Enlightened Conflict

instinct

April 6th, 2013

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

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 .

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

And they are rarely emotional in decision making.

Now.

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.

leaf without a tree

March 4th, 2013

So.

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 .

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.

Sure. 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 .

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>.

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?

They 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 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 .

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>.

Excellent.

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.

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>

<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.

That’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.

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.

logan’s answering machine

November 11th, 2012

“a long time ago, we used to be friends . . .” – Dandy Warhols <Veronica Mars theme song>

Ok … while this is about Logan’s cell answering messages <and teen Life lessons> … Logan was a great character in Veronica Mars. And Veronica Mars was a great show. I am relatively sure Kristen Bell <who was Veronica Mars> is a good actress … but her Veronica character was the PERFECT role for her. Really smart, in-your-face quick witted soundbite driven communicator, strong but sensitive … all the while balancing being a teen, a girl and a sense of maturity.

And while the show’s various mysteries and crimes were fairly well plotted <some stories were a little far out there> it was some great quick dialogue writing and some unbelievable soundbite moments that makes the show really work. For me? I struggle to remember long monologues <except maybe West Wing> but I constantly remember the short back & forth smart dialogue.

Anyway.

Veronica was not the only great character … there was Logan. A counterpart in quips.

High school Vice Principal: Mr. Echolls, may I have a word?

Logan: Anthropomorphic. It’s all yours, big guy.

The show was filled with little moments like this.

But.

Logan’s cell phone answering message. One of the really fun aspects of the show was how this tortured rich kid <Logan Echolls> used different quotations in a tongue in cheek way on his cell’s answering machine that he likes to call “inspirational messages.” They were delightful in that they were delivered in a slightly sarcastic tone but also as true insight into how he felt <or what he … or any typical teen … was dealing with>. You were never really sure he was pulling your leg or trying to share a helpful thought. The writers treated it as an intermittent running gag. It was awesome … funny … a little wacky … and always relevant to the situation. It was real wisdom but dropped into the real life situations Logan seemed to constantly find himself in. And, frankly, as good TV shows do … they parallel our own Life situations on occasion.

Here are a few <and remember that he is quoting as a high school junior or senior guy>:

“The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams.” -Eleanor Roosevelt

- Teens are in an odd, uncomfortable position in that almost their entire life is ahead of them … all their dreams remain on the horizon … and yet they are crossing into adulthood where reality has a nasty habit of forcing you to better assess your dreams maybe before you would like to. High school is a great place for dream building. And at exactly the same time … Life, in general, is a tough place for those who have dreams. This is where I really feel like teachers are in a very tough position in today’s society. Their real job is almost equally balanced between pragmatic teaching and hope building. They balance the possible and the impossible in almost every kid’s head. And, yet, parents are constantly pounding them on “why are you filling my kid’s head with all that nonsense … he doesn’t need to be dreaming … he needs to be thinking about doing.” Teachers are getting squeezed. And teens are getting confused.

Look. High school kids clearly understand reality. They know they will need a job. They know they need to be ‘good at something.’ And they know they need to do some things to insure they are prepared. We adults are smoking the wacky weed, or taking too many of those calming pills, if we do not believe that. We also are foolish if we do not understand that any Life transition moment <any … even as an adult> is challenging … and a little scary … as you leap from one spot to another. It drives me crazy that adults forget that shit.

Anyway. What makes Logan and Veronica Mars kind of special is that Logan knows all of this … and is going into adulthood kicking & screaming … while Veronica <who he loves> cannot wait to be an adult. The lesson to us adults? They both have dreams. And Veronica is no more valuable, better or exemplary than Logan because of this. People find their own timing with regard to knowing what they are going to do in Life.

“Adversity is the diamond dust with which heaven polishes its jewels.” -Thomas Carlyle

- We adults have a habit of scoffing at what teens believe is ‘adversity’ in their lives and say things like “wait until you get into the real world” or “wait until you have the responsibilities of a family.” We are silly to do so. Adversity is relative. And, to a teen, adversity is often uncomfortably out of their control <because it more often at the mercy of their parents’ lives>.

So while there are some things they can control … there is a lot that is out of their control. And that is a maddening type of adversity. I surely don’t like it as an adult … and as a teen, when you still have all your dreams in front of you, it is also a little scary <and a LOT aggravating>. You know … the truth is that the significant majority of the time teens are doing the best that they can. Life and adversity is grinding away at them and they all pretty much believe <at that time in their life> that there really is a diamond somewhere inside them.

I wish more adults would remember that more often <and I wish more adults told teens there is a diamond in there>.

“To love and win is the best thing. To love and lose: the next best.” -William Thackeray

- Of course, as a teen, this is said sarcastically. Oh, and painfully at exactly the same time. Your first love is always that … the first. Trying to convince yourself that ‘losing a love is the next best’ is a losing battle. Almost everyone learns the truth of this quote at some point in their lives … but … the first is always the first.

