Enlightened Conflict

Tag Archives: agency

instinct

April 6th, 2013

 

“Ideas pull the trigger, but instinct loads the gun.” – Don Marquisinstinct collective_unconsciouness

 

This quote is taken from Marquis’ “The Almost Perfect State” which was written in 1927 as a series of sharp criticisms of the Progressive Era.

Ok.

I imagine a lot of people read this quote and wonder if the quote would work better … “ideas load the gun, but instinct pulls the trigger.”

But I believe that misses Don’s point <albeit I have not spoken with him on this topic … he died in 1937>.

The point?

Knowledge and experience can only take you so far.

It is the difference between being solely analytical and incorporating the intangible <the instinctual>.

What he is suggesting is that all the bright big ideas in the world don’t mean shit if they cannot be brought into being without a person who can originate the intellectual movement of action. This person requires a special character.

Ah.

Special character.

Instinct is one of those things people hate.

Because it is not tangible … and it always assumes some level of risk.

It is research of one <which scares the shit out of people these days>.

That means …

Collaboration? Well. Nope.

Consensus? Geez. Nope.

Extrapolation through the hypotenuse of multiple data points discussed ad nausea and plotted on some nifty white board? Sounds like fun … but … nope.

Instinct is gut … albeit typically great instincts have been honed by experience and knowledge.

But in the end … it is not tangible nor proven.

It is … well … just what it is.

Sure.

It can be cultivated.

And it can even be honed.

But I do not believe it can be taught.

Well. Let me take that back and try this.

Good instincts cannot be taught.

Good instinct is first and foremost an internal aptitude. We all have instincts … but some just have gooder instincts. Beyond that natural foundation it is probably a combination of experience and knowledge and ultimately a mindset.

I say a mindset because instinct is a feeling and not anything visible or tangible. You sense what to do and where to go and what to say.

And it often isn’t because your instincts are proven good … but just rather that you know what feels wrong.

 

“Every time I’ve done something that doesn’t feel right, it’s ended up not being right.” – Mario M. Cuomo

 

That said.

I know one of the most frustrating things I have heard in business decision meetings is “I am not sure what the right thing to do is … but … what we are discussing doing sounds wrong.”

And while frustrating … it also feels right.

We sometimes get so rushed to make a decision we grab one … anyone will do. And, yet, it feels wrong … okay … maybe not wrong … just not right.

That is instinct.

Not only knowing the path to success … but also recognizing paths to failure & disappointment <before you even take one step on that path>.

It is a true joy to be near someone with good, if not great, instincts.

They seem to be in an effective zone and not in a comfort zone. What I mean is that they have a habit of disregarding distractions … discerning the important from the unimportant  … and have a focus. That focus may not be the destination <it can be> but oftentimes their instincts are reflective of the journey to the destination.

They have a humble confidence … and sometimes are even slightly insecure <I imagine because their strength is in the intangible>.

 

“Trust instinct to the end, even though you can give no reason.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson

 

And they are rarely emotional in decision making.

instinct good or badNow.

Conversely, it is absolutely miserable to be near someone who has crappy instincts <but thinks they have good instincts>.

It is not only miserable because you end up going down lots of fruitless paths and waste a lot of energy but also because instincts are intangible.

There are no numbers or research or facts that can counter instincts and intuition. Therefore someone in a leadership position who has crappy instincts is unmovable. They are literally an elephant in the room.

That is misery.

Regardless.

Instinct is a natural aptitude.

Kind of like a knack.

An innate tendency or response to act in ways that, at its most base description, is essential to development, preservation or survival.

As Hayakawa suggests … instinct implies innate disposition rather than having a talent. It is not a gift, nor a talent or even an aptitude. It is more an inborn intangible. It could be called a ‘Knack’ but that has almost always been associated with social rather than intellectual causes & situations.

It is tough in today’s world for people with good instincts.

While intellectual in its strength it is not proven with any reason.

In an over thinking, over analyzing, over safe world .. ‘without reason’ doesn’t often gain a place at the table.

Instinctual decision making often requires having people follow with some blind faith. And in a world of consensus and collaboration … well … that ain’t happening much these days.

morons

March 16th, 2013

 

“All morons hate it when you call them a moron.” - Holden Caulfield <Catcher in the Rye>Cary Town Council - Wellness Morons

 

Ok.

Morons is a harsh word and a harsh concept …but let’s face it … most of us have experienced that maddening discussion where we explain that seemingly simple concept … or that seemingly simple common sense point of view to someone … and not only can they not grasp it but may actually argue a completely moronic point of view that flies in the face of <1> facts, <2> truth, or maybe even <3> common sense.

In fact … during the discussion we may even try several different approaches to the idea, using every metaphor <or parable or analogy> within reach to throw into the discussion that we think the person should reasonably be capable of following.

In the end … sometimes we succeed … mostly we fail … and always it is painful <to us> and obviously moronic <to us>.

It is here I will bring up the idea of intelligence <despite the fact it may sound odd in a rant on morons>.

First. Just to set the groundwork … most everyday functions of modern life require an IQ of around 90.

Those functions include driving a car, mailing a letter, paying bills and making a bank deposit.

The more specialized the function, the more intricate, the higher the level of intelligence necessary.

Second. I am not using the term ‘moron’ as a classification of any mental deficiency despite the fact that technically ‘moron’ translates to denoting a mild mental deficiency. I am going to suggest being a moron denotes a certain deficiency … but not a mental one.

Therefore <here is where I link intelligence and the topic of morons> we can dispense with the idea that morons are stupid or have a lack of intelligence.

The deficiency within morons, or being moronic, has nothing to do with intelligence <or at least IQ>. Most have IQs at or above 90 <I made that up but I tend to believe it>.

Let me take it one step further. You cannot be a moron unless you actually are intelligent.

Because morons are actually people who have intelligence … but they waste it.

Either by using it <their intelligence> poorly or misusing it or not even using it at all.

Wow.

Bet you didn’t think I was going to head down that path, did ya?

Morons are actually intelligent? Yup. Morons are simply purposefully ignorant … but they are smart.

Uh oh.

That means morons are as intelligent as you and I <okay … maybe at least me … you are probably smarter and this is simply my issue>.

All that said … it suggests that the moronic issue resides elsewhere than intelligence.

Robert Heinlein said that stupidity characteristics <or characteristics of morons> are actually tied to ignorance <so I am going to steal that idea because I agree with Bob>.

