=================

“Capitalism is the only engine credible enough to generate mass wealth. I think it’s imperfect, but we’re stuck with it. And thank God we have that in the toolbox. But if you don’t manage it in some way that incorporates all of society, if everybody’s not benefiting on some level and you don’t have a sense of shared purpose, national purpose, then it’s just a pyramid scheme.”

David Simon

=================

“It’s not personal. It’s strictly business”

The Godfather

==================

I do not get (understand) investing, VC evaluation and startup support in general. Ok. I get it, it just confuses me. And I say that having:

• Been on both the good and the bad side of a VC takeover: buying out a profitable business seeing an opportunity to make it more profitable by running it better & buying out a business to break it apart to make money
• Been in multiple startup incubators (B2B & consumer) and seen a wide range of technology to non-technology startup ideas (good and bad)

All that said. Don’t ask me to explain how startups get funding, how VCs evaluate & invest nor how some ‘successful’ startups continue to get money <although this piece, “What I wish someone had told me about Venture Capitalists‘, does a nice job>. No matter how many times I’ve been involved in the process or been asked to evaluate businesses, I seem to be on the wrong side of the evaluation ‘brain.’ Why? Well. That has an easy answer. I like businesses that make money as in ‘profit’, not revenue, as my main criteria. Doesn’t mean I don’t care about revenue or the bullshit buzzword of the day, ‘scale’ (which is simply another bullshitty way of saying ‘growth’), but I like to stack profit dollars on top of profit dollars rather than cross my finger a business will cross the ‘making lots of unprofitable revenue’ Rubicon to the ‘hey, all this revenue is now profitable’ side.

** note: the exception would be what I call the ‘enabler idea products.’ These are the products which I usually call, in my non-startup pea like brain, the engine part ideas. They see the world as an engine and they develop parts which can replace existing parts or be inserted into the engine to make it run more efficiently or effectively – software ideas often fit this criteria.

What I will say is that the startup industry has become a master pyramid scheme in which the investors hope that one of the pyramid scheme bets pays for all the other bad bets. And you know what? Sometimes they do. And you know what? More often they do not. They have made capitalism a pyramid scheme. They encourage us to view business, all business and the economy, as one big gambler’s bet. And because they do they have reshaped the larger economy (forcing larger businesses to view innovation as a gambler’s bet too – if not their own business).

You may think I may be misguided or even wrong. But play a game. How many well known ‘successful’ technology startup like businesses are making a profit? Amazon? Kind of. Uber? Nope. Wework? Nope. Shit. Go into the best startup incubators, maybe even audit Techstars (who I like and admire). How many are making a profit (but showcase revenue)? Zero (okay … not many). It’s a gambler’s game. American capitalism has become a pyramid scheme. Can big business benefit? Sure. They can look at the gamblers and then buy the winners and absorb them. It limits their innovation ROI risk, but costs them in the purchase.

** note: I would suggest that many larger businesses are actually more well positioned to develop these more successful ideas but they tend to either (a) have a poor new idea evaluation process or (b) do not approach ‘startup idea innovation’ in a way that enables the focus & investment needed to make it successful.

To be clear. Companies like Techstar basically serves as the big business ‘brain’ that a small startup cannot afford.

That said. Even the exceptions I highlighted, the enabler idea products, are a gamblers game.

Here is where this version of pyramid scheme has an even darker underbelly. Conflicting interests. This new model of capitalism is an attempt to get around inefficiencies and costs imposed by larger business, but creates an ambiguous allocation of rights, and ownership as well as an ambiguous business model. Simplistically, everyone is in to get their money (let’s call it at its worst: greed). Even if the founder/owner truly isn’t overcome with a greed muscle and simply is in it for the idea, there is a dilution of control (under the guise of ‘freedom to innovate that engages a market that doesn’t yet exist’). This is nuts. Fringe business malpractice, but, simplistically, nuts. As I have noted most of the most successful businesses, and profitable ones, aren’t particularly disruptive at their onset nor do they ‘think outside the box’, but rather see the box and reconfigure it. And they make money.

I call this lazy capitalism (when I am being generous) and pyramid scheme capitalism (when I am not being generous).

** note: this pyramid scheme has a variety of bloodsuckers. For example, I have sat in on or eavesdropped on dozens of business people looking to pick the pockets of founders – the social media structuralists, the PR scale people, the ‘organic growth’ disruptors, the brand builders, the startup marketing futurists – who slither their way into founder’s (investors) wallets.

Look. I am all for startups with appealing ideas and driven founders getting the expertise they need quickly and the funding necessary to give them some traction that they may otherwise would have no access to. But over 80% of startups fail because, uhm, there is no market for their idea. and, no, this isn’t because they see a future no one else can see (i.e., they are visionaries), but rather because THERE IS NO MARKET FOR THAT IDEA.

