=====

Creating a company takes more than an idea. It demands a vision. And visions are more difficult to sell than products. Because a good vision isn’t easily attainable but still remains worth reaching for.

Great visions are grounded by the practical pragmatism of what it takes to reach a destination which is often located somewhere over the horizon … unseeable but imaginable.

Our company?

We have a change the world attitude. We don’t mind being disruptive as long as it is with the intent to create something new and better. Smart disruption displaces the conventional and replaces it with an unconventional way to do things that actually meets what people want, need and expect.

We call what we are doing ‘shaking the category etch a sketch.’

Visions should be lofty and grounded.

Simple yet reflective of a complex world.

Pragmatic & practical yet not the status quo.

Bruce McTague <for his own company>

====

Ok.

This is about having a vision, vision statements and thinking of a ‘place to go’ … a place to aim for … business and personal. This is about the pragmatic side of possibilities & the possibilities of pragmatism. You will find some practical stuff <because I have had to do it recently with several companies> and some … well … thoughtful stuff <because any time you work on vision projects you inevitably start thinking>.

Let me state upfront.

I am an admitted ‘hope vision’ type guy.

The vision statements I write and the visions I gravitate to almost always have some ‘bigness’ to them … always strive for aspirations … and attempt to offer a sense of hope … as in hope for something better in what we offer … maybe make things better in Life … certainly give people hope for something better.

This can be small hope <if I make nuts & bolts, my hope is everlasting strength … of something else>.

This can be big hope <if I am remaking how everyday healthcare is conducted my hope is … well … enabling people to live a better, fuller, Life>.

The bottom line with me is that a great vision, and visionary, has an idea of the world they want to be part of … and how they want to help create that world <whether it be in a small or big way>.

Regardless.

Let me get the practical ‘what is a vision statement’ crap out of the way first.

To be clear.

A vision statement shouldn’t be confused with a mission statement.

– Mission statements are present-based statements and reflective of your external existence. A mission statement answers the question “why does my business exist?”

– Vision statements are future-based and internally focused. A vision statement answers the question “who do I see myself as in a bigger picture <and where do I see my business in this bigger picture?”

A well crafted vision statement should communicate the company’s goals in a single sentence … or a few concise paragraphs … or in a tightly knit manifesto.

As you can see … a vision has no formula … excepting it should inspire. I believe visions are to be treated seriously … but is also a time for creativity, dreams and fun thinking.

They should stretch the imagination as well as offer some construct for direction and culture. A good vision statement will help set the company direction for employees as well as guide priorities … all the while challenging employees to think & grow & inspire <actions & attitudes>.

Develop a good vision and I promise you … a good strategy will follow <note: strategy never leads to a vision>.

Now.

The problem is that some vision statements consist of one vague statement which, frankly, anyone could say. Some are too long, unstructured and wandering reflecting not only a management’s lack of understanding of what a company really does but also reflects a lack of understanding for meaningful aspirational direction.

Suffice it to say … there is something called the Golden Bull award “for excellence in gobbledygook” for which many visions could be nominated.

Yet.

None of this stops me from seeking something that whispers ‘be dynamic beyond your purpose’ in everyone’s ear.

I do believe the vision can be one of a company’s cornerstones. But I also believe that because there is so much <too much> importance being placed on such statements that businesses tend to sit down like it is going to a dentist … generates a vision … whether it is good or bad … and posts it up on some website to prove they have a vision.

Let me unequivocally state … I would rather have no vision then a bad vision.

Ah.

But a good vision?

A well articulated vision aligns a company <that is a good thing>.

And more businesses apparently need a well done vision because according to a Harvard Business Review study up to 70% of employees do not understand their company’s purpose & strategy <that is a bad thing>.

It’s bad mostly because failure to understand your company’s position typically leads to poor decision making <that’s the practical side> and leads to thinking commodity-like thoughts about your company <that’s the ‘value’ side> and, finally, doesn’t lead to any ‘wow, I am part of something big & purposeful & meaningful’ <that’s the aspirational side>.

Anyway.

Maybe it’s because I have been working with some people on visions and seen how excited they get when they truly think about how their little idea can actually make something better and how what they thought when they thought of their company was part of something bigger they had been thinking.

Oh.

And maybe that is why I like vision statements. I like aiming for something in the future. I like inspiring people. I like an organization that feels like it is doing something more than making something or providing some service.

I like that a vision aims for some “what” … as in what could be & what do we want to happen.

I like a vision that is so big that it is compelling, not only to everyone else, but to me.

And, yet, no matter how big a vision gets it is very specific in outlining who you are as an organization.

This may sound crazy but I have seen dozens upon dozens of companies who have not taken the time to define themselves … or … define themselves so broadly it is meaningless … or … the worst … create a bunch of beautiful words and then behave in a completely different way.

Look.

If you discuss vision with business nerds you will get so many definitions and suggestions your head will start spinning.

If you discuss vision within an organization it may start in a good place but inevitably will be dragged down by pragmatism and ‘clarity’ <see mindless drivel>.

Screw them.

Here is what I know.

Your vision is your dream.

It is your company’s north star.

And while its primary objective is to inspire and create a shared sense of purpose throughout the company inevitably it sets the direction for new products, company culture, future decisions, hiring and … well … everything.

It is dynamic beyond your own purpose.

That’s business and vision.

Uhm.

Which leads me to my second and last thought on visions and a ‘place to go.’

Vision statements are a well renowned business tool.

Why isn’t it a personal or individual tool?

I would encourage everyone to write one of their own <instead of pursuing some of that personal branding drivel advice>.

Here is the incredibly great thing about a vision … its big and it gives you some place to go.

This isn’t dreamer type stuff … albeit … the stuffy pragmatic jerkwads of the world tend to shove this type of thinking up many people’s asses.

Far too often if a young person, shit, anyone … writes down a vision for themselves you will see the people they share it with shaking their heads and saying “well, that’s nice, not very realistic, but nice …”

What shitheads they are.

A vision is some horizon. It’s a place to go. Something yet to be created but a directional north star for who and what you are as a person.

Let’s call it ‘your soul direction.’

I tell young people that they may never get there … and that’s okay … the most important thing is maintaining sight of the north star.

I think we lose sight of how important something like this is for everyday schmucks like you & me.

In a world in which far too often visions seem small & practical <therefore not really a vision> it seems like trees become the focus and we never see the forest. And if that is the case then how the hell do you even know you are in the right forest?

All you know is that there is another one of those frickin’ trees in front of you.

I will end with where I began … creating a great person takes more than an idea. It demands a vision. And visions are more difficult to sell than products.

Because a good vision isn’t easily attainable but still remains worth reaching for. Visions are difficult mostly because they are difficult to ‘sell.’

Sell? Sell to yourself as something practical and worthwhile <because Life has a nasty habit of suggesting there are more important things to focus on> and sell to others <because people have a nasty habit of being scared of big things>.

I would suggest to truly be happy in Life … Life will demand you have a vision.