This is one of those thoughts that sounds awesome theoretically but is a painful reflection of Life trial & error. I think this thought is even more powerful because it is being said by a teen guy … okay … a tough guy teen. Being a teen boy is a tricky balance. Lots of balancing in fact. As you wander from boy to young man there are some toughness, ‘manly man’ expectations involved … and emotions are an interior thing at a time where much of high school life is an exterior thing. The brilliance of Veronica Mars? Logan gets to maintain his exterior tough guy and decided to share the interior emotion via this faceless piece of third party technology … the cell phone answering machine.

We should remember that even the toughest appearing kids need some outlet for their interior thoughts. We can either give it to them … or they will find it for themselves.

“Life’s tragedy is that we get old too soon and wise too late.” -Ben Franklin

- When I heard Logan say this I almost laughed out loud. Teens collect experience moments at an amazing pace. And it is still not fast enough. While we old folk always joke that ‘kids always think they know everything’ … we are wrong. Very very wrong. They don’t. And they certainly don’t think that.

They are just doing the best they can with what they have. Sure. They may bluff through some moments <which is mostly a “I don’t want to look stupid” action rather than a real belief they know everything>. Sure. They wished they knew more and had more experience and were ‘wiser’ … but I don’t know one teen who didn’t wish he/she had some more knowledge. That doesn’t mean they believe all older folk know more than they do <would you as you look around at how some of us old folk actually act?> but they certainly recognize that they have a shitload more to learn. And they certainly wish they knew what they really needed to know to deal with some of the crap they have to deal with. We old folk need to remember that Life’s trial & error gauntlet, particularly at that age, ain’t fun.

Anyway.

And the last dose of wisdom, inspiration thought for the day, Logan will share with you today:

“If you dig deep enough, you’re going to find that everyone’s a sinner.” – Logan Echolls

This is a pretty thoughtful thought. Sin covers a lot … envy, greed, lust, etc.

and the real thought behind this is the true fact … no one is innocent … the only question is … how will you bear the guilt? Yeah. This thought is not really about ‘sinning’ or being a sinner but rather acceptance.

We all have flaws. We all make mistakes. We all have done some thing we are not proud of. The real question alll of us face is not whether we have sinned in some way or not but rather how we accept that which was done. In the show Logan was extremely flawed <as kids trying to figure things out typically are> but at his core he was a good ‘man in the making’ …

If you dig deep enough inside, you will find everyone is basically the same … we all have hopes & dreams & good intentions … and insecurities intertwined throughout. And we all work our way though our high school years hacking our way through all of them. And we do <and think> some stupid things at that time in our lives. Heck. Life bombards you with so many different challenges from so many different directions all at a time when you are trying to define your own character and establish whatever version of self esteem you will carry with you moving forward … it would be exceptional if you made no mistakes. If you dig deep enough into your memory banks for that time in life … we all have sinned in some way.

Give kids a break. Of all the times in a Life I cannot think of another when insecurities are as tangled up with good intentions … and ‘sin’ behavior. And we should give them a break because of what I typed earlier … ‘how will you bear the guilt.’ As a teen shapes themselves into young adults I tend to believe we would like them to use as little guilt as possible as they shape themselves for the future.

Anyway.

Veronica Mars is a smart show. And Logan is an added bonus. Maybe just as sharp as Veronica with a similar slightly cynical view of life. The combination of the two makes for an introspective look at the teen/young adult mind <in a pretty entertaining show>.

And the inspirational messages are a nice <sarcastic> reminder of the stuff teens deal with.

twittering amongst the big birds

October 9th, 2012

This is from a recent WSJ article:

“When General Electric Co. Chief Executive Jeffrey Immelt tweeted for the first time this month, his “Hello Twitter” was greeted with some snarky replies, including this one: “@JeffImmelt how come my grandfather got on twitter before you?”

In the same article:

A leadership expert thinks a CEO is shortsighted if they aren’t tweeting. That is former Medtronic Inc. CEO Bill George, a management professor at Harvard Business School <and avid tweeter>.

“Most CEOs should accept that social media is part of their job description.”

“People want CEOs who are real. They want to know what you think … can you think of a more cost-effective way of getting to your customers and employees?”

With all due respect to a Harvard professor … what is he smoking?

<that should generate some twittering>.

“Social media is part of their job.” ?!? <that was me in a thought bubble> I think that is nuts.

Unless my business leader wants to be involved with twitter, personally, I am telling her/him <me included as a business leader type> ‘don’t waste your time.’

I found the article fascinating because I know for a fact that today CEOs, heck, all company leaders, are constantly being hounded by their own people to join Twitter. Why? Well, because they aren’t:

Seven in 10 Fortune 500 CEOs have no presence on major social media networks such as Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Pinterest and Google+ (source: CEO.com and analytics company Domo).

Among those who do, 4% have known Twitter accounts and 8% use Facebook under their own names, according to the study.

Now. As a counterpoint … 34% of all Americans are on Twitter and 50% use Facebook (same source).

My conclusion? I still say ‘don’t waste your time.’ <unless you & your friends are already on twitter>

There are a hundred different ways a leader can be accessible or ‘real’ or “authentic” or ‘human’ or whatever characteristic you have in your pea like brain that a leader should be. And ‘cost efficient communications’ is … well … silly. Just because it is cheap doesn’t mean it is the best quality decision. But that may be an entirely different post.