** note: I have never seen an angel investor or any investor sit in on those ‘pick pocket presentations’ I mentioned in my last note. If they did, they would not only hear how stupid (nonexistent possible success, i.e., ‘no real market for that idea’) some ideas they have invested in, but would also watch a pick pocket in action.

The flow of money into the startup world is absurd. I look at that money and can only dream about what it could do if invested elsewhere. But it will not stop. Why? Greed. That’s what pyramid schemes work in the first place. Greed. Easy money. All that bullshit.

There has to be a better way – and there is. Startups have a place in the world and investing in them in which dreams turn into viable businesses is actually good for capitalism. It’s a funded Schumpeter Creative Destruction and I love that. Family companies have, and should have, a new lease on life. Public companies SHOULD be challenged as they try and squeeze out more profits through their operations in a variety of misguided ways. Short term mentality, archaic hierarchies, status quo onerous non-digital business models should be gamed out. All that said. A pyramid scheme non profitable lazy capitalism startup investment model is not the way to do it. An insurgent economy should be a hybrid of smart idea, money making, startups and large public company smart non-standardization (I hesitate to call it agile so let’s say adaptable, antifragile) money-making longer-term business sense making.

===============

“A job is the ultimate pyramid scheme.”

Ken Poirot

=================

I believe we are seeing a shift in the underpinnings of the business world. I may not agree with all the “its about culture” people or the “purpose over profit” people, but I do believe, and have for quite some time, business is transitioning from an outcome only mentality to more of a “business is more than just business” mentality. I do believe technology is playing a role and while not in the ‘digital transformation’ camp I believe augmenting humans and thinking-conceptually-sensemaking is edging its way into the ‘way we do business.’ Someone said awhile back that business is learning that to ‘outbehave’ is the path to better performance. Within that idea is part technology and part people. Within that idea is where the startup world may find its most fruitful investments – ideas that outbehave created by a mindset that seeks to outbehave the status quo (ethically & service). Ponder.

=====

“… but there is a certain point where trying to choose between the lesser of two evils is just an exercise in futility. It doesn’t matter what you choose … both are so bad you struggle to discern which would be worse. Therefore, I refuse to choose.”

Alex Verus

———–

So. The opening quote is from a character in a fantasy book, but, that said, we have all been in a situation where all the choices look bad, or not so good — but definitely not good.

This is the choice of the lesser of two evils:

—

The lesser of two evils principle (or lesser evil principle) is the principle that when faced with selecting from two unpleasant options, the one which is least harmful should be chosen.

—

Let’s just say, well, it sucks. And it sucks even worse when we stop and fruitlessly seek some silver lining in what is, frankly, no good choice trying to convince ourselves it isn’t ‘actually’ that bad a choice. But. It is a bad choice.

This is not one of those choices where someone says “sometimes the wrong choice puts you in the right place.” The only place this choice puts you is in a bad place, sure, maybe less bad than somewhere else, but bad. In game theory it is typically known as the no-win situation – an unavoidable decision with unavoidable an outcome which encompasses the losses of whatever value resides within the choice.

Uhm. And, yet, the character decided to not choose. Why?

At some point it becomes an exercise in futility.

Now. If there was ever an example of ‘no choice actually being a choice’. this may be it. In fact, it may actually be ‘the win’ choice.

Huh?

It seems like when faced with a lesser of two evils far too often we look at harm associated with the choice itself and not the harm to ourselves.

This may sound crazy, but survival is not always the desired outcome.

Huh?

Well. If survival means sacrificing all that you find valuable & important to your self, you better be damn sure it is worth the evil you are choosing.

And that is what the character in the book is saying.

“I choose neither of the evils because if I did … I live … but I may not be able to live with myself.”

Well.

Personally, I probably think about this ‘live with myself’ with regard to my decisions more than most people and possibly more than is productive or healthy for me. But.

I have seen success and I have seen failure.

I have had rewards and suffered penalties.

I have risen toward the top and scrambled to get free of the bottom.

Through it all the only one, the only thing consistent, is me.

Just saying ‘I survived’ <and this can be in business, life or situational> is not enough for me. Never has. Possibly because I have seen the wounds inflicted upon character, esteem and integrity with basic ‘I survived’ choices. Personally, I don’t want to survive if I have to sacrifice … well … me <the character portion … not the physical portion>.

To be clear. This is a personal choice and I do not judge others on how they choose.

To be clear. This personal decision comes with a cost. But it is a cost I am willing to bear because it only costs me material rewards & society-based successes. It doesn’t cost me any of what resides within me.

Look.

Choosing between the lesser of two evils is almost always actually choosing between three evils: the two choices and what evil it inflicts upon yourself.