I would also suggest that you will more likely be happier as a person if you actually have a vision.

I would also suggest stop trying to ‘sell’ anything when it comes to a vision.

Shit.

Do you think the night sits down every day wondering “how the hell am I gonna sell all those people out there that this star is the one that points North?”

No. It does not.

Direction & vision feels right. It doesn’t need selling. And, what the hell, if you are the one who can see the world you want to help create … only you can really see the direction to get there.

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

“When you make a choice, you change the future.”

―

Deepak Chopra

===========

“Oh, yes. Choosing… it has always hurt. And always will. I know.”

―

George R.R. Martin

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

Ok.

This is about Intelligence … and making choices.

Why do I put both of these together? Well. Do you know the origin of the word ‘intelligence’?

<because I did not>

Intelligence is derived from the latin verb intelligere … which actually means “to choose among.’

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm … so that means an intelligent person isn’t a smart <high IQ> person or one who has reams and reams of knowledge and factoids stored away in their pea-like brains <although I envision it could increase the likelihood of actually being intelligere>.

It actually suggests that the ‘intelligent’ are those who can discriminate fact from fiction, truth from lies, which half of a half-truth is the important half … and I imagine those who can discriminate … even if only between the bad and the worse.

Oh.

And, of course, that means intelligere is founded upon the concept of choice. And not jut the ability to discern the choice but also the character, and fortitude, and smarts … to actually make choices.

In addition … intelligere demands one have the curiosity to have at hand that which is needed to actually create, and have, ‘the among’ available.

Uhm.

The ability to ‘choose among.’

Once again … we seem to face the uncomfortable truth that things are rarely black & white, choices are inherently unclear and a simple “if this then it must be that” linear choice is almost never at hand.

Intelligere is … well … not easy.

Look.

I don’t know that I really have a point to make here today.

I simply found this interesting. It made me think about what I perceive as ‘intelligence’ in people.

I know I had always simply thought people who were smart were intelligent. And, frankly, I didn’t think much beyond that.

But.

Assessing intelligence not just as being smart but rather what you do with those smarts?

Whew.

I like that.

===

“Believe those who are seeking the truth.

 

Doubt those who find it.”

 

————

Andre Gide

=====

Well.

If I could earn a salary being a truth seeker I would sign up today. In fact. I believe we need a job like this.

I think we need a job like this because … well … Truth is significantly more elusive than I tend to think we believe. Truth is rarely simple … certainly not as simple as we would like it to be and even more rarely tied to what could be misconstrued as “common sense.” Truth is often complex, nuanced & tinged with contradictions.

And because I believe what I just wrote … I am always wary of those who come out blazing by speaking “the truth.”

Why? Things are rarely black & white. I also imagine I say this because my truth attitude is tempered by the fact I have been called optimistically cynical.

While my incessant curiosity always has me pursuing new & better & different knowledge <which inevitably create unlearning> I guess I question everything upfront. This means I filter thru everything I hear & rarely accept it as “it is what it is,” I imagine this is my cynicism part <or maybe one would hope as I have become older I can judge what to question and what to accept upfront>.

My optimistic side?  I always believe great things come of the cynicism filter <rather than use cynicism to drag things down>. Maybe this style of mine insures I feel more confident in what I know versus what I don’t know as well as draws my thoughts & thinking a little more away from opinion & more towards truth, fact & real knowledge.

By the way. I would like to believe more people <and society … and business … in general> would benefit from a filter like that.

Regardless.

I would like to believe I am one of those people who is constantly seeking truth. I may not be, but, it is certainly a good objective to try to attain. And I would welcome anyone on to my truth seeking team <as long as they truly were open to “unlearning to learn”>.

I do know that I believe as long as you are ‘seeking’ … you are being persistently curious … and … well … there are worse things to be.

I do know that I believe we need more persistently curious truth seekers in today’s world.

Anyway.

Truth seeker.

Well.

That is certainly a title I would like to put on a business card. Tough job but, whew, I would do take this job in a second.

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

“Sureness will always elude you.

The detective will always circle around what he wants, never seeing it whole. We do not go on despite this. We go on because of it.”

—–

Claire DeWitt

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

<note: this thought piece skews toward learning & teaching our youth but is relevant to all ages & how we learn>

So. Everyone who knows me knows that overcoming ignorance is my thing <I always hesitate to use the ‘soapbox’ word so it’s ‘thing’ here>. In fact … I was tempted to call this post “enlightened Ignorance” <because I love contradictions>.

That said, I found a guy <Jim McGee on Future Tense blog> who has actually not only thought about learning & overcoming ignorance as much as I have but has also created some interesting diagrams which better articulate the dynamic between “learning and ignorance” then I ever could <plus … the diagrams look like something I would have scribbled on a piece of paper>.

What Jim did was to articulate this idea of “boundaries of ignorance” and “circles of knowledge” in a really interesting way. The foundational idea is that by expanding the circle of knowledge you are simultaneously expanding the boundaries of ignorance. In other words, the more things you learn, the more things you become aware you don’t know.

Now that is an awesome incredibly simple concept.

The thinking behind this concept? In the beginning of your knowledge gathering life <probably think mainly children> ignorance always outpaces knowledge and learning <side note:this is just one of the places where I believe people like you and I can make a difference – think about in viewing this first diagram and young people>.

Let me be clear. By ‘people like you and I’ I mean older people with more experience and a better understanding of how expansive true knowledge can be. Why do I say this? Because if you think about this circle diagram concept it means that gaining knowledge can be frustrating.

Frustrating? Frustrating in that every time you learn something ignorance still lies outside your existing knowledge base. This translates into a state of being perpetually dissatisfied <or the glass is never completely full with knowledge> which obviously can be either encouraging or discouraging with a person’s attitude to continue learning. This diagram also makes you think about the role of schools <and do they help or hinder or minimize or maximize>.

Schools fulfill their role in this process by focusing attention on the inside of the circle and keeping youth carefully inside the boundaries. What I mean by that is the credentialing system of education looks backward at what you are supposed to have learned in its testing and measurement of success. I imagine the good news is that a good school environment helps keep you from falling off the edge into material you are unable to understand or appreciate <and in the process hopefully limiting a type of discouragement>.

In addition.

A huge purpose of schools is to introduce students <of any age> to appropriate vocabulary in a logical order … so you can progressively move on to additional learning <this is the same in business>. For example, it’s difficult to skip to more complex physics until you have basic physics understanding. Or. It is difficult to read Tolkein if you haven’t mastered Dr. Suess.

Yet. The danger, or maybe better said, the potential limitations of formal schooling <even when well done> is too much focus on what you already know. In other words, if a person <or child> isn’t pushed out to the boundaries, opportunities become limited for significant new learning. This thought gets compounded by the fact today’s schooling tends to overly protect students from failure and, therefore, from opportunities for deeper learning.

Therefore. Learning and attacking ignorance <and the boundaries of ignorance> is a place where parents and outsiders <beyond teachers> can make a HUGE difference.