He suggests that stupidity cannot be cured using money, remedial education or some governmental edict because inevitably it resides within a different reason … a purposeful or intentional ignorance.

Purposeful. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm … This means that morons actually know something to be wrong with themselves <it may be subconscious but they somewhere within they understand> … they are intelligent enough to understand … and, yet, rather than correct themselves and abandon that ‘something’ … they practice intentional ignorance clinging to that ‘thing’ and inevitably insist that they are right and everyone else is wrong.

And this is where morons are dangerous.

morons electronsVery very dangerous.

 

“Because, fanaticism and ignorance is forever busy, and needs feeding. And soon, your Honor, with banners flying and drums beating, we’ll be marching backward, backward, to those glorious ages of the 16th century, when bigots burned the man who dared bring enlightenment and intelligence to the human mind.” – Clarence Darrow <Inherit the wind>

Morons march backwards. Busily marching themselves and trying to herd the rest of us backwards to some glorious age.

It is a Life truth that fanaticism & ignorance is forever busy <and a busybody>.

I fully understand that this fanaticism and ignorance is impossible to extinguish. But that doesn’t mean it should be tolerated. Particularly if it is actually harmful.

Regardless. Tolerance is an acceptance of the morons.

And with this acceptance, albeit grudging acceptance, the morons simply see it as permission to be moronic and they gladly step up <in their forever busy way of theirs> and do harm.

Harm in the form of stopping <or even reversal> of progress … harm in marching us backwards.

Or they teach and promote falsehoods to others <others including children which is disturbing> with the hope that this younger generation will grow up and can possibly march us backwards.

All this translates into a lot of time and effort and energy lost as ignorance and its byproducts step up and suck time & energy from progress.

Ok. A Bruce thought.

I believe we can no longer afford the luxury of moronic ignorance or tolerate the presence of morons. Tolerating them leads to the creation of a sense that this moronic ignorance actually equals some sort of knowledge <which then makes them some sort of “knowledgeable person” and you know where that leads … ‘trouble in River City’ to quote The Music Man>.

 

“<there is a> … false notion that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” ― Isaac Asimov

 

Morons are wily. They have the notion that their smarts, combined with their purposeful ignorance, is just as good as real unfiltered knowledge.

This is tiring to deal with.

In fact … if you find yourself surrounded by morons, rather than just shake your head, you have to purposefully accept the challenge to deal with their moronic thinking with the knowledge that they actually have the intelligence to be non-moronic <but actually choose to be moronic>. Wow. Just typing that made my head hurt.

It would take a monumental effort to create the unlikely evolutionary change where morons become extinct <that may be an unattainable objective but it is certainly an admirable objective>.

And it will take your best monumental effort to deal with a moron because there are instances where the lines are blurred and where argument and debate and discussion regarding two sides of an issue are actually warranted.

But.morons disagree

You should seek solace in that there are also issues where right is right … and wrong is wrong … and anyone who argues it looks like the guy who believes Yoda exists somewhere and The Force can be attained with focus & practice.

Oh.

And here is where morons really thrive.

Numbers & science & studies & statistics <oh my>.

Science is smart and science is stupid.

Both are true and there could be studies done to prove it.

One of the smart/stupid things about science is something called the ubiquitous study. They are excellent scientific research formats but while all studies <and most research in general> are interesting … they do not reveal eternal, all-encompassing truths.

They simply provide a glimpse into one small, carefully cordoned off area of interest. Extrapolations from the data are based on statistics and therefore do not necessarily apply to everyone and everything.

I say that because it seems like we find comfort worshiping at the altar of the ‘numbers’.

All of us seem to be considering study results and numbers to be the indisputable truth.

What a fantasy.

But it is often a fantasy land morons live, eat & drink in <and thrive in like a bacteria in a petri dish>>. Numbers are their friends and constant companions.

Morons thrive on the isolated statistic. A random factoid or piece of information that has no context nor admits it has Truth only within a limited set of circumstances. And they win a shitload of debates using this technique. How does all this happen?

Well. It sounds simplistic … but I believe we allow it to happen for a couple of reasons … first is a well intentioned but subverted belief in freedom of speech. Subverted because inevitably it is often simply ‘freedom of opinion’ these days. Secondly … ‘opinion’ forces us all to seek something tangible in which to reach some conclusion … therefore we seek statistics or numbers to identify truth <and isolate something we can all agree on>.

And numbers do not necessarily translate into Truth. Especially isolated non-contextual numbers.

In the end we seem to be damned by a society that has ingrained in us this strange belief that because we encourage freedom of speech and freedom of thought … that all ideas deserve respect and consideration that no one individual <or idea> is “better” or more “worthy” of consideration than any other.

What a bunch of bullhockey.

This has created an environment in which any moronic idea can hover around like an aggravating gnat as legitimate idea.

It is crazy.

A moron is a moron.

A moronic idea is a moronic idea.

It is time that we learned to have the balls <or spine if you are a woman> to call out the morons.

morons quoteMorons don’t like to be called morons.

Why?

Because they are frickin’ intelligent enough to know better than skate by on shallow feelings and beliefs.

And all the while you must swim in the shallow end of the intellectual debate to debate with them … you must be careful of your own ignorance more than theirs … because purposeful ignorance does have a sneaky way of creeping up on you. What I mean is that it is easier to be a moron than to not be a moron. It takes less work, intellectually and curiosity, to maintain an ignorant point of view than it takes to not only grow personally but to actually help a moron grow <which is a quite taxing job>. Frankly it is just easier to quit debating than to take on a moron. I imagine it becomes a test of character.

Regardless. I imagine in the end that is my point <the test morons give us day in and day out>.

Morons are morons because they are smart enough to engage in purposeful ignorance.

To be ignorant on purpose?

Yikes.

You would have to be a moron.

But. In the end … morons hate to be called morons simply because they are smart enough to know they could do, and be, better. Even morons know somewhere under their purposeful ignorance they should be better than what they are. I imagine the only way to beat morons is to actually get them to face that fact.

Wow. There is a tough job. But. We cannot let the morons win. Purposeful ignorance is a disease. A disease that can affect entire civilizations & cultures. That thought makes it scary to even think about tolerating the moron.

leaf without a tree

March 4th, 2013

So.things big or little

Studying history, and using what you have learned, is a tricky challenge. Often we study history, and the past, so that we can “not make the same mistakes.” Well. The attempt is one of valor <and good intentions> but most actions using historical learning are misused <as they are misguided>.