I cannot tell anyone what to do when faced with a ‘no win’ scenario.

That is for each person to face on their own and decide what is best for them. But I can tell everyone you should think about it.

It can be a ‘no win’ choice just make sure you, yourself, also doesn’t win. Because losing yourself in addition to having to choose between a lesser of two evils means, well, some version of evil has won.

Ponder.

=============

“Who in the world am I?

Ah, that’s the great puzzle.”

Alice in Wonderland

==============

  “We ignored truths for temporary happiness.

six word story

=====================

“Most people do not realize that thinking about something is inviting the essence of that something into their experience.”

Abraham Hicks

====================

One of the most discussed behavioral things in today’s world is how algorithms trigger dopamine thru outrage and anger and fear to create perceptions and drive behavior.  We speak a bit less about, well, happiness and the fact the people are ‘pleasure-seeking’ entities. With that said, one of the most difficult things to figure out is what to do ‘now’ when given a choice particularly if that ‘now decision’ would appear to provide some happiness.

I mean, WTF, who would pass on happiness?

Well. We have a tendency to either not think long term when facing happiness .or maybe we weight present happiness to such an extent it appears to have a higher value then it may actually have.

Fortunately for us we actually have an inner scale.

This scale makes this decision a fairly easy one.  That inner scale is the , as Alice puts it, “I know who in the world you are’ scale. What this means is that if you know that your happiness assessment glasses are clear, not smudgy and provide you at least fairly good vision, well, you have a better than even chance of actually figuring out whether it represents temporary happiness or ongoing happiness.

Regardless. The desire or seeking of Happiness cloaks everything. Even truth. And maybe exponentially so for truth.

Truth is tricky.

We confuse it with common sense, intuition & instinct.

All of which suggest the real truth about truth without actually being true. What I mean by that is none of those things truly reflect truth, just an aspect of what could be truth.

The aspect consists of Glimpses. Glimpses of truth are temporary. That isn’t to suggest truth is not everlasting or steadfast, but rather our viewing of truth comes in glimpses. I imagine this is a reflection of a larger truth in that the world is extremely complex, is never stagnant and the amount of information necessary to increase the probability of truth in any given moment is most likely too overwhelming for most brains to assimilate.

That said I will offer a word to everyone on temporary. A word, if you take some time and consider it a little, which partially explains ignoring truth – evanescent.

Evanescent refers to that which almost vanishes as soon as it appears, implying that a thing is ‘tenuous, delicate or unsubstantial ‘ as part of its nature <an evanescent glimpse of the truth>

==============

“If you put your happiness in temporary things – your happiness will be temporary.“

Nick Vujicic

================

I chose evanescent to make a point because I could have used momentary, passing or fleeing.

All synonyms of temporary.

I could have used transient or transitory both of which stress brevity and impermanence and the fact it will not endure.

Both synonyms of temporary.

I could have even used ephemera which denotes that which changes aspect rapidly and continuously.

Another synonym of temporary.

I could have even focused on temporary which is a nice general term that implies measurable but of limited duration.

But I didn’t.

I didn’t because truth, more often than not, can vanish just as quickly as it appears.

Let me explain why.

Truth is rarely simple and is even more rarely a “it just is” factoid. Instead it is more likely represented in a disparate range of factoids and fragments coexisting in the past, present and future <kind of like the quantum theory of truth and happiness>. They all swirl around this truth and most often we, seeking simplicity & happiness, ignore all the fragments and put our arms around the easier happiness, i.e., the temporary one.

The danger in this is that we then have no depth of understanding. We are not forced to assess the fragments and think. We don’t because , in our heads, truth should be simple, clear and obvious <hence the reason we far too often confuse it with common sense>.

This is where evanescent comes back into the conversation.

As noted earlier truth is most often represented in a big blob of swirling disparate fragments and, yet, on occasion if we look at just the right time all the fragments align and truth appears.

Some may call this an “ah ha” moment. I would suggest it is simply a moment of clarity.

It is a moment in which you truly become a conduit of truth.

It is a moment where everything is aligned and Truth stands there, right in front of you, still amidst the swirl & chaos of Life.

I would be remiss if I did not also point out that this moment is temporary <with threads of infinite existence>.

====

“Liberty of thought is the life of the soul.”

Voltaire

=====

Of course you actually have to be paying attention.

Of course you actually have to not be distracted by temporary happiness.

Of course, as a human, you actually hate having to do both of what I just wrote.

I mean, c’mon, to have the opportunity to be wrapped in a nice cozy blanket of happiness for the rest of our existence <because that is what we hope every time happiness snuggles up against us … that this is the time it lasts forever>?

Uhm.

What a fucking fairy tale.

That is like basing truth and happiness on unicorn farts.

Here is what everyone needs to remember as they ponder ignoring truth for happiness.