Anyway. I struggle to think 140 characters is what is going to make people think someone is more real, authentic or human.

In addition … I think people confuse the issues by using words like ‘human’ or ‘authentic’

In addition … I continuously believe we confuse “social” and “business” .

Social is social <crazy me … but isn’t that the reason it is called ‘social media’?>. Business is business . What employees, and the business world, desires are not social words but rather business words that explain “why the fuck are they making that decision and don’t they know how it affects me!?!” <and not “hey … the party I am at has escargot <snails to the peons in the mailroom>.

We want leaders to (a) make the hard, difficult decisions and (d) <because that first is actually a, b and c.> show that you are in touch with ‘me’ <the little guy> on occasion.

… Yes … please note that I wrote “on occasion.”

No employee seriously believes a leader has time to be with the troops every day let alone typing out 140 characters <ongoing … because twitter is a dialogue not a megaphone> to share the serious stuff.

And the non-serious stuff?

Heck. I really, honestly, don’t want to hear about their social life. It does not make them any more real to me as I hear about their relaxing in some Monte Carlo casino or Marlin fishing on some yacht in the middle of the Caribbean or how they went to their ‘weekend cottage’ or even the ‘blue collar’ … “I weeded my beet garden this morning.”

I want to know they are doing their business shit … and doing it well.

I learned this a really really long time ago … great leaders are not always liked by everyone <the corollary to that is … well … no one is always liked by everyone>. That doesn’t mean they go out of their way to be disliked by everyone. They simply realize that most people will ‘kind of’ like you <and not really care about your human side as much>:

- if the employees feel like they are being fairly compensated

- the employees are being fairly involved in the success of the company <assuming there is some success>

- the employees feel like the company is secure <the leader is making the difficult decisions well>

- the employees feel like they are listened to if they have something <important> to say

<note: a leader can, and should, do all of that and not via twitter>

Anyway.

Here is where Twitter really doesn’t work <99.9% of the time> for leaders … the difficult decisions can absolutely be summarized in 140 characters <we did “x” and it is good for you> but it cannot EXPLAIN the difficult decisions.

Heck. It cannot explain the semi-difficult decisions. And if you cannot explain clearly you get questions. And questions foster rumors. And rumors foster people not working and instead gabbing and tweeting amongst themselves and, in general, a lot of non-productivity.

Look.

I am all for twitter and I think it is a neat social tool for in the moment quick give & take but I also know that even I do not have time to use twitter properly for myself <given everything else going on> and absolutely would not have time to use it properly in managing any organization that is , say, maybe over 50 employees.

Yes. There will be exceptions.

I would argue that the exceptions are driven not by the individual but rather by the company, i.e, what they do to make the organization run all day long <it is different for an online sales business than a factory production line business> & what is its overall culture.

Most leaders <not just Fortune 500 comapanies> just say they are too busy running a company to spend time posting 140-character messages to Twitter and/or retweeting posts <amen to that>. The GE leader could have <thank god he didn’t> tweeted back … “is your grandfather running a billion dollar company or was he tweeting from the golf course this morning?” <note: this is an example of why it is good I don’t tweet>

Sure. There may come a generation of leaders where the involvement of twitter is so integral to their every day DNA that when they actually become a leader it will be … well … not a tool or a tactic nor something they do that makes them more ‘real’ or authentic but rather simply a part of who they are. But <yeah … there is a but>.

Here is my bet.

How you think about things is different between before you get there and when you get there. I believe the next generation of leaders will find they don’t have the time, or there will be more effective means of communicating what they want to communicate, once they actually reach the Fortune 500 CEO <or leaders> slots.

In the end I believe we confuse socially connecting and business connecting. And planning how to make someone sound authentic kind of sounds to me like sending someone to a Sincerity Class.

Now. To be clear.

I firmly believe that today’s leaders have lost a sense of how important organization culture and organizational behavior ‘feelings’ are as they solely focus on the balance sheet. And I firmly believe more of today’s leaders don’t have to be more human, or real, but instead simply recognize they have real humans working for them.

I just do not believe tweeting is the answer to either of those things.

using the resurrection in marketing

September 20th, 2012

Whew.

For years I have waited for Pepsi to have “the idea” that knocks coke from the top of the hill. Then I saw a headline that suggests they have arrived at “the idea” … resurrection. (the headline: Michael Jackson to Be “Resurrected” on a Billion Pepsi Cans).

Yeah. Resurrection.

This is good stuff. This is better than Coke’s secret formula for god’s sake <pun intended>.

Albeit this round at resurrection isn’t … well … the big one … but it is Michael Jackson. And they are attempting to resurrect a billion versions of him .

My sense is that Pepsi is eventually going for the gold. The all or nothing win in the future. Yup. The “big” resurrection. And I bet they do it on more than a billion cans <they may even do bottles for ‘Him’>.

My best guess is that this is just a trial run on resurrection to make sure they have the whole process down. And you can judge (because they better have it right before attempting the son, or daughter, of God) because I believe they are attempting to resurrect the Jackson 5 version (also known as the “off the wall” version). <picture to right>

So if you happen to see the monkey loving, kid hugging version you know Pepsi is still working the resurrection kinks out <picture to left>.