“If you don’t know history, you don’t know anything. You’re a leaf that doesn’t know it’s part of a tree.” – Michael Crichton

—-

“History is not, of course, a cookbook offering pretested recipes. It teaches by analogy, not by maxims.” - Henry Kissinger

—–

Henry <or Hank to his friends> also said  …

“The study of history offers no manual of instructions that can be applied automatically: history teaches by analogy, shedding light on likely consequences of comparable situations. But each generation must determine for itself which circumstances are in fact comparable.”

Now.

Studying history is always good <that is a Bruce postulate>.

How you use what you learned studying history is always a challenge <that is a Life truth and an ongoing Life debate>.

Too often people want to use historical “learning” as a literal guide for what to do now <or in the future>.

You cannot.

Sorry.

But you can’t.

I do not care if we are talking about business, life or economics.

You cannot <I apologize for repeating myself>.

Hank, discussing Foreign Policy, actually walks us through a nice way to think about this.

Intellectuals analyze systems & situations while statesmen build them.

And therein lays a vast difference between the analyst and the statesman. The analyst can choose what problem he wishes to study whereas the statesman’s problems are imposed upon him. The analyst can allot whatever time is necessary to come to a clear conclusion while the overwhelming challenge of a statesman is time. The analysts runs no, or little, risk. If the conclusions prove wrong he can rewrite and reanalyze. The statesman is permitted only one guess and his mistakes are irretrievable.

 

smashing rear view mirrorSure. Typically the future is simply a version of the past. But what makes it challenging is that what appear to be superficial changes, that sometimes make it easily recognizable, are the things that transform situations into unrecognizable changed situations. In addition … we tend to ignore the ‘collection of people’ variable <I will explain later>.

In the end? We wonder what happened <and why we didn’t learn from history>.

Well.

As Kissinger states … history teaches by analogy, not identity.

Unfortunately this means that the lessons of history are never automatic.

That they can be apprehended only by a standard which admits the significance of a range of experience, that the answers we obtain will never be better than the questions we pose.

Now.

I do believe no significant decisions are possible without at least an awareness of the historical context.

For everything exists in time more than they do in a moment in time. What I mean by that is an explanation of ‘context.’ You may not be able to completely replicate the exact time, place, situation and experiences of any & all affecting what you are studying <or even replicate a majority of those variables> however you can gain a sense of choices that were available and choices made. This is contextual learning.

Because people forget that what they are studying is a given moment which is simply a situation where it is not only a reflection of a collection of individuals <and their experiences> but that situation also achieves a unique identity through the consciousness of a common history <those individuals are studying that particular moment colored by,or driven, by perceptions of beliefs of that time>.

The only possibility of learning is studying history within the collective memory.

It is not often that we actually learn something from the past. And it is even rarer that we draw the correct conclusions from it.

Why?

The lessons of history <and Life experiences also> are contingent.

That means they teach the consequences of certain actions … but they cannot force a recognition of comparable situations.

Well.

That is a BIG thought right there.

One that many of us should think about more often.

 

Let me translate <for my own pea like brain>.life as a straight line

History is contingent upon a series of factors … and to make it exponentially more difficult … contingent upon a continuum <horizontally> as well as simultaneously <vertically>.

Yikes.

That means exactly replicating the situation in which you are ‘learning from’ is … well … pretty much impossible.

The variations and variables almost seem limitless <try pointing that out in your next business meeting when someone says “what did we learn from past experience”>.

And … well … gosh … doesn’t that kind of make you rethink every business book you have ever read?

Regardless.

History is just that … history. A series of factors & variables all aligned for one moment in time <vertically & horizontally>.

Therefore … change is not only the constant but it also possibly represents the only legitimate path to progress.

I say that to suggest that change may actually freedom from the past.

And to suggest that history, when one decides to live it and not learn from it, can cage you.

I know.

Learning to break free from the history that holds no value <or decreases value> is difficult. It is easier to simply use it as a handbook of ‘what to do.’

If we truly seek to learn <and teach> we cannot be subjugated to history.

If we truly seek to be better than what we already are … we cannot do simply as history ‘dictates.’

But all we really feel most comfortable with is remaking things in the image of historical learning.

Well.

I guess that means to remake things better we have to be … oops … uncomfortable.

I believe what I just wrote will make a boatload of people very uncomfortable <assuming anyone understands what I wrote>. Why? Well. This kind of thinking can drive you crazy … particularly if you want to simply study and create conclusions <rather than hypotheses>.

So. The how do most people, and businesses, get around this type of thinking?

thinking Dont-Believe-ThinkThey suggest that they have isolated the most important variables … and can draw a correlation to the current situation … draw some conclusive conclusions … and isolate the best plan of action.

Well. They are nuts <if not crackpots or liars>. I do not doubt 99% of the intent of these people but they are still wrong. History provides context not analogy. Now people <in general> do not like that. It makes them feel uncomfortable. They want to know unequivocally that they will not be ‘making the mistakes of the past.’ Sorry. Can’t happen. You may be able to reduce the odds but cannot unequivocally guarantee it. Oops. Big trouble in the working world if you say shit like that.

But it is Truth. Truth in a business world. Truth in Life.

Another truth? <and something that most people will also feel uncomfortable with>

Studying history will make the in-the-moment decision better. I did not say “using history to make the decision” but rather “people who have studied history will better be able to CREATE a unique decision in the moment.” Yup. I used the dreaded ‘unique’ word. Most decisions are discreet <unique to the moment>. That makes people feel very very <very> uncomfortable.

Regardless. It is a Life truth.

In the end?

“Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought.” – Basho

Well.

That is a nice uncomfortable thought to end on.

frightening Fructis fall fight

February 27th, 2013

So.fructis absurd

Fructis went with alliteration to name their new product … I just was alliterative to illustrate how frightening a recent television commercial I saw was.

Before I explain why their recent television commercial frightens me … a couple of caveats:

-          I have never worked on a shampoo product

-          Yes … I have worked on products in the health & beauty industry

 

That said.

Their ad frightens me.

Oh.

But first … “fall fight”?

Oh boy.

Here is a stretch.