Everlasting happiness is a myth.

Shit.

Everlasting truth is a myth.

Whew. How ironic is that?

==============

“I have lived with a sense of irony and cold curiosity.”

Friedrich Nietzsche

==================

Two of the most valued things in Life are myths.

Well.

It sure sucks to think that.

Anyway.

Here is the most basic truth of all <a non temporary truth but an everlasting one>.

Truth will always be truth, but it will never be easy — easy to gather, to understand and to believe. And because it is not easy and we would much prefer happiness <even temporary happiness> we will accept being right sometimes … wrong sometimes … and at all times believe things on insufficient evidence.

Yeah.

We should just face the fact that even on the things we believe, and claim we understand, we are actually doing so often in an incomplete way <even if we are correct>.

I believe my smartphone works, but I have no clue how. I believe, well, fill in your own Life “black box belief” here — the things you just assume will work and assume we understand how to make it work but certainly do not understand the ins & outs of its workings.

This is the economy.

This is effective government.

This is climate change.

This is finance.

This is business.

This is most of the big stuff in Life.

Which leads me back to something little — evanescent.

The glimpse of truth.

It is the moment when all the disparate fragments align and truth stands in front of you.

It is the moment when things are sufficient enough to understand and believe.

It is the moment we should not ignore truth for either temporary happiness or the temptation of what may appear to be everlasting happiness.

It is the moment when we have the opportunity to, well, “see who I am” and place an important piece of the puzzle in place.

Well.

That sounds like an important moment, doesn’t it?

You bet.

Pay attention for it.

Pay very very close attention.

Pay attention because the glimpse of truth is evanescent.

Pay attention because the last haven of truth often resides in the evanescent.

Pay attention because you shouldn’t ignore truth for a temporary happiness.

Ponder.

———

All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary
All of this is temporary

———

Ok. I was tempted to call this ‘the glimpses of perfection’ <which I also call “the flickering of perfection” somewhere later>. What I mean by that is if you put any real effort into what you do, in business or in Life, you will actually brush up against perfection on occasion. And that’s the maddening part.  Life is pretty maddening in that it often gives us these little glimpses of perfection, but at the same time refuses to let us actually keep it for anything longer than a glimpse.

This is where it all gets tricky. Therefore <because we like … no ... LOVE ... those glimpses> we constantly attack Life & business always slightly tainted by this ‘temporary perfection’.

Why? Because the temporary glimpses, those ‘moments’, they suggest perfection <or a version of it> is achievable. And you try and plan, and replicate, those glimpses so that they become the norm. Unfortunately, we people are imperfect so replicating perfection is almost impossible. We struggle in this wretched in between almost everyday.
Now.

First. Let me be clear. The whole idea of perfection is shit.

Second. That doesn’t mean we cannot achieve perfection <whew … there was a contradictory thought, huh?>

The difficulty resides in the fact that perfection is fleeting and we only get glimpses of it. I sometimes refer to it as the flickering of perfection in our lives.

And you know what? That’s good <that flickering>. In fact I would argue it is often good enough. In fact I could argue it is as good as it gets.

Look. I imagine most of us probably feel like we are ‘doing’ somewhere between okay and good in most areas of life. We are, in our minds, doing a decent job day to day. Some days better than others, but overall decent.

But perfection? Whew. I don’t think so. Maybe at moments … but all the time in life? No way.

That said. Maybe the key point, or issue, most likely comes down to my ‘definition of perfection’.

Here is my take.

I sometimes believe we see perfection as a home to move into.

It is not. It is a hotel <or maybe a motel>. You may stay one night … maybe a week <if you are really really lucky>, but you can’t live there.

Am I saying this as a way of condoning mediocrity?

No. Absolutely frickin’ not.

It is just a reminder that people are not perfect <most of the time>.

It is a reminder that Life is not perfect <all the time>.

It is a reminder that Business is never perfect despite all the best practices, process, system, ROI & corporate cultural guidelines <never perfect contextually>.

It is a reminder that aiming for perfection <all the time> is wasted energy and maybe to take it easier on yourself.

Now. This doesn’t mean you should try to be your best <because you should>, maybe just acknowledge that your best doesn’t equal perfection <at least all the time>.

Uhm. Uh oh.

It is quite possible one would think that “doing your best” should be, well, our best, no?

And if we believe that, well, our best should equal perfection, no?

Unfortunately it doesn’t actually work that way.

That actually isn’t the formula.

This may be difficult to accept, but your best is a jagged line. Jagged as it is dependent upon what you have and when you are doing something – context as it were.

On occasion that jagged line butts up against the ‘perfection line.’

So.

Unfortunately. Under the harsh spotlight of self judgment you may be tempted to judge this as not really your best. Or maybe you make it a caveated best. A derivative of best as it were.