I do believe as we get older we come to appreciate, or at least understand, the importance of failure in real learning.

This is important learning beyond educational building blocks and assists in ongoing career development activity and personal intellectual growth. We need to insure children don’t get discouraged with two things:

——–

(1) slow paced learning as they learn necessary foundational elements <they get discouraged because their curiosity never gets sated>

(2) failure to learn everything <they get discouraged because by remaining in the ‘ignorance zone,’ despite having invested energy in knowledge gathering to actually get in that zone, they never feel a satisfaction of ‘something completed’>.

——–

With that thought …. we get to Jim’s second diagram where the circle of knowledge has inconsistent edges/boundaries. Yeah. It is uneven. When I saw this diagram I thought it perfectly reflected not only how people expand their learning knowledge outside a school construct but also my own personal challenge when it comes to increasing knowledge and ignorance.

The problem I have personally always had … is I run the risk of collecting information book by book and article by article and with each one my point of view slightly sways in the direction of what I read. I imagine, upon reflection, over time I have gained a better understanding of my own learning flaws and I tend to treat each piece of new learning as simply a breakthrough in my ignorance and I start gathering information around that particular piece of learning to round out my thought and point of views instead of solely being invested in the ‘breakthrough thought.’ In some variation I imagine most people are like this. This would also mean … uhm … there is no such thing as a well-rounded person.

So. All that said.

Assuming I could actually create a diagram without help from someone who knows how to build diagrams, my personal third diagram would probably be the rounding out of some of the points above. In other words … the spike is the initial breakthrough which inevitably leads to a curiosity driven rounding out of fuller understanding and knowledge. Beyond that rounding out I would imagine there is an inevitable new ‘spike’ somewhere else assuming I had read or heard something that piqued my curiosity. Therefore, and I believe this is the neatest thought, this is a perpetual process with spikes and rounding out but in the end the circle just keeps getting bigger and bigger. In my mind <and personal motto> … this suggests ‘seek truth’ just expands the mind with no end destination ever truly landed upon.

Anyway.

Jim makes a great point in his blog — you become more expert and informed on certain topics at the expense of others. The well rounded circle that might have theoretically characterized the end of classic education system but reality suggests it should be replaced with the profile of an expert (or increased passion on a topic) in some particular domain. Therefore, you will never end up with a perfect circle but rather an ellipse or some wacky trapezoid <or something>. I would also suggest that at the end of high school a teen will have the first diagram and just one spike out <I am making a generalization but you get my thought>. Most kids have some passion that they become comfortable with and expand their knowledge to a point that they are pushing the ignorance boundary out on that topic.

Ok.

Before I leave that thought. I believe every kid is passionate about something. And I believe it is up to us adults to find it <not the kid>. Once again … I do believe we more experienced <older> people have a responsibility here <note: as do more experienced manager in a business organization>.

It is a tricky challenge … but we should be encouraging other “spikes” in the boundary <note: I hesitate to call it rounding out because if you believe this diagram – as I do – we are seeking to look to create the sharp salient effect on the circle and then round out the salient>. As noted earlier we adults are in a balancing act role of encouraging and managing inevitable discouragement <because of the never ending aspect of curiosity>.

We need to think about this. Really think about this.

While it is a fascinating thought process that if we do not take time to think about we are likely to mismanage.

In the end?

We need to recognize that our smallest actions can make a big impact. And that is a responsibility.

Regardless.

Do I believe there should be tools, techniques and specific tactics to take advantage of this “boundary of ignorance” and guide ongoing learning? Shit. I don’t know. I am not an education expert.

I am sure someone can come up with some voodoo technique that gets people to enhance their knowledge base. For me the success lies within the understanding of the process. For when people understand these diagrams and this thought process I believe we are on our way to success. For, as I noted with the first diagram, the issue sometimes comes down to discouragement/encouragement. In our current world people are very focused on “attaining a goal” and what this “boundary of ignorance” suggests is you can never attain the goal.

The cheese gets moved every time you get close to getting it. Maybe the trick is to make learning become visible so you recognize the next step is to further cluster more learning around something that interested you <and encouraging that gathering/clustering>. But. I am not sure how to do that.

So. Here is what I do know <or believe> from this:

–          School systems are built to create a rounded foundational learning and accumulate enough knowledge to “attack” ignorance as you get older.

That is good. And it probably pays for parents and influential people in kid’s lives to understand this. And encourage kids because there is a high risk they will sometimes get frustrated with the basics and want more.

–          In general … learning is discouraging <that is a big thought we need to wrap our heads around>.

Until maybe you attain Albert Einstein status on quantum physics you can never reach your goal. Or maybe better said you are always reaching for something and finding out there is something more to reach for. In people’s formative thinking/learning years it is helpful to remember this.

–          Personal understanding is important.

I recognized pretty early on my learning challenge. Each book contained a thought that could drive my newest “thinking” or point of view. I discovered a way to deal with it.

Do I still fall into the “tunnel vision learning” trap? Sure. Who doesn’t fall in love with a well articulated logical idea on occasion? Am I trapped for long? Nope. I know now to seek out additional learning on thoughts to round off the spikes.

–          Single topic pushing out versus multiple topics pushing out.

There is no formula. I know for a fact my own parents were scared shitless that when I picked up a science fiction book, and then another, and then another, that all I was going to read and learn about was that. But then I would find something else and then that would be my new eternal focus. Ok. Eternal until the next interesting factoid smacked me in the head.

Other people push out on multiple topics at the same time. The only thing I know for sure? Encouragement.

I don’t like the way my own parents encouraged my curiosity <it was a negative approach … “you shouldn’t just read about this .. you know there are other interesting things in the world”> … but, regardless, the intent was good.

Go get more.

More is good.

Okay. Maybe that’s the bottom line to this thought.

More is good.

More learning begets more enlightened ignorance. Question everything. Even your own knowledge.

So. In this case, oddly enough, maybe I am suggesting ignorance is good. Good in that the more you don’t know makes you want to know more. Ok. Maybe it’s the more you know makes you want to know more.

Anyway. In the end … despite the fact I abhor ignorance & fight ignorance everyday from my little corner of the world … after writing this … well … maybe I should say “Up with ignorance!” because it fosters more learning. Go figure.

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

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.

—————

Michelangelo

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

“He’s a very candid, transparent kind of person, and if he feels strongly about something, he’s going to speak his mind. But as we all know, that can come with a cost, too.”

———

John Cornyn

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

‘non ventrem’ 

 

(no guts)

 

===========

Ok.

I am going to discuss guts a little differently than most people do today mostly because I am going to challenge the “no guts no glory” mantra.

First of all … is glory all that it is cracked up to be? <no>.

Second … what the hell is glory exactly? Some sense of recognition? <mostly, yes>.

Third … a truth to ponder … I can have no guts and still be successful.

Whoa.

#3 is gonna make some people shit some bricks.

What I mean by #3 is that we associate guts most often with big things and glory and ‘toughness’ and all that crap. I can have none of that, no guts per se, but I can have character, dignity & integrity to fall back on.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Someone is gonna say “that is guts.”