“Notice strands in your bathroom sink or brush? Improve hair’s resistance to everyday hair-fall due to breakage.”

So this shit fights everyday hair falling out <is that an issue?>. Now. Some people may call this “going bald little by little” or maybe “everyday dead useless hair being eliminated so that newer fresher stronger hair can grow in.” But, as noted earlier, I have never worked with a shampoo brand … so what do I know.

Anyway.

While I was first surprised that Fructis was advertising a Fall <seasonal> product in the winter I was pleasantly <if albeit still confused> surprised to find the name had nothing to do with the season but rather your hair falling out <an annual issue … not a seasonal issue>.

Ok.

The execution.

 

Fall Fight ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=481l1HoRThQ

 

Let me run through the logic in what you just saw <I am writing as if I participated in discussion … but I didn’t really>.

She has to brush her hair inside … because that is where cool people brush their hair before they go out and do something cool. Oh. Plus. That is where hair falls out <at home>.

Whew. So … how do we show hair falling out?

A hair ball. That’s it. And if we have a hair ball we can have a cute kitten <because people like kittens>.

fructis fall fight kittenExcellent.

Oh. Does the kitten puke the hair ball? Oh. C’mon. That’s disgusting. The kitten is just playing with a disgusting tumbleweed of hair that is somewhere in the house.

Wow. Great idea.

Oops. But we have to go outside because that is ultimately where cool people hang out with other cool <good looking> people and do cool things.

What about the kitten?

Well. It has to stay inside because … well … it belongs at home <eating all the hair that has fallen out … and if it pukes it will be off camera>.

So. Now we are outside.

But now that she is outside we need to her to look smart <as well as having fun>.

Ok. Let’s put glasses on her. Lenses in or lenses out? Aw. Who cares? She looks smart and we want people to think that smart, fun, cool, good looking people <whose hair falls out> buy our shampoo.

<cut to putting glasses on her>

Hey.

She does look smart. Let’s actually make her smart. Let’s let her tell everyone about the key ingredients in the shampoo <which tells everyone that we were smart to create a shampoo that scientifically keeps you from going bald>.

But she is outside … how do we make her actually smart?

Aw. Who cares? Let’s have fun. Let’s give her a blackboard in the middle of a field and have her show some random molecular diagrams with the names of the ingredients next to them <is it really the right molecule structure? Aw. Who cares? What girl who buys our product really cares about that stuff … it just looks smart … and of course then they will think they are smart! … plus … we put the name of the ingredient next to it so they will think it is right>.

(yell to some intern t go on wikipedia and get some molecular images to copy)

A blackboard in the middle of the field?

Sure. In fact. She is so smart she carries a blackboard in her car wherever she goes. Wow. Should we show the car? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm … interesting idea. Shoot it. We will have it in the can and if we have the time we can put it in somewhere.

What about the kitten? Should it be with the blackboard she is carrying around?

Wow. That’s silly. It’s at home playing with the hairball … why would she be so mean to take it away from that? Don’t overthink. Your first idea was good. Put the blackboard in the car and get some footage <but we don’t want to pay overages>.

Ok.

Now we need to show that our shampoo is strong … but fun.

Ok.

Why don’t we have a boxing ring in the middle of this field and shadowbox with real looking boxing gloves to show strength?

Wow. Great idea.

Hey …. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm … why don’t we also have one of those ‘high strikers’ you see at carnivals and not only is she smart but strong enough to show the shampoo is strong? <and that allows one of her good looking friends to box in the field so she doesn’t get sweaty>fructis fall-fight-tv-commercial

 

<high striker definition: A high striker, also known as a strength tester, or strongman game, is an attraction used in funfairs, fundraisers, and carnivals. It operates by utilizing the lever where one end holds a puck attached to the tower and the other end is struck by the person or contestant using a hammer or mallet. The aim of players is to ring the bell suspended on top of the tower. If the lever is struck with enough force, the puck will rise high enough to hit the bell, indicating a success. Modern versions use a spring-loaded version of the lever, others use an enclosed striking mechanism.

Operators entice people to try the high striker with phrases such as: “Step right up!”,”Test your strength!”, or “Who are the men out of the boys?”>

 

Wow. Excellent idea. A boxing ring AND a carnival.

A carnival in the middle of the field? No silly. Just the high striker.

Wow. That is brilliant <and fun>.

Ok.

Don’t forget.

We need to show some other people to show she isn’t some narcissistic self-absorbed hermit with a kitten. So let’s have some good looking people hanging out like they are wanting to hang out with the smart girl who is no longer going bald.

Excellent.

Go down the hallway to where I think they are doing the casting for the Calvin Klein ad campaign and see if you can grab a  couple of people.

Ok.

Where do we put them?

In the field stupid. That’s where all cool smart people who are not going bald hang out with their friends.

Should they have a blackboard too? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm … no.

If they do not have one that suggests our Fructis girl is smarter than they are because she buys our stuff … but she is an influencer! Everyone will assume she tells them about our shampoo and they will go out and buy it. Excellent. We have incorporated word-of-mouth into traditional tv advertising <tell the junior account person and maybe we can amortize the cost of production over this word of mouth thing>.

Oh.

And we need a cool song <even though the song is relatively meaningless to the execution communication> so let’s use something by the Ting Tings <Great DJ is the song>. I know their music is used on Gossip Girl so it will be perfect for us. Who cares how much it costs! Darn it … we are a fun cool brand and Ting Tings are a fun cool band <cut to senior management on both advertising and client side making a note to themselves, using a pencil, to find out who the hell the Ting Tings are>.

————–

Whew.

abandon shipThat’s it.

There is so much random stuff happening in this advertisement my head hurts.

Now.

Someone is going to argue I am not in the target audience and that it is a ‘fun’ ad.

On the first part? Correct. I am not.

On the second part? You can create a fun informative execution without having to resort to simple random shit. Yeah. I said random. There are so many little ‘bites’ of information and lifestyle cues I have this vision that there was a long checklist of things they wanted to say and show and then they figured out how to piece it all together <under a basic framework of ‘fun’>.

Look.

Developing ongoing campaigns is significantly more difficult to develop good stuff <technical word for ‘work’> than one-offs.

But confusing the two is bad … really bad. What do I mean? Well. It seems like in today’s business world of ‘what have you done for me lately’ brand managers are often suggesting ‘treat this as if it needs to be a standalone idea’ with the good intention to get a break through type idea/execution … but the bad intention of “I don’t give a fuck what has been done before me … I want to do something great!” <usually stated in front of their marketing/advertising vendors with not just one exclamation point>.