I think this is a really great move on their part because I am fairly sure I have seen a Coke Christmas ad that suggests God is <was? … not clear on what tense I should use> a Coca-Cola drinker.

If you can’t get the head of the household then you make a play for the kids.

Good sound marketing.

1855 and 2012 (or … an Open Letter to My Generation)

September 19th, 2012

Dear My Generation <us older folk>,

Ok. I feel like we need to have a talk. Not just a talk but maybe a ‘talk talk.’ You know what I mean. Now. I am going to avoid the “am I better off today” topic but suggest in an open letter to my generation that we may not be in an economic crisis but rather a cultural crossroads. And I may suggest that we need to quit complaining and/or blaming and step up to the plate. Anyway. It seems like we get so caught up in ‘how bad – we feel/perceive – it is today versus yesterday” we overlook this period in time may simply be an example of painful well-needed progress <oh, isn’t all progress painful?>.

“Progress? The history of all times cries loudly against it.” – Immanuel Kant

Note #1: Versions of this thought were recorded in Egyptian hieroglyphics.

Note #2: The idea that we are bad, and getting worse, feels remarkably comfortable across cultures.

Note #3: My generation seems to be crying loudly at this time.

This thought is also true for each generation’s belief, or nonbelief, with regard to our views on human nature and its prospects. Most cultures have a myth of a golden age from which we are in decline, but in the absence of evidence on whether the state of nature was violent or utopian or truly golden or gold plated.

Note #4 <or rather a question>: so … is much of our current angst about the world simply a reflection of the fact attitudinally we change, progress, is painful … as well as difficult to see while within the moment?

Ok.

What made me think about all of this?

I had some beers the other night with a bunch of guys in my generation <old white guys … I am also an old white guy>. Prior to beer I was fairly optimistic with regard to the world and when I left I had a sense of several of the following:

- Armageddon is upon us <at least the old white guys>

- The world is crumbling around us <and it is mostly Obama’s fault>

- America is a pansy in foreign policy <we should be killing, crushing, smothering someone … yet to be identified but it should have already been done>

- The Islam slur video on youtube is simply an expression of freedom of speech

- Cats & dogs are living together <but cannot be married>

- We are doing nothing but complaining, bickering and blaming someone else

Personally I find it difficult to discuss progress when most people I hear think we are headed to hell <in a hand basket> and want to complain someone should do something about it or just blame someone for it.

Regardless. I am gonna try. Because I need to tell some things that are on my mind to my generation <us older folk>.

The truth is that all times are changing times. Times of moral and mental transformation whether we like it, or want it, or not. When what is viewed as simplicity by looking in a rear view mirror looks like chaos when viewing through the front windshield. What everyone knows is true becomes only wht some people used to think.

In the end? It is unsettling. For all our delight in innovations and impermanence we also long for the unalterable. We cherish old stories for their changelessness.

Oh. And media is doing its part to feed this frenzy. As retired General Wesley Clark said on a Sunday interview … “isolated multiple incidents involving the few being highlighted by the media creates perceptions of overall chaos.”

But the media is a different post for another day.

Now, I am not suggesting we shouldn’t look around with concern … albeit I would rather call it a ‘crossroads’ rather than the more popular ‘C’” word … a crisis. Because, yes, things are changing, but, yes, they are always changing.

That said … I am reminded by Rousseau: “let us begin by setting aside all the facts for they do not affect the questions.”

The question is why we are so certain the world is going into a shithole <or into chaos … or … in a crisis … pick your poison>.

Attitudinally I suggest this is partially what Gregg Easterbrook calls “the progress paradox.”

It suggests that frustrations rise with our expectations, and make us feel worse while we are actually getting better. Political interests, and media, deliberately exaggerate bad things. But it doesn’t explain the joy we seem to gain from seeing our glasses as half empty.

It is difficult to explain but I am not writing to do so … only to make the point that while we gnash our teeth about what is going on today … we have this in common with any culture and any generation you would like to query <you may need a medium and a crystal ball to ask some>. Every age produces prognosticators who declare it is worse than what came before. They might turn out to be true but within the moment it is always difficult to say whether one is declining or progressing.

It is a see saw of challenges and new innovations.

Robert Bork suggested <in an otherwise unreadable book of despair>: “every new generation constitutes a wave of savages who must be civilized.”

Despite being poetic he has a point. We learn from history and we ignore history.

Each generation wants to create a unique identity … which means you begrudgingly assume things from past generations /history. All that said the true thought is there to be found … for moral clarity for each generation we need to conserve the bits of decency left. For it is within a sense of decency we can see the progress within the seeming chaos.

Part of the difficulty in doing so in times like these is that we tend to feel better when we assume the worst.

Huh? Yeah, But It would be too easy to suggest optimists may spend their lives being disappointed while pessimists spend theirs being pleasantly surprised <although I do believe there is an element of this>. Plus. If you buy this then it suggests my generation is simply a generation of pessimists … and I refuse to believe that.