=============

“It’s easy to miss and easy to mistake
For when things are really great
It just means everything’s in its place.”

Aimee Mann

Well. You would be wrong. Its not some lesser version as long as you were truly “doing the best that you can.”

Oh shit. Trouble. In actuality many times we are not actually doing our best.

Huh? C’mon. 90% of the time as we go thru the grind of Life & business you know you could do more <if the measure is truly our best>.

Look. I truly believe chasing perfection is an endless pursuit. And, frankly, if you try to do this you only put yourself under unbearable pressure aiming to be the perfect version of who you are. And, inevitably, this relentless quest for perfection can only bring disappointment because not only is being perfect all the time <if not at any time> an impossible task, but it becomes exponentially more impossible <ok … how can something that is already impossible become exponentially so? … its kind of like getting three death sentences …> if you actually attempt to do “it” all the time.

Planning perfection, which is most often a random confluence of factors, is a sysiphean task. Someone can waste far too much time and energy trying to be the perfect ‘whatever’.

Sure. None of us want to be ‘less-than-perfect’ in anything we do, but it is a fact of life. But. Here is some news.

Ok.

No. Here is the fact.

Doing your best isn’t about perfection and it isn’t always trying to be perfect. Because doing your best is about “good enough with what you can actually do”. Doing your best is about maximizing ‘as long as it lasts.’ And that is often not perfection.

Ok.

In the end. Don’t think about perfection as ‘your best.” Best is simply … ‘effort + attitude’. And … just … well … do your best. Choose the moments and truly do your best <and admit the other times just aren’t your best you are just muddling through>.

Why?

Well. I believe every action has an equal and opposite reaction <actually … each action can have a variety of opposite reactions of which it is difficult for you to discern beforehand what will occur but that’s a different post>. Therefore, if you perform any action the results will come, maybe not today or tomorrow, but at some time. So if people could keep their minds thinking what I just typed above and truly do your best at the right time and mentally unattach yourself from the outcome of the ‘best’ actions <and the concept of perfection> I think more people would be happier and they may actually do their best more often. And, maybe more importantly, if you do not try and fool yourself into believing you had done “your best” in certain situations you may be able to manage your life expectation-wise a little better.

Regardless.

Just do your best and, if you are lucky, you will get a glimpse of perfection. We can try and be our best all the time, but perfection is temporary. While that may sound painfully disappointing maybe look at it is “possibilities”.

——–

I dwell in Possibility—
A fairer House than Prose—
More numerous of Windows—
Superior—for Doors—

Of Chambers as the Cedars—
Impregnable of Eye—
And for an Everlasting Roof
The Gambrels of the Sky—

Of Visitors—the fairest—
For Occupation—This—
The spreading wide of narrow Hands
To gather Paradise—

Emily Dickinson

———

Remember. While your life may only have the flickering of perfection it surely seems like a positive way of attacking Life would be to dwell in the possibilities that perfection will visit again.

===============

“The world’s thy ship and not thy home.”

Thérèse de Lisieux

==============

“All of life is a coming home.

Salesmen, secretaries, coal miners, beekeepers, sword swallowers, all of us.  All the restless hearts of the world, all trying to find a way home.”

Patch Adams 

====================

Well. I had all these quotes and I didn’t know what to do with them until I saw the image at the opening of this post: “They say every atom in our bodies was once part of a star. Maybe I’m not leaving maybe I’m going home.”

I have often wondered why many of us are so restless. We seek things, and travel places looking for ‘something’ and dream dreams. This doesn’t mean we don’t enjoy what we have nor does it mean we don’t accept reality. It just means that there is always an undercurrent of change or “what ifs” or “what could be’s” underneath the surface of our Life. At the same time we are sailing through Life seeking some place we can land which we can not only call home, but actually feels like home.

And maybe that is where the line “home is where you hang your hat’ comes into play. In its simplicity it is actually suggesting that it really isn’t your hat that matters it is when you accept that you can be who you are and that ‘who’ is all you can be that you have found home. And while Thérèse was really suggesting that the material world was simply your journey and heaven, or God, is your destination, the overall thought is truer than true.

Whether you believe in something bigger than you or simply believe there is something bigger within you, you should seek the stars within you to guide you to it all — not some external place or location which may appear to fulfill some aspect of ‘home.’

Your dreams, wishes and … yes … the starlight to guide you in the darkness of not knowing what to do, where to go and how to get thru whatever it is you are going thru is all within you.

Your home resides within you.

You are simply looking for a place to, well, place your home that feels right and true.

That place is unseen.

That place is not really one place <it can actually be many places>.

Here comes the hard part.

Life will not give you any signposts and most of Life will constantly change your direction unseen in the undercurrents of Life.