I imagine it is up to the partners/vendors to bring some logic, if not some rational long term perspective to the discussion, but I recognize it becomes tough to do so when you have a young, or semi young, client saying ‘give me something different <or else … threat in whispers …>. So what marketing/advertising partners do as they shift into survival ‘responsible’ mode is that they develop some broad strategic guard rails to work within.

For example … try out … ‘well … Fructis is a fun brand for fun people and fun events/life’ <note that ‘fun’ is the operative word>.

Honestly … that strategic direction sucks <because it is broad and relatively meaningless … and Disney is a fun brand> but it gives the idea developer <creative people> a virtually endless horizon of possible paths to pursue.

Regardless.

I get frightened when I see advertisements like this because someone actually thinks this is good for Fructis long term.

Short term? I may not have even invested the energy writing about it <although it is a wacky configuration of stuff in an advertisement>.

Actually I get frightened on a variety of levels.

Hair falling out shampoo? <and calling it Fall Fight>

The advertisement? <actual execution>

The development? <how the idea was actually developed>

 

In the end.

Is the advertisement really bad? Of course not. It is kind of a wacky semi likeable ad.

I just cannot envision it being in the ‘good’ category in terms of execution and strategic.

Plus.

It gave me something to write about.

pressure doesn’t gain time

February 13th, 2013

Ok.and time is all there is

I almost called this “our obsession with time.”

And because of this obsession … procrastinators, who have always been crucified, are being verbally harpooned day in and day out in books, businesses and everyday life as “time wasters” <which is metaphorically making those people as bad as smokers, litterers and communists or, in general, inferior flawed people>.

Yup.

In my eyes procrastinators have a tough life these days.

 

Employers are getting better at squeezing any ‘time wasting.’

And peer pressure makes any time wasting become the equivalent of having a post-it note super glued to your forehead with lazy/inefficient/nonproductive/etc. <choose one or all> on it <or just a poor employee>.

Even compensation is becoming more short term.

Almost 60% of Americans are paid hourly.

And even if management isn’t tracking hours, paying people by the hour, demanding meeting effectiveness by the minute or utilizing time efficiency models to squeeze every productive minute out of you … you are putting pressure on yourself with to-do lists, calendar updates, scheduled sex events with your partner and “family time” <limited to maximize 15 minute increments to insure you get everything done you need to get done>.

We are so obsessed with time and maximizing it … all of it … each and every minute … and we are being pressured <by others or by ourselves> to do so all the with the intent to ‘gain time.’

<side note: this, to me, falls into the same category as ‘giving 110%’ in terms of absurdity … I can’t gain time or ‘free up’ time … I gots 24 hours no matter how I manage it>

Anyway.

We are constantly seeking to maximize moments under the guise of ‘not procrastinating’ or in harsher words … not wasting … our time.

Maslow suggested we should seek, and encounter, “peak moments of clarity.”

Some bonehead called Eckhart Tolle <who is considered a very smart bonehead in some circles> wrote an entire book expounding on living a life in the ‘now’ (Power of Now) which was slightly absurd.

A company I worked at, JWT, even wrote a trend white paper called “Time is the new Currency” <in the early 2000’s I believe>.

 

stopThis is crazy.

First of all obsessing over anything, let alone time, is not and never will be … healthy.

And secondly it will never increase efficiency, nor effectiveness, when all time is said and done.

Thirdly, pressure, especially on an ongoing basis, is never a good ingredient in the formula for happiness.

All that said.

 

I would like to reference an obscure article which can be found in the Academy of Management Journal <Brian Gunia & 3 co-authors of Johns Hopkins> and a book “Wait: the art and science of delay” <Frank Partnoy>.

Let me begin with one of my favorite topics – doing the right thing <ethically>.

I found it really interesting that in a series of experiments slowing down actually makes us more ethical <I had to reread this several times because I guess in my own head I would have thought our initial knee jerk reaction to a decision situation would have been us at our most ethical … but I was wrong>. When confronted with a clear choice between right and wrong, people are 5 times more likely to do the right thing if they have time to think about it rather than if they are forced to make a snap decision. In addition they studied businesses and suggest organizations with a ‘fast pulse’ <like banks> are more likely to suffer from ethical problems than those who move more slowly.

Say what?

Yup.

Time pressure enhances the odds someone will make a less ethical, less right, decision.

Beyond that … the books and research suggest that delaying decisions <not yielding to time pressure> actually enhances the quality of the decision.

Sure. There is a ROI on time and delay and decision making … I imagine if I were smart enough I could draw out a decision utility graph with time and quality of decisions but I am not only not smart enough but I cannot draw.

Suffice it to say these relatively smart guys say that in their published papers.

Look.

Maybe because of the business I am in I get asked a lot about family time (or diminishing of family time) and not having enough time to <fill in the blank> or managing time.

Beyond the fact I have either seen or have done so much research on how people actually USE their time … I have found that we invest so much time trying to manage time … or worry about how to alleviate the pressure time seems to put on us … we actually waste a shitload of time <which actually creates a doom loop of pressure to use and maximize time>.

There is so much discussion and pressure on what to do with time I see diminishing results.

The pressure to maximize time is actually leading to minimizing time (go figure)

So.

I remind people that we all have the same amount of time … which usually draws some evil looks … but its true … it’s what you elect to do with it and, maybe more importantly, your approach toward time.

I tend to believe we forget, or undervalue, the fact that it is less important to do things first then to do things right.

And I have someone on my side … Warren Buffett … who has said … “lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style.”pressure and time

<and he has made a BOATLOAD of money>

Me?

I worry that our obsession with time <speed> has a negative effect in business and at home <basically … in our lives>.

The secret to an effective brain is a combination of fast and slow <and there is research to support this>.

Procrastinators get a bad rap … yet this is exactly what they do.

A fact.

If you leave something to the last minute you only have a minute to do it.

Sounds obvious but it is a truth.

Procrastinators are actually the ultimate non procrastinators.

They utilize their time the most effectively.

The research shows that procrastinators actually use the time while putting things on hold thinking and evaluating and assessing different shit. Some relevant shit and some non relevant shit … but it all goes into our mental gourds … rattles around … and when the time comes when the decision/action trigger needs to get pulled … the majority of the time the action is a well rounded ‘right’ decision.