No it is fucking not.

It is character, dignity & integrity. Don’t sell those things short by calling them ‘guts.’

Now.

I will hedge on that ever so slightly by saying Guts, not manufactured gut, isn’t really a choice.

Yeah.

That may sound weird but, as with almost everything personal, guts comes from within. That ‘within’ may be your character but I could also argue that guts, often, arises from fear of looking like a ‘lesser version of what people should see of me.’ That ain’t character … that is ego, self-esteem and self-actualization driven behavior, in other words, manufactured guts.

That said.

I will also state that even if you don’t have ‘guts’ as a natural instinct that does not make you a coward.

I can have no guts and still make a stand. I just may not desire glory.

I may be speaking of semantics … but cowards retreat. And I can have no guts and not retreat. That’s my point. You can just stand your ground and stand with some courage of your convictions.

Anyway.

If I show guts one time and don’t another … does this make me gutless?

If I go big one time and … well … go home another <or goo little> … does this make me little?

If I do the right thing one time and the wrong thing another … does this make me someone who believes in doing the wrong thing?

In today’s world we seem to want to make this a black & white, binary, all-or-nothing discussion.

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

 

“The most important thing to remember is this: To be ready at any moment to give up what you are for what you might become.”

————-

D.E.B Dubois

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

Let’s face it.

This means we are incredibly hard on people who try to do the right thing.

We act like everyone can do the right thing all the time.

We act like everyone has some bottomless pit of guts they can tap into 24/7.

That just isn’t true. Guts is a finite resource <unless you are an idiot>. That means you will inevitably be faced with a situation which demands guts but you just have none to give at that moment.

And that is okay.

It is okay because we are defined just as much by our weaknesses and personal foibles as much as our strengths.

“Forcing” guts just is not sustainable.

Therefore, we are what we are … imperfect and perfect.

Grinding our way through thousands of decisions, choices and actions choosing right versus wrong <often with incomplete information in a semi-fog of distractions & multiple tasks> and when to go big or go little and when to … well … have guts or stand aside.

While I would love to suggest that all of this is approached tactically or in some calculated fashion … I cannot.

Far too often we view this in hindsight or from the ‘outside looking in’ and make some misguided judgements and offer some fairly harsh criticisms.

That’s crazy if not slightly fucked up.

There are certainly clarifying moments in which a choice should be calculated but, c’mon, a person is sifting through thousands of daily decisions and recognizing the truly clarifying moment from the mundane moment just isn’t as easy as we make it out to be. I challenge everyone to look back and decide whether they recognized all clarifying moments they had been faced with <and you would be lyin’ if you said you ‘saw’ them all in the moment>.

I am not offering an excuse for those who purposefully are gutless. I am just suggesting being right 100% of the time, having guts over 100% of a decisions & choices and ‘going big’ all the time is not very realistic <and is a recipe for disaster>. Therefore the reality is that there will be gaps, there will be spaces and there will be disappointments.

All that said.

I will say that everyone has the capacity for guts, going big and ‘doing the right thing’ when it matters.

Therefore, we all have the capacity for greatness.

Therefore, we all have the capacity for improving our lives in a way which gets us ever-so-slightly closer to the better, and nobler, version of ourselves.

Therefore, we all have the capacity for some level of what could be construed of success.

Therefore, we all have some capacity for some version of guts.

In the end.

Guts, to me, are far too often tied to ‘fearlessness.’

That’s nuts.

Guts are what you exhibit when you have fear.

Guts are what you exhibit when the world almost demands you go small and you make an attempt at something big or just bigger.

Guts are what you exhibit when ‘wrong’, or maybe ‘an easier path’, is the path of least resistance and you decide ‘right’ is the right thing to do.

Guts is capacity.

Capacity to accept your imperfections, your weaknesses, and accept the fact you will not always get it right.

Capacity to not only envision a better version of oneself but to actually, at least on occasion, do the things that reflect the better version of oneself.

Guts doesn’t lead to glory.

Guts leads to a nobler version of I. I wish we would measure guts this way more often.

==========

“I call it a thought virus, because really what they want to do is they just want to replicate their way of thinking to other people.” 

—-

Len Pozner

=====

Definition of a thought virus:

 “majority illusion, where many people appear to believe something ….which makes that thing more credible.” 

—–

Clayton A. Davis at Indiana University

================== 

“Nature has planted in our minds an insatiable longing to see the truth.”

—

 Cicero 

================= 

    “Book store owners and record store owners used to be oracles, in that way; you’d go in this dusty old place and they might point you toward something that would change your life.

All that’s gone.”

———-

Tom Waits

===========

Boy oh boy.

If there is one insatiable desire the entire 7 billion people on this earth of ours shares, it would be for truth.

Let’s just say, well, from that point on it is all downhill for truth.

Let me tell you what I am going to tell you.

There is an enemy in this story — the thought virus.

There is an unexpected doctor in this story — the future librarian.

============ 

“This is the look of the truth: layered and elusive.”

Anne Carson

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

That said. I have written dozens of times about the challenges Truth faces in today’s world. I have also written several times, in rebuttal to the overall dismay & despair & hand wringing of the older generations, that I believe the younger generations will solve this. They will solve it because they will find a lack of truth certainty untenable and … well … do what generations do – innovate a solution to an existing issue.

The issue, to me, is fairly simple to articulate <and I don’t think I am the sharpest knife in the drawer>. To articulate it I go to the 80/20 rule.

In the past we were presented with a fact, or a truth <which is most typically a coalescing of facts> and we accepted it was most likely 80% true … and that was good enough. We figured the 20% wouldn’t change the core truth. That 20% also permitted us some space for unlearning or some adaptability to absorb an additional fact to course correct our thinking. But that factoid, because it was mentally residing in the 20%, needed some gravitas to shift the 80%. That 20% also gave some room for the doubters and conspiracy theorists and misguided contrarians to dabble.

In today’s world truth has flipped. We are presented with a fact, or a truth <which is most typically a coalescing of facts> and we accept it is most likely 20% true … and then we rummage around in the 80% <if we are curious> to coalesce some additional things <some facts and some conjecture>.

But, suffice it to say, a shitload of people wander around on a daily basis having beliefs grounded in a 20% fact foundation. This means they either quadruple down on their 20% <to create the 80% in their heads> or they are constantly unsure of what is truth and hat is not being buffeted about by the winds of whatever information is in the air that day. This shift damns truth to a wretched game of truth or consequences because truth demands a certain amount of certainty – which we have ceded in today’s world.

Regardless. Let me offer two words to everyone – information literacy. I believe it is a commonly used term within the hallowed halls of librarianism <in other words … librarians use the term a lot>.