============

“In the short voyage of a lifetime, we can see the eddies and ripples on the surface, but not the undercurrents changing the main channel of the stream. “

Thomas Mellon

=============

This all suggests you are in control and you are not in control.

Just ponder the fact we often stand upon the deck of our ship admiring the horizon and enjoying the travel & journey only to have some Life undercurrent disrupt our complacency and some version of ‘living Life laziness’ <i.e., if you’re not careful and become actively involved in Life, Life will actively involve itself in your Life>.

This simply reminds us that circumstances beyond our control often disrupt the illusion of what we have, who we are and where we are.

The unseen undercurrent constantly nudges our mind with questions:

What is our purpose?

How can we take control of so many things out of our control?

How do we reconcile the vastness Life offers us … reconcile the bigness that can often appear within reach … and reconcile our desire to be worthy of Life … reconcile it all against the smallness that is us in the roiling sea on which our ship sails?

Will we ever satisfy our dreams for what could be & what we could be?

Meaningful or meaningless?

We struggle with these questions. And all the while we avoid the questions under the guise of “seeking home.’

Ah. Shit.

Suffice it to say, home is not anything physical, it actually resides in the infinite. As a corollary, this would presume if you accept its infiniteness you should be able to see it also has the potential to be infinitely good.

I believe we inherently know this and inherently know that only ‘home’ will truly satisfy us. And that search, that journey, is the satisfaction. I imagine the unfortunate, uncomfortable, truth is the odds are we will never truly find some ‘home’ in which we can live our entire lives.

The world is our ship.

Life is our ship.

Our home, our stars, reside within us.

Ponder.

=======

“Aesthetics is the shop window, ultimately, if there’s nothing in that shop, it has no longevity, do you know what I mean?”

Geri Halliwell

———————-

Well. Of all people in the world I never thought I would read ex-Spice Girl Geri Halliwell <Ginger Spice?> saying something relevant to business and actually use it to write something.

Anyone who has ever worked with me has heard me use the “fluff and fold” reference.

Fluff is the aesthetics.

Fold is the value.

Fluff is puffery.

Fold is the substance.

Look. We like the aesthetics. Maybe even love it, adore it and bond with it. But without the fold, the value and functionality, we end up disappointed in the aesthetics and will inevitably move on to the next thing to adore. In other words, we just see the fluff.

And, while I have never articulated this thought like Geri, I have tried to say it over and over and over again in meeting after meeting after, well, meeting. Perception is not reality. Reality is reality and if your aesthetics don’t match reality you are screwed.

I do know it is one of the most consistent discussions in business positioning, selling and marketing. And it will continue to do so because there is a natural tension between “fluffers” and “folders.”

While the most strident of each wish it would be 100% at the exclusion of their kindred enemy, most of everyone fall into a natural 80/20 versus 20/80 Pareto rule.

A fluffer understands that substance is necessary, just maybe as a period at the end of the interesting fluff.

The folder grudgingly accepts that aesthetics are necessary, just maybe as a “once upon a time” entrée to the main story of substance.

It really doesn’t matter which side you fall on in this discussion the debate revolves around the same issues time and time again:

• If they are not interested <sometimes confused with ‘entertained’> they will not pay attention
• Everybody is stressed for time and if you don’t engage them in the first 10 seconds you have lost them <a hyperbole statement at best>
• People are tired of bullshit and just want you to cut to the chase <flawed logic because this assumes substance/rational sell itself>

But regardless of how often all of us fall into this tired argument, this is where most trains go off the tracks.

Suffice it to say, businesses get mesmerized by aesthetics.

If I hear one more quote about “first impressions count” or “they have to like you before they can enter into a brand dialogue” or, well, any of the semi-intellectual strategic crap that flippantly gets tossed around like the newest office toy sitting on the conference room table … I will puke.

In the simplistic dialogues that take place you inevitably find people debating what is more important — when it isn’t a matter of importance; it is a matter of balance <or proportion>. And, yet, while I sense we all know that balance is the answer we seem to consistently slide down the slippery slope of fluff under the guise of “the substance is complex and we need to simplify!”

Huh?

Everyone wants ‘the one thing.’

Everyone wants ‘the formula.’

Nuts.

That is what I say to that.

Nuts.

Substance is substance. I am not suggesting you have to serve it up in some complex unpalatable way, but substance, more often than not, is not simple. And if we try and simplify substance too much, uh oh, it becomes … uhm … fluff.

In the end.

You cannot just have fluff.

You cannot just have fold.

You have to have both in some form or fashion. And more often than not there is no formula, but <I have to tell ya> if you can balance your fluff and fold in a quasi-50/50 split <maybe 40% fluff & 60% fold> you have a very good chance of delivering relevant information in a palatable way.

Oh. That word may get me in trouble … “palatable.”

