturally does the most or least “social” thinking, and so on, for all seven brain attributes (which I described in an earlier post ). This lets me group participants in instructive ways. I’ll team up people from opposite ends of different spectrums—gregarious with reserved, irritable and amiable, and open-minded with single-minded. After an activity, I’ll ask everyone to reflect. When a naturally vivacious, decisive, focused person is teamed with a shy, conciliatory, agreeable person, the cautious one is crushed. Sometimes we’re annoyed when others contribute something we cannot. They make it look easy. For them, it is. To illustrate the differing ways people think, check out this exercise I often do in workshops. I assign a topic and divide everyone attending in pre-determined groups based on analytical, structural, social, and conceptual thinking, and place each person with the others who share his or her strongest “thinking” attribute. I hand out large pads of paper and colored markers, and ask the groups to take notes. I invite the teams to go wherever they wish, but they must return in 15 minutes. Invariably, one group will leave (usually the conceptual group) because those people do their best thinking while they are lying on the floor, or looking out a window—or, if it’s a nice day, outside. I predict that in 15 minutes someone will have to go find them, because this group may not return on time. Sure enough, 15 minutes later, I have to send someone to find the conceptual group, which usually gets a laugh. Generally, the structural team makes a numbered list in black ink, aligned on the page, in perfect teacher-printed handwriting. The analytical team creates a bulleted list of comments in blue ink, also printed. The social team makes a list using bright colors, possibly with illustrations and hearts. The conceptual team’s page will be covered with different colors of ink, ideas in balloons, pictures, and an attempt at some notes that will need to be explained. The greatest disparity is between the structural and conceptual teams, as well as between the analytical and social teams. The structural brains have little use for the conceptual list, since it is not numbered and doesn’t make sense. The conceptual brains will feel disdain for the structural list, which appears dull. The analytical brains find the social brains too touchy-feely. The social brains think the analytical brains have no heart. If you tried it, this dynamic would also play out among your staffers (group people by your best instinct if you don’t have a profile) and it has major implications for your performance. How do these personalities get along in the workplace? Here are some examples of how different “thinking” attributes may play out among your colleagues: People who are quiet, analytical thinkers may be perceived as uncaring—but you need their deftness with data. You’ll have to call them out to get it. Structural thinkers who are focused may seem overly cautious. They are not trying to shoot down your ideas; this is simply how they verify new concepts. Social thinkers who are peacekeepers may be regarded as emotional, but you won’t know why they are upset unless you ask. Their gift is how they care about the customer. Conceptual thinkers with a driving energy may be perceived as unrealistic and controlling—but you’ll love their innovative ideas. You need all brain attributes represented on your team. You can’t expect to love all your employees, but recognize their contributions to help smooth things over. Your differences aren’t personal—they’re necessary. Advertisement: Are your customers tuning you out?    In the digital age, mass marketing no longer gets the job done. Customers want to feel a personal connection. So how do you get your customers to tune in? View our video to see how Pitney Bowes can help you make a personal connection. http://www.personallypb.com Ads by Pheedo

Read the original:
Don’t Like All Your Employees?

British Foreign Secretary William Hague, on a visit to Burma, says European Union economic sanctions will not change until authorities release all political prisoners.  The top British diplomat made the comments after holding separate meetings with democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi and Burma’s military-backed leaders. 

Hague held talks Friday morning with Burma’s opposition and Aung San Suu Kyi at her lakeside home in Rangoon. Hague’s visit is the first in more than 50 years by the former colonial power’s top diplomat.

Following the meeting, the British foreign secretary told reporters it was an exciting time in Burma as there was a real chance for democracy in the country after decades of military rule.

He voiced support for the government’s reform efforts, including opening a dialogue with Aung San Suu Kyi, loosening its iron grip on the media, allowing labor unions, and releasing some political prisoners.

But, Hague said much more needs to be done, in particular, giving freedom to all remaining political prisoners, estimated to be in the hundreds.  He acknowledged widespread disappointment this week with the government’s Independence Day amnesty, which saw only about 30 such prisoners released.

“It is not possible to say a country is free and democratic while people are still in prison on grounds of their political beliefs.  And, so it is vital for such prisoners to be released if European Union restrictive measures are to be changed,” Hague said.

The EU and United States limit diplomatic relations, trade and investments with Burma because of the military’s violent suppression of democracy movements. But expectations are growing that those restrictions could soon be relaxed.

The EU announced Thursday it would open a representative office in Burma to manage humanitarian aid programs and facilitate political dialogue.