Optimists or pessimists, good or evil … frustrated or just simply believe “these are the worst of times” I will take a minute to let my generation read two items from the mid 1800’s. I included these thoughts to show some words that I believe resonate today. In fact, take the dates off and they could appear in NY Times next week:

“The dream that this young land, fresh from the hands of its Creator, unpolluted by the stains of time, should be the home of freedom and the race of men so manly that they would lift the earth by the whole breadth of its orbit nearer heaven … has passed away from the most of us , as nothing but a dream. We yield ourselves, instead, to calculation, money making, and moral indifference.” – 1855 magazine writer

“it is an affair of instincts, we did not know we had them: we valued ourselves as cool calculators, we were very fine with our learning and culture, with our science that was o no country and our religion of peace … and now a sentiment mightier than logic, wide as light, strong as gravity, reaches into the college, the bank, the farmhouse, and the church. It is the day of the populace; they are wiser than their teachers. The interlocutions from quiet looking citizens are of an energy of which I had no knowledge. How long men can keep a secret! i will never speak lightly of a crowd. We are wafted into a revolution which, though at first sight a calamity of the human race, finds all men in good heart, in courage, in a generosity of mutual and patriotic support. . We have been homeless, some of us, for some years past … but now we have a country again. This affronting of the common sense of mankind, this defiance and cursing of friends as well as foes, has hurled us, willing or unwilling, into opposition.” Ralph Waldo Emerson 1861

The late 1850’s into the 60’s was a time when the men and women, an extraordinary cast of characters in leadership & influencer roles, find themselves at a crossroad of new ideas–about medicine, commerce, economics, technology and justice. It was a time in the world where proponents of the old ways fiercely battled those with progressive minds.

A time when the intrigue, the ideas, the questioning and tension raise the level of global change.

Sound familiar?

So.

A couple of points here:

Every generation feels like it is worse than it was before.

Every generation struggles to link past analogies to the present <because we inevitably always err on the side of thinking today is significantly different than yesterday because of ‘progress’ innovations>.

All that said let me share some bigger overarching thoughts relevant to the overall angst I believe my generation is feeling … because our beer conversation reminded me of several things:

- In America, in particular, we constantly struggle in the hollow space that lies between a self-interest mission and an idealism mission. Kissinger suggested America will always be tugged in 2 directions with its foreign policy.

1. Domestic ideals: A strong sense of what is best for America (within its boundaries as primary focus and secondarily its actions outside its border).

2. Mission of ideals: A strong belief that part of our mission is to encourage and support our “freedom of choice” ideals (regardless whether there may not be a direct self-interest reward). How about calling this ‘supporting the progress of our ideals internationally.’

A thought for my generation. These two things are not always aligned and yet our actions may still be right. Regardless. We are a country with a strong set of ideals of which are not defined by dollars and cents. The dollars and cents have always been defined by the ideals. Yes. Let me say that again to my generation … the dollars and cents have always been defined by ideals.

There is good well earned money and then there is … well … money. Notice the people who stretched the rules to make their money defend it as “money is money.” They are wrong. It may all look the same but it doesn’t feel the same. I say that because it is up to my generation to remember the ideals … and the fact we are NOT the world’s peacekeeper … we are the world’s ideal protector. Inside and outside our borders we stand up for the little guy <or gal>, the medium sized guy and the big guy wherever and whoever they are to protect the ideals. And I mean wherever and whoever. We refuse to let ideals be bullied.

I am a business guy. So let me try this on for size. If it isn’t about ideals then aren’t we just a commodity? My generation needs to put their wallets and any bias toward some religion in the drawer for a minute or two and check their ideal pulse. Cause if there is no pulse we are doomed.

- We constantly struggle with the perception reality gap of minority actions and majority truths (and I have a longer post coming up on this). Despite how it sometimes feels we are not driven by the lunatic fringe which is in the minority. The minority…the radicals, the psychopaths, the greedy, the morally inept … is just that … a minority. As a subset of the minority/majority paradox we constantly struggle with discerning the lunatic fringe from the voice of progress in the fringe. And the lunatic fringe is often sneaky making it difficult to discern. Think about Ron Paul or even Jesse Ventura. Or almost any radio talk show host (right or left). One moment lucidly insightful next moment loony crackpots.

Regardless I would suggest to my generation that we get our heads out of our collective asses and realize we are smart enough to not be fooled by some sound bite or inflammatory statement as some foolhardy fact but rather think … yes … think. Progress takes work and thinking. Therefore, the foolish voices of rage within some silly minority faction nor the silent majority of the sheep are relevant to us because in thinking our way through it ultimately we will be able to offer a clear voice of reason.

- We constantly struggle with immediacy and patient thoughtfulness. We burst into a desire for immediacy and decisiveness (which we sometimes confuse with immediacy) to right a wrong or to get something done. And yet we are unforgiving in the retrospective “blame game.”. We seek to blame. We seek the quick response. We seek self-interest. We seek hope. We seek dignity and decisiveness in our actions. We want decisive quick leaders in a complex (sometimes confounding in our attempts to unravel it all to find truth).