And if that just isn’t you?

Think about this … I found this thought from a mother … or maybe call her a ‘home manager’ instead.

“When you don’t know what to do next, just do the thing in front of you.”

Ok.

If you can live with that kind of thinking I actually believe that not only alleviates pressure <because you just say ‘screw it … I am just doing something’> and you are actually ‘doing’ inseatd of planning or thinking or worrying.

Ok <part 2>.

But I admit it certainly helps if you have more of an idea of what’s the most important thing to do next.

Because these days it seems like too many of us respond to the tyranny of the urgent.

One of the characteristics of an adult who has their shit together is the ability to recognize the difference between the important and the urgent.  And, ultimately, refuse to be tyrannized by the urgent … refuse to manage by crisis … refuse to waste time under the pressure to not use time wisely.

Sure. Easier said than done.

Who hasn’t struggled to start something ‘important’ but can’t seem to find the time because of an exploding diaper, an urgent business email, the ringing telephone, or whatever the crisis du jour may be in your own little world?

But as time managers we must recognize the difference … and disregard not only the pressure of others … but the pressure of the moment.

We cannot operate solely in response to the pressure of urgency for long … or we will go nuts.

Well.time persepctive

Time is not about pressure … it is simply about choices <which I fully recognize creates a different type of pressure>.

And choosing what is most important.

When we’ve made deliberate decisions about what’s important certain choices become a no-brainer.

You’re at peace with the choices you make, because they align with your priorities, and they just make sense.

Regardless.

If time is about choices … and under pressure we tend to make poorer choices … it kind of seems like that equals something to the effect that pressure loses time.

Go figure.

But I was never good at math.

rabbits

February 9th, 2013

rabbit hat mean

“… not even the best magician in the world can produce a rabbit out of a hat if there is not already a rabbit in the hat.”  - Boris Lermontov

 

Ok.

I admit. I often get a little crazy when I hear “well, you pulled that one out of your ass” <this generation’s version of pulling a rabbit out of a hat>.

Well. I apologize. Only 99%+ of the time I go crazy. I account for the less than 1% of the time to sheer dumb luck.

When someone makes a surprisingly good in the moment decision … or uncovers a relatively surprisingly insightful idea … in most cases the fact they are surprising people does not mean they just made it up out of the ether.

What I mean is that pulling a rabbit out of a hat <or out of your ass> implies you created something from nothing.

 

Here is a Life truth … even a business truth … so maybe let’s just call it Truth.

 

You cannot create something from nothing.

Sure.

Sometimes the connections between what was and what ends up being are blurry <if not even visible and sometimes appears to come out of the proverbial ether> but everyone needs to have a solid base of knowledge before making the connections <thinking or tangible things> to create something. That knowledge can be within <your own pea like brain and its experiences and thoughts> … or without <tapping into other people or things>.

Anyway.

Here is the full quote reference.

Livy Montagne: “You’re a magician, Boris. To have produced all this in three weeks, and from nothing.”

 

Lermontov: “… not even the best magician in the world can produce a rabbit out of a hat if there is not already a rabbit in the hat.”

 

Again.

You can’t create something from nothing … you can only create something from something else <or something elses>.

Another Truth?

Wrap your head around this.

Ideas exist … and don’t exist <simultaneously>.

Yup. Physicists have found something <particles and things that move around that we cannot see> can simultaneously exist and not exist.

In other words, some things are capable of existing in several different states.

Any physicist can correct me but I believe it is the uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics which suggests particles are allowed to travel along all paths and exist in all possible states simultaneously.

What changes uncertainty? The simple act of measurement. Measurement, or the simple recognition of what actually is, instantly forces it into just one path or state and it is no longer uncertain.

I believe it is called something like ”collapse of the wave function’” in physics.

Yeah.

It is the same in thinking, doing or whatever.

world controlled by a rabbitRandom knowledge collapses upon itself until it creates something. The ‘nothing’ is just a bunch of somethings yet to be consolidated.

 

I have been to far too many ‘brainstorming’ or ‘creative thinking’ or even ‘the power of visualization’ workshops … so many that my brain cannot storm and I cannot think straight let alone creatively and I cannot visualize shit. Every time I walk out I grab my copy of James Webb Young’s “Technique for Producing Ideas” <published in 1937 and still relevant today> and flip thru the pages to remind myself that ideation is all about cramming bits & pieces of ideas & information & thoughts into your head until you can either assimilate it into a ‘rabbit’ or you interact with someone else and inspire them to create a ‘rabbit.’

So. With that. Two thoughts.

Accumulate knowledge: the more you learn the more you can pull out of your ass <consistently>.

Practice: the more you use what you have learned the easier it is to pull something out of you ass.

 

Sorry. There is no such thing as divine inspiration.

There is no such thing as pulling rabbits out of hats <unless there is already a rabbit there>.

 

We all have a gazillion thoughts, observations, and information <parts, pieces or whole> bouncing around in our heads … either in our subconscious or conscious mind. There are a myriad of possibilities existing with regard to possible outcomes.

The nothing is all these pieces and parts not assembled.

The something is when assembly is achieved.

Now.

Not everyone is good at “assembling” or even implementing from the nothings floating around in their heads but that is a different post for a different day.

If you feed your mind you will end up with a boatload of rabbits in your hat.

But, please, something from nothing?

Not even a magician can do that.

uncovering the obvious

January 17th, 2013

Ok.uncovering the obvious

One of the craziest discussions you have with businesses is often about what they want to tell everyone about themselves as important (or differentiating).

Here is a marketing truth <that marketing people always fear to tell businesses>.

Businesses want to state something obvious.

But they want to claim it is superiority.

And, ultimately, it ends up simply being hyperbole.

And it isn’t just advertising … it is everyone and everywhere in a business. Sales, marketing, advertising, internal communications, PR and it even creeps into vision and mission direction/statements <where it can actually create harm>.

Obvious disguised as hyperbole is the bane of the communications industry.

This came to mind during a discussion I had on “nothing really good is ever easy” and I laughed and said “nothing really bad is ever easy.”

I didn’t say this just to be a smart ass <although I do enjoy being one>.

 

It is the oldest advertising trick in the book.