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

Information Literacy

Information literacy is a crucial skill in the pursuit of knowledge.  It involves recognizing when information is needed and being able to efficiently locate, accurately evaluate, effectively use, and clearly communicate information in various formats.  It refers to the ability to navigate the rapidly growing information environment, which encompasses an increasing number of information suppliers as well as the amount supplied, and includes bodies of professional literature, popular media, libraries, the Internet, and much more.  Increasingly, information is available in unfiltered formats, raising questions about its authenticity, validity, and reliability.  This abundance of information is of little help to those who have not learned how to use it effectively.

To become lifelong learners, we need to know not just how to learn, but how to teach ourselves.  We must acquire the skills necessary to be independent, self-directed learners.

———–

Derived from the Association of College and Research Libraries’ Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education

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

Information literacy is the superweapon to permit truth to battle on the field of doubts, lies and conspiracies.

I also believe we will create a new career in our battle over truth – information literacists. Let’s call them our future librarian superheroes <information literacists>.

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

“We don’t become better because we acquire new information. We become better because we acquire better loves. We don’t become what we know. Education is a process of love formation. When you go to a school, it should offer you new things to love. “

David Brooks

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

Look.

We talk a lot about how bookstores have suffered and libraries have suffered but they are just places of learning and, in my eyes, we should be focused on deliverers of knowledge <which enables the learning>. I would love future librarians to be ‘book slingers’, but I think their future specialness resides in information literacy <”truth” as it were>.

And that, my friends, is the future librarian.

The one who steps into the library and offers us the rediscovery of specialness.

Specialness?

I believe libraries should be less about the books and more about a place for the mind. My gut tells me they will need to wrestle that mantle away from the perceived ‘place of the mind’ – the internet. This shouldn’t be that difficult. The internet does NOT have a monopoly on knowledge, it has a monopoly on information. Some good information, some bad information, some false information and some true information. In today’s world there is no “judge.”

And while I would shift the character of the library to more of a place of congregation combining coffee shop, book exchange, art gallery, museum and … well … enlightened conflict <human exchange of ideas> I think the library of the future needs “information therapists” who engage in mind therapy.

Superheroes of the mind lording over information libraries.

I see libraries as havens of truth self-improvement.

I see libraries as islands of shared intellectual heritage.

I see libraries as raucous spaces of learning reverence.

I see libraries as arenas where all are victors in the battle for truth.

Libraries need to find a new reason for existing, a new role and a new way of working and I believe the librarian is the catalyst for the makeover.

Frankly, we do need superheroes and less “community gathering places.” I am not opposed to community but … geez … truth desperately needs bold superheroes and not revered spaces of whispered knowledge among few.

I feel strongly about this because … well … 3 things.

• My sister is an ‘information literacist.’ I have seen the power of librarians up close & personal. They were Google before there was google. For years we have seen them as quiet servants of books behind some desk and now they should be encouraged to step forward and champion not just books, and literature, but knowledge. In fact … I would begin recruiting those who DO want to actively engage.

If not them, then who?

• Society, led by some fairly vocal ‘truth benders’, are leading the charge against truth by standing up and basically saying nothing we say means anything, we’ll do what we want to do and tell you what truth is afterwards. I say that because books, and knowledge, cannot fight unless someone holds them forth as the torch is held forth on the statue of liberty. Truth, whether we like it or not, demands hand-to-hand combat. I believe we need superheroes on the side of truth.

• Truth, more often than not, is complex. Philosophically, truth is simply the idea that ‘facts’, viewed from a human perspective, end up being nuanced and create a complex multidimensional slightly flawed diamond. Not everyone can handle truth … it most likely demands superheroes.

To be clear. I don’t believe we should be sending these new superhero librarians out without some allies and tools.

Personally I believe we <including me>, who care about communicating truth and having truth reestablished, need to go back to the drawing board with regard to ‘learning’ and unlearning and … well … reintroducing truth to society.

I also believe Google should be stepping up to the plate.

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

<about Google> This is the equivalent of going into a library and asking a librarian about Judaism and being handed 10 books of hate

Danny Sullivan

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

Google needs to get their ‘truth compass’ heads out of their asses and start thinking about some technology voodoo they can create, and implement, that assists in filtering out ‘the fake.’

Ah.

Fake. ‘Fake news’ is nothing more than purposeful disinformation using some actual fake-information – this is a thought virus.

Fake news is NOT opinions.

Fake news, or disinformation, is often information disseminated as ‘whole fact’ and, yet, it is a splinter <at best> of a fact.

Fake news is deliberately false and misleading information published in social media and elsewhere online.

But fake news, at its core, is about lies and lying.

But fake news, at its core, resides in some alternative universe where what you & I know <and is basic corroborated truth> does not exist. It doesn’t even have a heartbeat in that universe. In that universe its citizens discard the usual rules of evidence flippantly dismissing actual eyewitness testimony as lies, actual confessions of someone who was guilty are waved away as ‘they said what they had to say’ and documented information  is scoffed at as flawed, paid for by some elite cabal, some academia gibberish … or a simple forgery.

In this alternative universe real information, truth as it were, is simply what someone believes <sometimes under the guise of common sense> … and they conflate “believe” with “know.”

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

“Of course, disinformation,” Quinn said. “I can do that.

I’ll leave out critical events, then I’ll put in false information and twist everything that has happened around into a vague, shadowy history that obscures what really took place.”

Terry Goodkind

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

This alternative universe ends up being created from some complex combination of lies & truth which are undermining the very idea of facts, history and truth. In fact, they turn truth and facts on their heads therefore making any evidence of the actual truth & reality bogus <in this alternative universe> … uhm … which means nothing can be proven and truth becomes … uhm … “thoughtful opinions.” Ultimately this creates that 80% doubt which swallows up the facts & truth like quicksand.  In that quicksand facts become a conspiracy, a legend, a hoax, or some active effort to circumvent truth.

In other words. In this bizarre world truth becomes lies and lies become truth. While this seems bizarre, it is dangerous:

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

“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (i.e., the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (i.e., the standards of thought) no longer exist.”

Hannah Arendt

===========

I say all of this long thought piece to state – this is a problem which demands a superhero.

I say all this long thought piece to state that these new librarian superheroes, our doctors against thought viruses, needs to be a defined career. It needs a career path, training and … well … I guess certifications or degrees or some shit like that.

Why? It is surprisingly tricky to debunk and compete against “fake.” It is surprisingly <and disturbingly> incredibly difficult to debate with a liar. You would think that you could simply point out what is a lie, but it is not easy when dealing with a good liar. Yeah. There are ‘good liars.’ They justify what they say by saying “but its true” and defending the fraction of the whole they used against the more truthful ‘whole story.’ They thrive in the 80% doubt & uncertainty space in the information literacy world.

By the way … this 80% ‘uncertain truth world’ has been in the works for a while <it has just found some influential enablers of ate>:

————————-

This has been a long time coming. Edelman, the world’s largest public relations firm and my previous employer, issues an annual study into the state of trust around the world. Over the past few years that study has pointed to a clear trend: the erosion of trust in authority figures and the rise of trust in “people like me.” We called that the inversion of the pyramid of influence. It means that your neighbor is just as much a source of insightful analysis on the nuances of U.S. foreign policy towards Iran as regional scholars, arms control experts, or journalists covering the State Department.