Hague met the same day with leaders of the government, including President Thein Sein, who promised all political prisoners would be released without giving a timetable.

His government is also allowing Aung San Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy to contest by-elections in April after being sidelined from the historic 2010 election.  The Nobel Prize winner told reporters Friday her goals were clear.

“All political prisoners should be released and there should be all efforts made to put an end to ethnic conflict within our country,” she said.  “And, certainly we would like to see free and fair by-elections.  And, I must add I would like to see the NLD winning very well in those elections.”  

Aung San Suu Kyi was under house arrest for most of the past two decades for challenging military rule and was banned from contesting office.

She was released just days after the 2010 election.  Her NLD won Burma’s previous election in 1990 but the military refused to give up power.

More:
Britain to Maintain Sanctions Until Burma Frees Political Prisoners

Associated Press Indonesian activists gather sandals at the office of Indonesian Commission for Child Protection in Jakarta to protest the prosecution of a 15-year-old boy for stealing an old pair of sandals from a police officer. More In Indonesia Amobee Focuses on the Rest of Asia Indonesians Praise Ghost-Buster Guard Indonesian Police Shave Punks’ Heads Provocative Ad Links Women’s Success to the Bedroom BlackBerry Maker Faces Questions on Stampede Flinging footwear at people in power is so last decade; the new trend in Indonesia is to donate it. Indonesians have dropped thousands of old flip-flops and other footwear at police stations and a child protection group to protest the heavy-handed treatment of a 15-year-old boy accused of stealing a policeman’s sandals in the northern state of Central Sulawesi. After allegedly stealing the $3 slippers in 2010, the boy was beaten by three police officers and now faces up to five years in prison.

The policemen were punished for their brutality after the boy filed a complaint—which may be why the police decided to force the case to court, according to local reports .

The trial of the boy, referred to by only his initials, AAL, in local media, has been going on since last month and continues Wednesday.  It has sparked the anger of Indonesians frustrated with a justice system that sometimes seems too tough on citizens even as government officials accused of extorting millions escape heavy sentences.

The National Commission for Child Protection announced last week that it would take donations to buy the police officer new sandals, but people started showing up with used footwear instead .

The government-financed child protection organization, which is urging the boy’s timely acquittal , now plans to collect and deliver thousands of pairs of shoes to the officer. “The flip-flop collection is a spontaneous movement, which has sprung up since the news broke last week. It shows how people are concerned about injustice in the system,” said Sofyan Farid Lembah, the Central Sulawesi-based commissioner of the Commission for Child Protection, which has so far collected 3,000 pairs of sandals across the country. “How can an underage child be facing a five-year sentence for a petty crime?” This isn’t the first high-profile case of what seems like police harassment for small crimes. Last year two men were caught in a police sting operation for trying to sell their iPads online without local-language user manuals.

They were acquitted in October but prosecutors plan to appeal. Also last year, pop star Nazril “Ariel” Irham was sentenced to 3 1/2 years in jail for making two blurry, homemade sex videos that leaked on the Internet.

The court rejected Mr. Irham’s argument that the videos had been stolen and released without his permission, saying he hadn’t done enough to stop their distribution. Meanwhile just last month, police in the conservative state of Aceh raided a punk rock concert and detained more than 50 fans, shaving mohawks , removing piercings and forcing detainees into a 10-day rehabilitation program. –With contributions from Yayu Yuniar

The rest is here:
Indonesians Protest With Flip-Flops

Burma’s pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi met late Monday at her lakeside home with billionaire American philanthropist George Soros, the latest public figure to pay the Nobel Prize laureate a visit since her release a year ago from 15 years of on-and-off house arrest.

Soros, whose foundation supports grantees that provide uncensored news on Burma and activists who call public attention to abuse of power, arrives in the wake of a stream of visits, predominantly by senior foreign dignitaries.

Political Science Professor Carl Thayer of the Australian Defense Force Academy says influential business and political leaders are lining up to ride the crest of change in Burma and to reinforce reform efforts.

“As intelligent as she is, she has been relatively isolated,” he says. “And she needs, I think, the advice of people like Soros and others, the financing and foundations, and people on the ground to provide and reinforce her efforts.”

In the past month, Aung San Suu Kyi met with the U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Thailand’s Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, and foreign ministers from Indonesia and Japan. Later this week, British Foreign Secretary William Hague is expected to visit.

Hague’s visit will coincide with a general amnesty for prisoners announced Monday by Burma’s state media.

In what is typically a regular gesture to mark Burma’s Independence Day, selected prisoners will have their sentences reduced beginning Tuesday. It is not clear how many in jail will be affected by the amnesty or how many political prisoners will be included.