Look. I am clearly in the substance <fold> camp.

While I enjoy the fluff I find that it maddeningly takes up an excessive amount of energy and focus away from substance <fold> which is inevitably what represents the effectiveness of whatever idea you are sharing.

But I have also learned, and have the scars to show, that ideas, even great bigly ideas, do not explain themselves, do not sell themselves and are often not attractive in their black & whiteness. I have learned that, while starkness has its time & place, businesses <and people in general> engage with things that have a more rich & royal hue.

I imagine all us business folk should remember the famous words of that ex-Spice Girl Geri:

Aesthetics matter … but … if there is nothing in that shop … well … there is no longevity … is there?

Stick with the Spice Girl advice and you may actually do well.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) launched this tag line in 2003. It has licensed its use for use in public awareness campaigns about security.

====

“He who does not prevent a crime when he can, encourages it.”

Seneca (a 1^st century roman philosopher)

====

I like this quote because of its simplicity.

No gray area.

Black & white.

Do something to correct a wrong or you are inherently encouraging wrongness.

This is more than moral or ethical responsibility.

This is more about actions speaking louder than words.

This is about making the world a better place.

Now.

Just because it is simple doesn’t mean it is always easy (although one would imagine it should be simple all the time).

And I imagine people could look at his and send me a laundry list of situations in which Seneca “overlooked” and it is not as simple as he states. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm … sorry folks.

It’s this simple.

I don’t care if you are in business, at a game, in school, in a social environment, if you do not actively correct a ‘wrong’, you are implicitly encouraging it.

Now. Let me lean in on again to Seneca suggest it is not that simple.

“The bravest sight in the world is to see a great man struggling against adversity.”

Sometimes doing the right thing creates adversity. It creates ‘conflict.’ Basically, you are ‘pushing back’ against something.

I, personally, don’t think not encouraging wrong behavior or deeds is brave, but, that said, if you think you have to be brave just to do the right thing, go for it. I don’t give a shit as long as you do not remain silent and actually do something.

Sometimes you have to prevent wrong when you see it, regardless of the situation, simply because if you do not do anything … you encourage it to happen again.

Here is what I know. This needs to happen more often in today’s world.

Period.

====

“What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson

====

So. The world of relationships and ‘special days’ like Valentine’s Day or Christmas or birthdays can have a wacky relationship. Suffice it to say each of these days can translate into getting dumped, or not dumped, even before Christmas (to avoid giving a gift) or Valentine’s Day (for fear of commitment).

But they also inspire some inspired gifts and inspired words. Maybe the most inspired are also the simplest: “I love you”.

Which leads me to “what lies within us.” When in a relationship, what lies within us, as a statement, is the definition of love.

Valentine’s Day or not.

 ===

“It would be too easy to say that I feel invisible. Instead, I feel painfully visible, and entirely ignored.”

David Levithan

===

Whew. When I saw this quote I had to, well, sit back.

Think a little.

I wanted to write about Life like “maybe something personal?” I thought, but surely this is applicable to business.

Well.

It is about everything.

I will begin personally <or about people and Life>.

I have always disliked the whole ‘love yourself first & foremost’ advice. I worry that it is a trite soundbite solution to people living in a Life where self identity, success, esteem and happiness is significantly more complex.

Look.

I think ‘be yourself’ is important.

I think ‘true to thineself’ may be the single most important Life compass one can follow.

But. I do not believe this means you can ignore context.

Making yourself visible by being yourself and, yet, end up being invisible and ignored in the world … well … that sucks.

It sucks on so many levels I am not even sure where to start. But I am sure it sucks enough that it is unhealthy and not particularly good for self esteem and confidence.

 And before anyone wants to debate the whole ‘external validation versus internal driven’ importance let me share a credible source:

“For years mental health professionals taught people that they could be psychologically healthy without social support, that “unless you love yourself, no one else will love you.”… The truth is, you cannot love yourself unless you have been loved and are loved. The capacity to love cannot be built in isolation.”

Bruce D. Perry, M.D., Ph.D.

 Effective and positive visibility is a combination, or maybe better said: an alignment between ‘being yourself’ and ‘not being ignored’ socially.

I say that because invisibility is isolation <or maybe call it ‘visible but ignored’>.

I am not sure anything can really be built in isolation.

Created? Possibly.

Built? Yikes. I don’t think so.

Even more importantly I am fairly sure you cannot create or build if you are isolated by being visible; yet ignored <because you have created but have received no affirmation of value>.

So. I believe one person, an individual, can rarely build something without help. Help as in tangible <doing help> or intangible <emotional support>.

All that said. If we are truly honest with ourselves, we all like to be noticed. On a wide spectrum of visibility, we all like to be visible and not ignored. To be clear. This doesn’t have to be awards or accolades or any significantly vocal ‘notice’ … it can be a slight acknowledgement.