————————

And maybe that is my point on the librarian superheroes and thought viruses … the inversion of the pyramid of influence. If that is true <and I believe it to be so> the battle for truth almost demands a new type of expert that people can actually trust. We need truth to be championed by someone other than “Joe my neighbor,”

Anyway.

Like any good <bad> virus … it is here to stay and a sonuvabitch to kill.

Truth is too important to let the current battle be fought without some superheroes on its side. The truth is the axis munid, the dead center of the earth … when it’s out of place nothing is right; everyone is in the wrong place.

Society, and our future, demands librarians to venture out from behind the desk and become information literacy superheroes.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

That’s just what I think.

But I have to tell you a truth … truth is getting the living shit kicked out of it in today’s world and we better come up with a solution soon , therefore, my idea is as good as anything out there yet.

================ 

“The person who pretends to not see the truth is committing something much worse than a mortal sin, which can only ruin one’s soul – but instead committing us all to lifetimes of pain.

The truth is not just something we bring to light to amuse ourselves; the truth is the axis munid, the dead center of the earth. When it’s out of place nothing is right; everyone is in the wrong place; no light can penetrate. Happiness evades us and we spread pain and misery wherever we go. Each person, above all others, has an obligation to recognize the truth and stand by it.”

———-

Jacque Silette.

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

“I prefer nothing, unless it is true.”

Socrates

==========

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

“We miss out on the value of the message itself as a vehicle for driving virality.”

–

Jonah Berger

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

“Say something meaningful in an interesting way.”  

–

Bruce McTague

<author of “the shortest business book ever written”>

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

So.

This is about how we have a simplification crisis.

Ok.

This is actually about how we have an oversimplification crisis.

This crisis is making us … well … stupid.

Ok.

This crisis is actually making us stupider.

Look.

What I mean is that in a world in which we know that everything is complex, and more often than not, more complex than our own pea like brains can handle, we unerringly swerve toward simplistic headline conclusions and oversimplifications and absurd bullet point conclusions. We have hollowed out communication of the truly meaningful parts.

This surface skating intellectualism just makes us stupider.

Now.

We may convince ourselves we do this simply as a mental survival technique but I would argue, and I do, that it actually is the opposite of a survival technique … it is destructive behavior. It is destructive in that it destroys the overall thinking of what is actually a population quite capable of being intelligent, if not intellectual.

Yeah.

It makes us stupider.

I thought about this the other day because I have conversations with some incredibly smart and talented people who know a shitload more about more things than I could ever imagine and this topic came up. I note the smartness of these people to highlight how unusual it is that I can say something that actually can make a group of these people stop, be silent and then go “hmmmmmmmmmm.”

It is a rare thing.

And, yet, it happened the other day.

How did it happen? After some extensive conversation on North Korea, global trade challenges, Trump <of course> & foreign policy we opened the discussion to “what is the biggest challenge facing us …”

I spoke up & my thought drew some <thoughtful> silence.

I said “oversimplification.” <insert group silence afterwards>

To me … oversimplification misleads and creates bad decisions and, worse, creates bad thinking <which leads to bad opinions, attitudes and thoughts>. To me we have created this oversimplification shithole we currently reside in. And I offered a couple reasons why I believe this is happening <I did this because if you can identify the issues you can find solutions>:

We have convinced ourselves we do not have time for complex

Going back to the ‘destructive behavior’ thought I shared earlier …  oversimplification is anything but efficient. It actually demands more time in a variety of ways. The two simplest ways it does so is <1> the time we over invest attempting to isolate the simplest version of what is anything but simple and <2> the amount of time & energy we have to invest explain everything beyond the simplistic tripe initially offered, to thwart misguided behavior & reactions to the oversimplified offering & to redefine the oversimplification into bifurcated parts of the oversimplified whole.

We do this destructive behavior because we have convinced ourselves that we all have shorter, and shortened, attention spans.

We do this destructive behavior because we have convinced ourselves that people best retain “one thing.”

We do this destructive behavior because we have convinced ourselves in our perceived “never enough time” world we have to topline everything <to fit everything in>.

We do this destructive behavior because we have convinced ourselves that in a blizzard of nonstop things constantly vying for our attention the only way to capture someone’s attention is in some pithy soundbite.

Basically we have convinced ourselves that hollowing out an idea and a thought actually benefits not only the idea and the thought … but us! This is fucking nuts. Absolutely crazy.

Unfortunately, and truthfully, some things are just too complex to communicate in a sound bite or in 3 seconds or less. No matter how brief and simple you want to make it … well … it is neither brief nor simple. It is complex and sometimes the opposite of brief.

It isn’t just about telling a story.

Nor is it just about finding influencers to broker the story.

Nor is it just about practical value.

Nor is it just about emotion.

Unfortunately … it is a combination of those things. Yeah. Effective communication is … uhm … complex.

We have convinced ourselves that simple & simplicity is reflective of common sense.

I admit.

I have never been shy about calling bullshit on the simplistic tripe being spewed under the guise of ‘expert advice’ or ‘common sense.’

That said. I will suggest no topic has  been tortured more by common sense than simplicity.

Common sense suggests the simplest thing is the best.

Common sense suggests it is easier for a person to remember one thing and one word.

Common sense suggests in a complex world we humans crave simplicity.

Common sense suggests in a busy world we only have time for simplicity.

Common sense suggests a lot of nonsensical bullshit.

I will not argue that making something as simple as it can be is good but … well … simplistically … oversimplification is misleading and ultimately creates bad less-than-informed decision making AND thinking.

We have used this common sense simplicity bullshit for one simple reason — it serves us well in challenging the most established legitimate rule of Life & things. And that rule is “the world is complex.”

We embrace simplistic solution after simplistic solution, all labeled as ‘common sense ideas’, which are often counter to what an expert would suggest <which is often deemed “too complex”>…  only to find 90% of the time common sense was not only just simply wrong but also made us stupider.

I have written about simplicity and the complexity of finding the simplest way to communicate the complex many times and as I do so today I would remind everyone of what Jonah Berger offered us for a nifty sound bite compilation of sound bites to create a sound bite philosophy:

Here are his STEPPS for making anything go viral:

–          Social Currency: We share things that make us look good (even if that means pictures of our cat).

–          Triggers: Easily memorable information means its top of mind and tip of the tongue.

–          Emotion: When we care, we share.

–          Public: Built to show, built to grow.

–          Practical Value: News people can use.

–          Stories: People are inherent storytellers, and all great brands also learn to tell stories. Information travels under the guise of idle chatter.

And while this Berger thought is about “making things go viral” it is actually about finding the simplest way to communicate complex shit in a way that it is actually retained in a cognitive way.

I would also note that this dos not reflect “one simple thing”, it does reflect the complexity of reality and the mind and it reflects how to … well … help make us less stupider.

Ah.

Cognitive way.