Reverse a ‘claim’ and see if it is something that anyone would ever do … or say. You can eliminate a lot of silly, if simply obvious, ideas by doing this.

I learned this one really on in my career from the advertising’s infamous David Bell when I was working at an advertising agency called Bozell in NYC. While David and I may have had our differences he was a wizard with clients and business leaders.

He taught me this one as we sat in a room filled with a non-stop testosterone driven group of a dozen client ‘marketing experts’ who bludgeoned us with ‘here is what we need to say about our company’ ideas. David staved them off one by one by reversing them to suggest ‘why would we say this? Because the alternative isn’t really an alternative is it? … and, if you agree, then what you want to say doesn’t say a lot about us.’

Ok.

Let me be clear.

What do I mean?

“We care about people.” <or> “We are in the people business.” <usually stated with an exclamation point or two>.

Flip it.

“We don’t care about people.”

“We are in the non-people business.”

Who the fuck would ever say that? No one.

Well. Unless maybe you are a zoo.

Flipping the claim points out your claim isn’t really different, or certainly not distinct, from anyone else.

Another.

“service matters.” <or> “service exceeding expectations.” Heck. even … “exceeding expectations.”

Flip it.

“Service doesn’t matter.”

“Service not exceeding expectations.”

And the infamous “meeting expectations.” <a nice low bar to meet>

C’mon.

Is there any business out there who offers the second, flipped, version? Of course not.

So that means what you are staking a claim to sounds good and makes you puff your chest out a little <a lot> … but it is meaningless in terms of differentiation, distinctness and drumming up business.

As I said … this conversation is one of the nuttiest discussions in business.

It gets even more convoluted because developing a tagline for a company is difficult. Yes. That I admit <and have the scars to prove how difficult>.

Therefore many businesses take their sales or organizational rallying cries <“go beyond the expected!”> and suggest you make it their tagline.

Uh oh <I typically started looking around for the M&M’s and the bar about that point>.

Look.

I am absolutely an alignment guy.

I believe in aligning an organization around a vision and a functional delivery focus.

But using words as an alignment tool is very tricky. It can be done … but it is tricky … and has to be very well thought out.

And sometimes it just cannot be done.

Regardless.

Once you uncover the obvious you should avoid using it to differentiate.

Oh.

My favorite to this day remains … “our people are our difference.”

Well.

When are the people not the difference between companies? <unless we go to Star Wars Episode III: Attack of the Clones and believe organizations are hiring clones … hmmmmmmmmm … which could explain unemployment … well … anyway … different post>

uncovering the obvious1Anyway.

I call this exercise “uncovering the obvious.”

And, yes, sometimes telling people the obvious in marketing & communications is important.

And, yes, I have often encouraged businesses to state the obvious <particularly when research has suggested that people need to be reminded about the obvious>.

But, no, I have never suggested stating the obvious as a superiority claim.

Because it is silly.

And, ultimately, the only people who do not believe it is silly are your own sales people <or most employees> because everyone on the outside will simply give you a quizzical look and say something along the lines of … “uhm, I kind of expected that.”

Now.

I tried to think about when it is appropriate to state the obvious and actually another blogger <Kog’s qualms> addressed this for me already:

I can’t quite figure out why people state the obvious and, why they do it so often.  Whatever the reason, I definitely have a qualm. But I’ll allow for exceptions.  Obvious statements are okay in two cases:

1) when you’re excited and having a fantastic time and you want everyone to know: “I’m having so much fun!  This is so exciting”; and

2) when you’re talking about the weather: “It’s so sunny!” or “ugghhh rain AGAIN!”.  The first type of statements are functional and life affirming and the second are the cornerstone of small talk and just about the only thing everyone in the world can talk about and agree on.

So.

Unless a business is having extraordinary fun <and wants to tell everyone> or wants to talk about the weather … steer them from stating the obvious.

All that said.

I am ashamed to say that I have lost too many of these types of battles in my career. So many, in fact, that I consider the few wins to be extraordinary moments in my career.

And sadly I believe my experience represents the majority.

In the end?

I am fairly relentless in teaching aspiring professionals to discern the obvious from the distinct differentiator. I do so not only because it is the right thing to do but with the hope that they will be better at winning these battles than I.

temporary advantage

January 9th, 2013

“Every advantage is temporary.” ― Katerina Stoykova Klemer

And.

“… the only true advantage is knowledge.” – <someone I cannot find at the moment>

So.

This thought of temporary advantage, and knowledge, is easy for business but it is also relevant to Life.

Let me begin with business <because, frankly, it is easier>.

Businesses are always seeking an advantage.

And they should.

I imagine the point I am going to make <in the end> is that most businesses don’t consider ‘advantage’ as temporary. When it actually happens … they treat it as sustainable and want to ride it all the way into the sunset <or as far as the horse will carry them toward it>.

And ultimately that becomes their downfall.

Couple of thoughts.

First thought.

Most often all energy is invested in developing a distinct product, or service, or some tangible advantage.

In fact gobs of money is spent against this objective.

Definition of gobs? Lots of money & time & intellectual energy. And this typically leads to some type of patent <if you are smart> or, at minimum, something different enough you feel it is … well … different <you may actually convince yourself after eating a pound of M&Ms in focus groups and multiple cocktails staring at your navel that it is “unique”>.

Now.  Let me tell you a business truth.

Product advantages are actually fairly easy to attain. In fact … they are a dime a dozen. Yup. Sorry about that.

Here is the other business truth.

The majority of product advantages are indiscernible to anyone but the one who developed it. I call it ‘dancing on the head of a pin’ differentiation.

Frankly? It is all wasted energy <mostly>.

Personally I prefer to aim for a competitive parity product that has enough meaningful benefits that it can compete over time <in other words … it is a sustainable product> … and use knowledge to be an advantage.

Sound crazy? Maybe.

Sound painful to say to management? Yes. Trust me … I have the scars to prove how painful.

But if you can keep your head out of your egotistical ass you actually have a chance to see this idea through to a very profitable, sustainable profitable, conclusion.

This translates into the ability to keep the product competitive but limit the amount of investment you have to invest to update/improve/trash & reinvent.

And use knowledge to sustain advantage because knowledge is a changing environment … never stagnant.

Next.

Second thought.

Sustainable advantage.

Sustainable advantage is really rare.

Extremely rare <unless you define ‘sustainable’ as ‘we did it for a week’>.