I would suggest to my generation we are of an age where we have run the gauntlet of hasty foolish decisions and wasted opportunities dithering over this & that. In our wisdom we should realize that while our leaders may be ‘better’ than we in some form or fashion they are also derivatives of us … having run the same gauntlet. We are smart enough to know that some decisions should be made quickly and some should be made patiently and that typically the person who knows the most <which would not be us by the way … it is them> will make the best decision possible. Will it always be right? Of course not. But the blame game is wasted energy … for us & them.

- We constantly struggle, morally, between how to act on what is versus how we believe it ought to be (I have an upcoming post on this called redefining mortal clarity). I am not really sure it was that much better when we were young but I sense things were fairer … people played by the rules more often and people did the ‘right thing’ more often. Regardless of what I sense, or don’t sense, what I do know is the foundation of a moral clarity is “we” … not I. Because at the heart of moral clarity is some decision of self sacrifice, i.e., what I am I willing to sacrifice <a me thing/benefit> in this situation so that I honor the “we” <either in ideal or actual benefit>.

I could have suggested to my generation that the struggle is between I and we but instead I took it to a higher level and suggested we explore our collective moral navels <please remove lint> and decide what we want to be teaching our future generations.

- We constantly struggle with looking backwards and forward progress. We are at an age where it is sometimes simpler to look back than look forward. We assess all the progress that has been done in our lifetimes (and desire to maximize it in some ways) rather than dream of the unseen progress to come.

I suggest to my generation that no matter how fond you are of some memory or ‘how it was’ or ‘how we did it’ you cannot go back. Ok. You can … but you ain’t gonna get anyone else other than some old folk to join you. Progress is forward. We don’t have to throw out the baby with the bathwater but we need to stop slowing everyone down looking backwards. It’s done. Move on. Help progress or just get the hell out of the way.

Ok.

Interestingly all of what I typed <aspects of it> may be why every generation believes it is not as good as what was before. In reaction we seek the decisions made and not the process that led to it.

So, my generation, we need to take a step back and quit whining for someone to show up and magically clean our house <assuming you actually own one> for us.

We may prefer clean <and clarity> but the world is a messy place. It always has been.

My dear generation … regardless of how you feel on this topic <we are going to hell or every generation has felt like they were going to hell> we ultimately are forced to focus on progress and moving forward. It is inevitable. And all this blaming and dickering silly backwards gilded age gazing is irrelevant. In fact it is wasting not only energy but also what we actually have to offer to progress. We are the Prophet (Idealism) archetype <Straus/Howe archetype> generation of wisdom to future generations.

the caption is not mine but the future is in the picture

Yup. Future generations. Sorry, my generation … but, no matter how narcissistic we may be, our reward, and the inevitableness of progress, is not self-interest.

It is our Children.

Practically speaking children give us a stake in the future <and a desire to see it doesn’t end up in hell>. Whether we want to believe progress is possible … in the end … you cannot possibly raise, or educate, children if you believe it is not possible.

So, my generation, maybe it is time to grow up.

It is time to battle calculation, money making, and moral indifference.

It is time to remember that which we desire … be the home of freedom and the race of men so manly that they would lift the earth by the whole breadth of its orbit nearer heaven.

It is time to insure we do not regress but rather progress.

Please.

Sincerely,

One of the <older folk> Generation.

how to tell someone you listen

September 10th, 2012

Ok. Every once in a while you see something in marketing & advertising that reminds you how difficult it is to do something that seems like common sense.

What do I mean?

Well. I saw two banks’ advertising <SunTrust and 5^thThird Bank> that brought this to life for me.

So.

First. Let me tell you a secret.

Everyone sees the same industry research.

Everyone.

Which always makes me laugh when someone says “our research information is proprietary & confidential.”

Yeah.

Whatever.

If that makes you feel better and more important … then … well … sure.

Second.

Listening (which inevitably leads to a better response) is, has, and will always be the most important concept in a service business – and particularly banking (financial services).

Oh.

Sorry about that marketing folks …

It is not ‘solutions’ or ‘personal’ or ‘customized’ or ‘one-on-one’ or even the infamous “it is about the people” <huh? no shit … unless you are a zoo what else would it be?> … sorry … it is not because alll those things listed are outcomes from effective listening.

You cannot do anything that I just listed in the previous sentence unless you actually listen. Therefore they are all simply by products of a listening foundation.

Anyway.

That said <having burst some planner insight omnipotent insight diatribe>.

The point of this post is that you can blatantly tell someone you listen <which is not good> or you can say something that tells/suggests to everyone you listen <which is good>.

5^th Third says “I am the listening bank.”

C’mon.

<WTF>

I rank “I am a good listener” in the same group as

- “my I am a beautiful woman/handsome man”, or

- anyone saying “trust me” or suggesting you are an honorable person … and you haven’t even earned it … or …

- anything related to “I am really good at” type comment.

There are just some things you cannot tell people and be believed. Sure. You can toss around some proof points to try and get someone to think “maybe” but I struggle to think of a time where it has been effective to simply tell someone you are something. Heck. Why do you think the misreably boring technique of testimonials is used so often? They are trying to say “I <the company> am this because they <some people being filmed> say this.”

Anyway. As I listened to 5th Third <with mouth embarrassingly agape> I remembered I had written this a long time ago <it seems like eons ago>:

———-

How do we communicate “Listening & Responsiveness” within the marketing communications?