As in “we actually understand what it is we heard, saw or read.” That is an important thing to ponder because over simplification cheats cognitive value as well as the value of whatever it is you have to offer people. Simplicity may be “memorable” but it doesn’t really lodge itself in anyone’s mind & memory in any meaningful way.

In fact.

The less depth you offer in your oversimplification the more you are at the mercy of the mind that decides to remember you. What I mean by that is if you don’t provide the depth the mind will create some perceptions around whatever it lodges in the pea like brain.

Uhm.

This means the pea like brain lodges only what is actually the brain’s perceptions of what to remember and not what you <a> know to be true, <b> think it may be important for that mind to know or <c> want the brain to store away in its mind.

I imagine what I am talking about is some wacky version of awareness versus engagement … but that shit is bullshit too.

It’s all bullshit because we should be turning away from simplification and engagement and connection and simply focus on “say what you need to say to persuade someone to think or do what you want them to think or do.”

All the other bullshit just confuses things.

If I tell someone that ‘being noticed ‘ is the most important thing, than some asshat is gonna come up with some zany oversimplified shit that gets noticed but doesn’t effectively communicate one thing <let alone all the things you may have deemed truly important in the beginning>.

I admit … I balk at a lot of the bullshit offered online about simplification <and the importance thereof> because … well … it is an oversimplification which diminishes the importance of ‘communicating depth’ and increases the importance of ‘being noticed.’

I do not like that equation. Effective communication is not a binary choice.

Effective communication, as with almost everything, is a complex challenge in communicating a complex thing well – because if you can communicate a couple things well it actually increases the perceived value <which then inevitably creates a stronger “memory stamp” … with value attached!>.

Which brings me back to our oversimplification crisis.

I could clearly argue that in today’s fragmented messaging world where information multiplies at light speed and a day still remains 24 hours that we humans are constantly honing our “incoming thoughts” filtering mechanisms.

I could also argue that our filtering system, as it exists today, sucks. We have dumbed down our communication and thinking behavior to such a hollowed out status the majority of time we skate along the superficial irrelevant surface of reality.

If we are lucky, the ice doesn’t crack.

But the truth is that oversimplification only offers the thinnest of ice to skate on and inevitably we fall thru the ice … over and over and over again.

Uhm.

And in the business world falling through the ice is bad. It is, metaphorically, making a bad decision based on shallow thinking and paying for it.

Yeah.

I did say the biggest issue we face is oversimplification.

I said that because if I can solve this, if I can have smarter people communicating complex things more smartly and I can have more everyday schmucks understanding that simple solutions are more often like trying to place a square peg in a round hole … well … I think it unravels a shitload of other problems we face in today’s world.

I imagine I am arguing that if more people are less stupid and more aware of the reality of things the more effective & efficient we will be in addressing the difficulties reality tends to place in front of us.

In the end.

I will go back to where I began … “say something meaningful in an interesting way.”

There are no rules nor boundaries in this statement.

You use as many words, or as few, as you need to say … to say something meaningful in an interesting way with the intent for it to be understood … and, ultimately, persuade someone to think something. I would say that the hollower the communication the less true persuasion engagement occurs and, conversely, the fuller the communication the more true persuasion engagement occurs.

Period.

=======

“Everyone, at some point in their lives, wakes up in the middle of the night with the feeling that they are all alone in the world, and that nobody loves them now and that nobody will ever love them, and that they will never have a decent night’s sleep again and will spend their lives wandering blearily around a loveless landscape, hoping desperately that their circumstances will improve, but suspecting, in their heart of hearts, that they will remain unloved forever.

The best thing to do in these circumstances is to wake somebody else up, so that they can feel this way, too.”

–

some tumblr blogger

=====

Well.

This isn’t about living an unloved Life but it is about waking up in the middle of the night <and hopefully having someone to wake up>.

I could argue that if you believe some value in Life is found in exploring … than at some point you will be lost. In other words discovery will always encounter moments of “where the hell am I, how the hell did I get here and what the hell was I thinking?”

Unfortunately., most times you wake up with those questions ringing in your head mentally you are standing alone in a field. You just aren’t sure you can see anyone else in the field with you or maybe you feel like you have gotten too far out ahead or maybe you even feel like you made a wrong turn and that’s why there is no one else in that field.

Regardless.

It’s just you. You and your thoughts <which, in the middle of a night, tend to shape themselves into the shapes of monsters>.

And that is when you want to wake someone up. Not really to wake them up for the sake of comfort but just to see if maybe the field you are standing in is not some big mistake.

Now.

Who you wake up is tricky.

When you are young if you find the wrong person that person can encourage the wrong things even if they mean well.

When you are older, assuming you have woken the right people up when young, you have a better chance of waking the person up who has a better sense of when to say “shut the fuck up and go back to bed” or listen and say “well, how about thnk about this” or listen and say “don’t worry … other people will show up at the same field you are standing in.”

I would point out that this all revolves around discovery & exploration <and how well the person you wake up sees discovery & exploration versus how you see it>.

What I mean by that is to be successful, exploration of Life needs some reasons beyond “feels right” to not only convince the people around you but, I imagine, yourself when you wake up in the middle of the night.

As for other people?

People are far more interested in the short-term outcome of exploration than any nebulous long-term benefits and, therefore, they tend to judge your middle of the night dilemma that way.

This means for you <the wakerupper> finding the right balance of rational & emotional and short term & long term ‘who you wake up thoughtfulness’  is kind of critical to convince yourself to carve out the time in the middle of the night to explore whatever it is you want to explore … and discover what may.

Well <part 1>.

There is a shitload of vagueness in what I just wrote.

Well <part 2>.

Exploration and discovery is a vague thing.

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

“As you get older there comes a time when you’re not scared of the dark or of monsters anymore.

You realize the dark is just the dark and monsters don’t exist.

But it’s also when you become scared of other things, people themselves. You learn that not everyone wants to see you succeed. You become aware of people’s underlying intentions and selfish actions. & the monsters you used to check for under your bed at night don’t even compare to some of the things people do.”

—-

A teen

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

And maybe that is my point today.

Vagueness is a real bastard/bitch. It is for everyone. It is because vagueness’s best friend is “uncertainty.”

That said.

The prize in semi-mastering this vagueness is that it not only ends with some semi-clarity <some semi-certainty> in your exploration and discovery but it also stimulates the machine that is you and the mind to think about how to continue down the path of possibilities and discovery.

All of this is tricky because … well … the benefits, by nature, are unknown in the moment, but evidence of the benefits point to improvements and potential benefit.

Ok.

This whole thought centers around thinking and the art of thinking <in the middle of the night … which is different than thinking in the day>.

I know I have read how people can train themselves to think because while some people are natural thinkers by day, the ones who have the innate ability at birth who treat pieces of information as jigsaw puzzle pieces waiting to be put together and create something, night thinking demands a different type of thinking.

At night, typically, one piece of the puzzle demands your attention and all the other pieces seem to either not be present or are only blurs or pieces of the pieces.