And, frankly, many businesses are actually too slow to take advantage of their … well … advantage. The window of advantage does not stay open long.

Businesses work to gain it <the ever elusive ‘advantage’>. They get it. They build plans to take advantage of the advantage. They go and do … and … well … their advantage is not only as advantageous as it used to look … but in many cases it is no longer even the advantage that you thought it was. The window is closed. Oh. Maybe worse? To your dismay you look around the room and another frickin’ window is open.

Damn. Wrong window at the wrong time.

That’s my quick acerbic soundbite for businesses on temporary advantage.

Personally I believe many businesses mismanage ‘advantage.’ Mismanage through incorrect attitude and in incorrect behavior.

Not only do they typically think incorrectly they also implement too slowly … and ultimately they do not know when to ‘abandon ship.’.

Regardless … now that every business person wants to send me a scathing personal email I will move on to the next topic.

Life.

Yup. I will discuss Life and temporary advantages.

We all know Life is challenging. And that is so mainly because it is always changing.

Just when you think you have at least one thing figured out Life moves the thing <hence the term “life sucks” was created>.

To even have a chance to be competitive with Life you have to continuously gain knowledge and adapt. There is no formula for gaining knowledge … sometimes you read something, meet someone or see something that changes your knowledge.

That is self stimulated gathering of knowledge … and it takes some fortitude and self desire to do so.

Therefore thank god for kids (youth in general).

They are a natural incentive to stimulate knowledge growth to maintain advantage. I worry about people like me, who does not have children, as well as those who ignore the knowledge, and stimulus to learn, young people offer. I guess my point is that we should use kids as a knowledge stimulant <rather than ignore them or subjugate them to our past tense type knowledge>.

I thank god I am a reader. It permits me to at least maintain a competitive place in a restless world. Notice I didn’t say competitive advantage.

Just be competitive.

I say that because I fully understand I will never find a competitive advantage against life. Well. Maybe I get a glimmer of an advantage on occasion. But it is fleeting.  I keep a constant eye on the fact you gain knowledge to try and keep up. And every once in a while you get really lucky and dash ahead for a second or two.

Two things about that ‘glimmer of the advantage.’

First.

Some silly people delude themselves into believing they have a competitive advantage in life. And, yes, they are delusional. People like this don’t seem to understand that Life is like a river constantly flowing. They quit paddling to rejoice in their ‘advantage’ and … oops … all the crap in life not only feverishly paddles by to get ahead <and lay some traps> but some of Life’s crap may actually slow down and do their best to smack you around a little <because a moving target is harder to hit so when you stop paddling you are easier prey>.

These people confuse ‘glimmer’ with ‘this is my new home.’ That is why they are delusional … because normal people could never get confused by those two things.

Second.

I worry about the people who never even gain one glimpse of the advantage. Because a glimpse gives hope you can win … at least on occasion in life.

No glimmer? No hope?  That worries me.

How can anyone, even the strongest of the strongest, keep going on without hope for something better?

I am fairly sure I couldn’t.

I struggle to see how anyone could.

Anyway.

I now envision someone cranking up an email with a thought on “hey, hold on a second, you seem to be suggesting becoming a chameleon … and don’t you always talk about being true to yourself at all times?!?” <please notice I used a rare exclamation point just for emphasis>

Despite the fact I will give that someone cranking up an email major points because that means someone actually has read some of my drivel in the past … I will quickly go to this quote:

“Adaptability is not imitation. It means power of resistance and assimilation.” – Mahatma Gandhi

And then I would answer this way … in business and in life … the core is the core.

That core is the “me inside” and that is the sustainable competitive product. And by product I mean a product being a manufactured product or simply you <or me>. Anyway. That competitive core probably doesn’t have any advantage … it is simply able to go on day after day, year after year and … well … continue to ‘be’ … to exist. It <you & I> compete in Life <or with Life> because of a good steady core.

Adaptability through knowledge leverages your core … and means possible temporary advantage.

That’s it.

That’s my point.

self doubting smart people

December 7th, 2012

“The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence.” – Charles Bukowski

So.

Having been extremely fortunate throughout my life glancing off a lot of really intelligent people I generally agree with this thought.

Generally … in that you could misdiagnose the thought of you are not careful.

Intelligent people are not overwhelmed in a sea of doubt … they simply temper their intelligence with doubt.

And that is a huge difference.

Really smart people are typically confident … they just also seem to have either of the two following additional attributes:

-          strong thread of insecurity that forces them to not go blindly off into a stupid black hole of unrealistic overconfidence

-          a fertile doubting, self-reflecting mind constantly reassessing and reevaluating

These two things could actually be one and the same but in my experience the really good ones, the really smart ones, kind of lean in one direction or the other.

Suffice it to say … it works.

It hones their intelligence and keeps them grounded.

Yup.

Even intelligence needs honing. And intelligence is restless anyway so it all kind of works.

I have seen the sharpest people <and I mean really really sharp> wrestle with thoughts & ideas & points of view picking their way through a path of possible decisions never really 100% confident until they reach … ‘the moment.’

<… oh … side note … intelligent people also tend to be the best frickin’ listeners you have ever known … they are sponges of information and thoughts>

With that said let me add in one additional aspect when discussing intelligent people and doubt.

That is ‘the moment.’

The time when the decision needs to be made, the point of view clearly expressed or shit needs to be done.

Crunch time.

In that moment … that very moment … the intelligent person clears their head of doubt. It is an intelligent moment of clarity. It is like a donut hole in doubt or insecurity or whatever gets wrapped around that brilliant mind that makes it so good.

And because of that last aspect it is a bear <really difficult> to discern the difference between an intelligent person and a stupid person in ‘a moment.’

Because both are going to be clearly confident in the moment.

I have no huge insight on this to help you … sometimes you just gotta go with your gut in judging <assuming you cannot get some perspective outside the moment>.

By the way … smart people can be stupid.

Stupid in overconfidence.

And overconfidence actually begets lazy thinking.

And lazy thinking is stupid.

<somewhere in there is a business life formula>

Intelligent people are never lazy thinkers. Never.

Anyway.

I imagine I felt like writing this to point out that sometimes ‘doubt’ can be a good thing. It is healthy in doses. It provides balance and perspective … not just for intelligent people but for all of us.

Let’s just say that maybe some doubt keeps us from being stupid.

Enlightened Conflict