- Listening is the difficult portion to communicate. It is more in the tone or “reading between the lines.” However, it must be communicated strongly enough that the reader understands “oh, they HAD to have listened to have been able to generate that kind of response.”

So. Why don’t we just say, “we listen?” Well, just saying “we listen” really has no credibility. There is an important distinction (and it is sometimes a very fine line) to be made between claiming to listen and actually listening. Many advertisers claim to know what’s important to the customer, like, “we know you are nervous about getting your first mortgage.” This is presumptuous – how do they know if they’ve never spoken with you? Someone may know what the “process” can make you feel .. but, the reality?, everybody is different, therefore, you can never be sure until you have listened. The challenge in communication is trying to communicate that they genuinely listen to you.

Understanding your needs before offering customized solutions.

It has to become evident that listening is closely linked to responding. It is definitely a cause-and-effect process, but ongoing as in “growing in knowledge.” In situations where a response comes before the listening it is only because it is neither backwards nor unusual. It is merely the result of a relationship where each participant understands the other.

Bottom line?

It is important to communicate that you are seeking an understanding of the customer. The intent is to create a perception you are knowledgeable enough that all the “responses” are stored away in the closet … but we don’t know which one to pull out until they have listened. The communications needs to say “we have this particular response for you, but until we listen to you, we aren’t sure it is right for you .. so call today to see.”

——-

My point?

Being a great listener is not something you can tell someone you are … it has to be earned over time.

I think I laughed out loud when I saw/heard it. Yeah, yeah, yeah … I am sure they crafted some research that suggests “5^th Third is perceived/seen as good listeners” by its current customers. But …. some things to ponder so you do not take research information and think it is unfettered truth to be passed out like candy at Halloween:

That information is relative. It’s like being the tallest midget. No bank is truly considered a great listener.
Current customers are not potential customers <in the grand scheme of things>. sure. You may want to sell them additional services but you always want new customers.
Service <or listening, helping, caring, attention> is good but you are a bank … I am giving you money so I can eventually have more money.

I say all that because service has to be balanced with solutions. Is that easy? Nope.

But I can tell you that simply saying “I listen” kind of avoids the solution side of things <beyond the fact it is blatantly narcissistic>.

Now I get to my next example on the Listening issue … SunTrust bank.

And, I admit, I was part of the team who helped on the campaign … but I will point out that it was 2000 and it is now 2012 and they are still using the strategic platform and the key line.

Instead of saying “I listen” <or “I am the listening bank”> they just say “we begin every conversation with How Can we Help You”.

The line has changed slightly since 2000 <we built the idea off of “How can I help you?”> but it remains all about listening & responsiveness.

The following is an excerpt from the original strategy <or ‘manifesto’> document which was used for the internal communications and the external strategy brief :

——–

SunTrust: The “how can we help you?” Strategy (2000 or so)

All banks are not created equal in the eyes of the consumer … SunTrust IS in fact unique.

This means consumers chose SunTrust the best combination of:

- products and services it offers

- the level of service its people provided.

Once again .. better than all the banks SunTrust competes against.

Common sense tells us the tangible products are less important if they are not matched up correctly with what the customers say they need.

Research tells us customers define this “personal service” they like into two simple thoughts:

- listening (“they treat me like they want to help rather than just get rid of me”)

- responding (“they offer me solutions rater than just sell me a product”)

These two things – listening and responsiveness (or how we respond) – go hand in hand. We can’t provide them with the BEST response .. unless we listen first.

With that in mind SunTrust developed a communications strategy to capture the essence of the SunTrust uniqueness as well as what the consumer actually desires — a simple idea to wrap the current SunTrust successful service attitude around this listening and responsiveness.

Service attitude. Listening. Responsiveness.

“How can we help you?”

The culmination of everything we wanted to say about SunTrust to the potential customers in the marketplace

With this one simple line SunTrust:

- Invited the customer to speak.

- Requested permission to listen to what they have to say.

- Suggested we would like to provide them with a response.

These simple words reflect our service attitude.

It is a question …yet an offer to take action.

It suggests a promise.

A promise to listen and respond in any way we can to help.

It is a question a customer would expect from their local bank .. but unexpected from a large bank.

Even better, this question answers the reason why people typically walk through our doors or contact us .. they typically NEED help in some way.

“We listen and respond to what you say,” means SunTrust has taken a genuine interest in you, the customer. They make an effort to hear what you are saying with intention. SunTrust does not presume to understand how difficult it is to ask for money is or how busy your life is. Rather, they make eye contact with you, ask you questions about your needs and desires, and they answer your questions promptly and with detailed answers. They never shuffle you away or act like your questions are unimportant. It is a simple reflection of an organizational attitude … a desire first & foremost to help.

In the end it is a reflection of the SunTrust difference.

“How can we help you?”

It says, “Come to SunTrust where you know we are large enough to have access to all the resources you may need … and the Customer come first.”

————–

<note: if you are not in the strategy/marketing business you just got a glimpse of the nonsensical mumbo jumbo that is done behind the scenes that actually leads to sensical attitudes & behaviors within an organization.>

In the end I guess I am making the point that sometimes telling people exactly what you want them to believe … without earning it … is … well … stupid.