Burma is holding hundreds of people for their political beliefs. Clinton and other officials visiting Burma have joined Aung San Suu Kyi in calling for their immediate release.

Thitinan Pongsudhirak, Director of the Institute of Security and International Studies at Bangkok’s Chulalongkorn University, says Clinton’s visit opened the way for diplomatic engagement with Burma, also known as Myanmar.

“It is a green light for other countries to begin to lift sanctions [and] provide development assistance,” he says. “They have to be careful by not promoting the commercial interests too much too soon. There are some dissident groups that see all of this as a big kind of commercial deal.”

Burma is a major source of natural gas, gems, and timber, but trade is limited by Western countries because of economic sanctions over the military’s suppression of democracy and human rights.

Since the government of President Thein Sein took office in March, replacing overt military rule, it won praise for a series of liberal political and economic moves. President Thein Sein held direct talks with Aung San Suu Kyi after assuming office.

Thitinan says cooperation between the two is vital for the momentum of reform to be sustained. He says there are still hardliners in the government who would derail the process if it goes too fast.

“The momentum that we are seeing is just unprecedented and breathtaking,” he says. “It is going to be difficult to reverse some of it without incurring a great cost to the Myanmar rulers. Even if they want to slow it down, to reverse it, now they are in too deep. Now I think leading up to the Myanmar chairmanship of ASEAN 2014. I expect the reforms to be sustained.”

On Sunday, Burmese authorities hiked gas prices by 30 percent. A similar unannounced price jump in 2007 sparked protests that were later crushed by the military.

Continue reading here:
In Burma, Visiting Dignitaries Line Up to Ride Crest of Change

Burma is set to hold a by-election April 1 in a vote in that will test democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy party.

Burmese government officials, who asked not to be named, informed media organizations of the election date Friday.  Forty-eight parliamentary seats will be at stake.  The officials said parties intending to take part in the vote need to submit their list of candidates no later than January 31.

Aung San Suu Kyi formally registered her National League for Democracy as a political party last week, clearing the way for her to run in the election.  She has not yet announced the constituency in which she expects to run.

The NLD was stripped of its status as a party last year because it refused to participate in controversial national elections, in which the popular democracy advocate was not permitted to run.

The election produced a new government which, while still dominated by past and present military officers, has implemented a series of reforms including loosened press restrictions and the beginning of dialogue with its critics.

Aung San Suu Kyi and her NLD were overwhelming winners in Burma’s 1990 election, but were never permitted to take office. The Nobel peace laureate spent most of the years since then under house arrest.

Some information for this report was provided by AFP.

See the article here:
Burma Sets By-Election for April 1

Japanese Foreign Minister Koichiro Gemba has met with Burmese democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, seeking to assure her of Tokyo’s full support for expanded democratic governance in the Southeast Asian nation.

Gemba held talks Monday with the Nobel laureate at her residence in Rangoon, and later told reporters he wants her and leaders of the country’s new civilian government to attend a summit in Japan next year.

“I invited President U Thein Sein to attend the Japan-Mekong sub-region summit due to be held in Tokyo sometime next year. I also invited Daw Aung San Suu Kyi to visit Japan,” said Gemba.

For her part, Suu Kyi, who has spent much of the past two decades under house arrest, thanked Japan for its support.

“Our country is bound and determined to march towards the democratic goal. In doing so, I expect Japan to be at the forefront of friendly nations who will help us,” she said.

Earlier Monday, the Japanese minister agreed with Burmese leaders to open negotiations on a bilateral investment pact. He also urged his counterpart, Wunna Maung Lwin, to free more political prisoners and ease restrictions on media and businesses.

Suu Kyi formally registered her National League for Democracy party last week, clearing the way for her to run for a seat in parliament.

Party officials say they will contest a series of upcoming by-elections once the registration is formally approved. Suu Kyi has not yet announced the constituency in which she expects to run.

She also visited the parliament last week for the first time since her release from house arrest late last year. She met with Shwe Mann, a senior figure in the nominally-civilian government and the long-ruling junta that preceded it.

The NLD was stripped of its status as a party last year because it refused to participate in controversial national elections, in which the popular democracy advocate was not permitted to run.

The election produced a new government which, while still dominated by past and present military officers, has implemented a series of reforms, relaxing media restrictions and opening dialogue with critics of the former junta.

Some information for this report was provided by AFP and Reuters.

Here is the original post:
Japanese FM Assures Burmese Icon of Full Support