Me, personally, I have always struggled receiving compliments.  That is not my ‘being visible’ thing. Mine is more subtle. All I care about is, well, not being ignored. Visible, but ignored <which implies ‘no value’> is where I get my affirmation or non-affirmation. This doesn’t mean I will not avoid the spotlight it is just that I do not turn the spotlight on nor do I seek it. I simply stand my ground if it happens to turn on me. That is what I mean by some subtle differences in ‘not being ignored.’

Which leads me to discuss this thought in business.

Whew.

The whole spotlight thing I wrote earlier.

The business world has made us think about being visible and not being ignored to an absurd level.

Huh? Things like “you have to be your own cheerleader!” or ‘you have to promote your accomplishments’ or ‘shine a spotlight on your accomplishments so they get noticed’, things like that.

The implication is that the only way to not be ignored is to make sure you are not ignored. Theoretically this is okay, but in practice what this mean is a lot of noise and spotlights endlessly waving across the sky from people who are doing & saying things just to be visible and the things they are actually doing should be ignored.

I think, at least in business, we are missing an opportunity <if not make the business environment a little less painful>.

In business being visible, but ignored is a lesson. A lesson in ‘are you really doing anything of value.’ Far too often we judge our own value differently than how others do. Research shows that generally we overestimate our value and contributions and ability. By promoting ourselves to insure we are not ignored we miss out on, uhm, truth.

Truth as in ‘should we <or our accomplishments> truly be ignored’ <because they truly have no or little value>.

Anyway.

This quote made me think.

Made me think about being visible and ignored versus thinking you are invisible.

In the end.

I wonder how often we confuse thinking we are invisible when the truth is we are actually quite visible … but ignored.

Ponder.

====

“There are no rules here – we’re trying to accomplish something.”

Thomas A. Edison

===

Ok. Anyone who reads what I typically write already knows I struggle with rules <although I do like discipline & construct>.

And that is why I love his quote.

Edison is a guy who pretty much failed more than any inventor, let alone anyone, and yet was more successful in the end. I continuously read he was often a jerk and egotistical and had all the flaws that make someone fairly intolerable socially despite the fact he was a relentless innovator.

Well. I am gonna disregard that and focus on trying to accomplish something.

Accomplishing things is good. And, generally speaking, if you set some milestones/objectives and play by the rules you will accomplish things. That said. If you truly want to accomplish something stunning, something really big, something that turns the world slightly upside down, well, there are no rules.

Why?

Because the rules keep you from attaining everything I wrote in that sentence.

Rules maintain the norm.

Rules maintain the status quo.

Rules maintain “what is” and never <ok … rarely> generate “what can be.”

What is possible (impossible within the rules) is typically attained when you break thru the boundaries of what is accepted and what everyone feels comfortable with, i.e., the ‘rules’ which have generated past success, and you reach out to something new and innovative.

Rules are dictated by what got you to the success you attained today. As a cautionary corollary, those same rules restrict you from attaining future “new unseen success.”

To be clear.

Does this mean I am suggesting unethical behavior? Nope. I am simply suggesting process & practices rules tend to constrain the new behavior/practices to create something meaningfully new.

Does this mean I am suggesting chaos is good? Nope. I am simply suggesting that rules often restrict you from anything but maintaining the status quo (which isn’t bad but at its core simply means you are stagnant in one sense or another). And at some point someone is gonna come along and break the rules.

I can guarantee that.

And as a leader you will be judged by how you handle that.

Because not all rule breakers are good.

Just as not all rule breakers are bad.

You, as a business, are bad – ok, you suck – if you judge all rule breakers equally.  As in “they broke a rule and that is bad.” You suck because that means you are not only mired in a sea of maintaining sameness, but you have also attained the true status of squelching any innovative thinking that could possibly help you, or whatever you are managing, “break out” and get to the next level.

Am I suggesting this is easy? Nope.

And that is why so many businesses suck.

Because it is easier to maintain the status quo.  It is easier to have everyone follow the rules.

Because then your job is simply herding and not leading. Herders suck because they simply follow rules.

Suffice it to say businesses attain their status because they know how to make exceptions (and maintain the overall organization momentum).

Following rules is easy.

And lazy.

But, once again to be clear, not all rules that are broken is a good thing. Some rules kind of keep some necessary boundaries <on behavior and such>.

So, as are most things in life, there is no formula.

And those who break rules are as likely to have fucked up as they are to have been stunningly successful.

Personally I believe every organization should not only have these people, but encourage them.

Stunning failures with glimpses of success should be celebrated for the attempt of glory. And business shouldn’t chastise, but teach. For in every stunning failure there is an opportunity for a stunning success.

And shame on any business who doesn’t recognize that.