Some things you just have to earn person by person. So it is better to share something within your culture which gives a possible customer the hope you will give them what they want rather than tell them you will give it to them.

Sound complicated? Maybe. But we common folk are uncommonly complicated when we think.

Ok.

All that said … absolutely nothing to do with “listening” <or how to suggest you can actually listen> but another bank, PNC, actually has a nice message out in the marketplace.

It is all about being a personal ‘CFO’.

Or the thought that everyone is a cfo.

Nice idea.

I like it.

I tend to believe everyone thinks of managing their own finances as being CFO-like. And while you may not officially have the title sitting at the dining room table trying to figure out how to pay the bills, and mortgage, and school loans you kind of feel like no business CFO has it any tougher than you do.

I do not know if you are listening but, well played PNC.

libre et independante

August 28th, 2012

“La fixité du milieu intérieur est la condition d’une vie libre et indépendante.” – Claude Bernard

translation: “The constancy of the internal environment is the condition for a free and independent life.”

I didn’t know who good ole Claude was until I found this quote … suffice it to say I love this quote <and thought>.

Claude as a scientist. And while he was talking here about science this says a shitload about life and individuality and the fact people, to be at their best, need to have some core consistency (passion, vision, character, whatever) in order to be free enough in the external life to be successful.

What a great thought.

I tend to believe almost everyone has some core consistency that encapsulates their ‘being’ <soul, character, personal brand … I cannot believe i just typed that last one … whatever is that little flame inside you that is always burning … sometimes faintly … sometimes like a flamethrower …>. I also tend to believe most of all those everyones do not actually think about themselves like Claude suggests.

Ok. Let me explain. There are some life/personal dynamics that occur which drive people into buckets when evaluating themselves <which inevitably drives them away from this inner consistency/outer freedom thought>.

First. Passion or personal mission or something along those lines is a tricky concept. What a person may be passionate about at 18 may be different than what it is at 28. In addition it may be similar at a later age but defined more clearly or differently. Identifying passion is challenging … it is hopeful vision and yet, at its best, is reflective. Time permits reflection and, I would argue, clarity. I say this first one because this suggests a constancy of internal environment is tricky. To be successful with this thought you kind of have to be slightly adaptive.

Which leads me to second point.

Most <many?> of the people who focus on ‘constancy of internal’ are anally stubborn with regard to their decision on what constitutes constancy. In other words … they are not particularly good at being adaptive <with regard to their inner constancy>. They find comfort in a more rigid definition of “what I am passionate about” to a point where it becomes a single lane highway. Translation on what I just typed? They sacrifice ‘free and independent life’ because they are so focused on their passion/vision. Hey. I am not suggesting that is a bad thing … it is just simply a reminder that they have traded off something they may not have realized they have sacrificed. and they may be quite content with such a decision. I would actually argue that most of these people do not even recognize they have made that exchange.

Which leads me to the third. The corollary to the second is the people who focus on ‘free and independent life.’ You could simply replace all the comments on ‘constancy’ in the last paragraph with ‘free and independent’ and it will net out to the same conclusion.These people are just as maddening as the constancy people. Maybe even more maddening. They confuse free & independent for unfocused and undirected ability. At least the constancy people are focusing their abilities <albeit sometimes in a misguided fashion>.

These people tend to waste more of their abilities than they ever realize. There will be occasional flashes of brilliance interspersed with incredible waste of energy <under the guise of ‘independence’>. Now. Once again. Some people are incredibly happy with the occasional flashes. I am simply making an observation using the quote.

Because in the end Claude is right. The leveraging of the freedom and independence from some inner constancy, some solid foundation, is most likely to create the most happiness in a person. This is not a simple formula … like a 50/50 split. The formula of importance will vary by person. All I am saying is that the happiest people have both an inner constancy and some form of ‘freedom & independence’ in their lives. And I am also saying it is a worthwhile effort to sit down on occasion with a beer <or swanky mineral water if that is what you like> and think about this.

Why? Well. I think most people are happier when they (a) fully understand what truly burns inside them … that passionate aspect that warms happiness and (b) then they can truly enjoy the free & independent aspect because it will … well … I am not sure this is the right word but … it will have more value more consistently.

In the end I am once again reminded by someone’s smart use of words in a quote that happiness is a very personal thing despite the fact many people want to shove the happiness responsibility onto someone or something else … like “I am happy when I am doing something for someone” or “happy when I know it is helping the environment” … and … well … that is probably a bunch of happy horseshit. It is nice to do unto others … but happiness is derived from some sort of ‘self.’

An inner constancy & how you utilize, or do not utilize, free & independence.

Claude was a smart guy.

Oh. And as with most things … this personal tidbit/point of view is similarly relevant in the business world. This will be a generalization but the organizations which are too slavish to ‘constantcy’ fail because of their lack of ability, or interest, to adapt to changing environment. And organizations, typically the entrepreneurial ones as examples, which are too fond of free & independence <independent and maverick thinking> fail because they lack a core to provide a sustaining aspect.

That’s it.