So while the natural thinker, during the day, has the ability to sift through the jumbled pot of ingredients and like a Williams Sonoma colander trap the essentials and quickly let the inessential run off in the middle of the night there is typically one monster piece which is sitting there right beside you saying “let’s talk.”

Now.

Thinking has always been about bringing stuff in and letting stuff out.

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

we are cups, constantly and quietly
being filled. the trick is knowing how
to tip ourselves over and let the
beautiful stuff out.”

–

Ray Bradbury-

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

In this case I would imagine I am suggesting the monster let himself in and now you gotta figure out a way of saying … well … are you truly a monster and maybe you should stay of you are not and if you really are … how do I get you out?

And you wake someone up.

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

The Thinker – Historically we contemplated in retreat, silence, solitude, and within our own mind. We solved problems in isolation, deep thought, and through introverted reflection.

—

The contemporary Thinker – In an age of twittering, blogging, social networking, and sophisticated work-place networks, global science networks, and mass-participation and collaboration, (and TED talks ) information is exchanged via a networked world.

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

Thinking and problem solving, in the middle of the night, demands some inter-connected exchange of information that is fluid and, yet, systematic. It is kind of like you don’t really want to be stuck with this frickin’ monster staring at you in the middle of the night so you call someone up, wake them, and talk about the visitor. Its kind of like you need someone to look at your visitor thru different eyes.

Anyway.

All I really know is that part of exploration is uncertainty. And uncertainty will certainly beget waking up in the middle of the night wondering if they will spend their lives wandering blearily around a landscape, hoping desperately that their circumstances will improve, but suspecting, in their heart of hearts, that they will remain lost forever.

I am not suggesting you are actually lost … but you will feel lost.

And that is when you need someone, the right someone, to wake up.

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

“You spend your whole life stuck in the labyrinth, thinking about how you’ll escape it one day, and how awesome it will be, and imagining that future keeps you going, but you never do it.

You just use the future to escape the present.”

—

Looking for alaska; John Green

===========

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

“Most of us, shrinking from the difficulties and dangers which beset the seeker after original answers to these riddles, are contented to ignore them altogether, or to smother the investigating spirit under the featherbed of respected and respectable tradition.”

—-

Thomas Henry Huxley

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

“Not fearing death, nor shrinking for distress, But always resolute in most extremes”

.

William Shakespeare

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

Well.

Spend enough time in a corporate career and move up in a corporation and pretty much everyone gets some sort of media training <how to communicate with media and effectively communicating your message>.

And before you think this is just about senior management folk let me tell you that all you have to do is work with any significant franchise organization and you will invest more energy and time doing media training at all levels than you really would like to do.

Why?

All you have to do is get burned once by some local TV station trying to find some ‘you would be shocked’ story and you will learn the value of media training outside the corporate headquarters and on-the-ground at the service & franchise level.

I have received some fabulous media training throughout my career and most likely have a couple of media training manuals and presentations on some thumb drive somewhere. Training can span from a simple one-sheet ‘do this and don’t do this’ to sitting down in front of a camera being taped and grilled by some inquisition-type corporate communications expert <who you will hate for weeks after>.

For most of us … all training is excruciatingly painful.

For most of us … all we seek is “an opportunity to keep our mouth shut.”

But, alas, corporations and senior management demand face time publicly and it is better to arm yourself than to go into the fight “winging it.”

Now.

Most relevant to my thought today is that this training pays off in spades when you are forced into a comparison situation. Think being on a panel or standing at side by side podiums. I wrote not long ago about the window of ‘stark contrast opportunities’ in which I discussed the upside in terms of building value thru contrast.

Well.

As with anything good there is also a potential downside.

In a contrast situation there is a winner and a loser. And I don’t care how good a thinker you are, how good an instinctual communicator you are or how good an ‘explainer in chief’ you are … you cannot go into any comparison & contrast situation assuming you will  be the better one, the winner by default, in a contrast situation.

Contrast situations are fraught with peril.

I won’t go into all the training crap but I will point out two core aspects which are relevant to being in a public contrast situation:

• The hard one: simplify without oversimplifying

This is hard. Really hard.

And usually takes a shitload of practice & experience … and even then you will not always get it right <except for those truly gifted communicators who make all the rest of us miserable in that because they can do it everyone believes they can also do it>. My belief is always to say just enough so people understand and assume someone will ask a question if they need more information. If you do that, your experience with questions, what questions you get, kind of hone your ‘what is too much and what is too little’.

But you need enough experience and questions in order to be able to bracket what is most efficient & effective.

That said.

Oversimplifying concludes in one of two places <1> you have no idea what you are talking about or <2> you are out of touch with details and depth of truth

You have to figure out a way to showcase you understand the complexity without boring the shit out of people and, ultimately, convincing them you really do know your shit. In addition … you want to give just enough nuance and depth to suggest an ‘attack’, or clarification <which is just another kiss of the comparison death> would be a waste of time.

I will not go into all the gory details of how to efficiently communicate complexity <which is actually the advice we should be giving everyone rather than “keep it simple”>.

Suffice it to say there are three effective ways to simplify without oversimplifying.

Bracket your thought with two support points.

Triangulate your thought by offering three reasons to believe.

Box your thought in with 4 simple reasons why your thought makes sense.

A lot of people suggest always providing your thought and one reason to believe support <simple linear support> but the best training I received made the point that this makes your thought more vulnerable to questioning and, if possible <unless you have one undeniable blockbuster reason to believe> you should figure out a simple way to show simple complexity demands nuances smartness.

I imagine what I am saying in this aspect is you want to protect your words, thoughts and ideas from shrinking. And the way to do so is to effectively build a wall around them. Without the wall, the protection, the thought can get squeezed until it no longer exists … and you shrink a little every time that happens.

• The easy one: avoid hyperbole like it is the plague

Hyperbole creates a gap, an empty space, in between reality and some quasi-imagined reality.

Uhm.

Empty space to a listener/questioner/debater is like sugar for ants. Our tendency is almost always to make problems look bigger and successes more successful … it makes us look more heroic. But in our tendency to do so it actually … well … shrinks us. The truth is many of us think our jobs are fairly mundane and when discussing what we do, and have done, publicly we think “who the hell wants to hear this?” and then head down the path to make what we do, or did, look less mundane and more challenging or exciting.

Media training helps you see this.

And what you do is not worry about what you do but rather show how much you love what you do, or did, which breathes some helium into it and makes it look bigger. Suffice it to say it is incredibly difficult for someone to shrink what you like and what you are passionate about than it is to poke a hole in the empty space created by hyperbole and shrink the entire thought to a shriveled balloon status.

Ok.

Why did I bring this up today?

Well.

Sigh.

It becomes more obvious everyday … the shrinking of America right before our eyes.

Yesterday I watched President Donald J Trump stand at one podium and the president of Columbia, Juan Manuel Santos, at another podium. As they each spoke I watched Trump shrink before our eyes and America along with him.

The adult at the front of the room was a president … just of Columbia.

No offense to Columbia or the Columbian president but I don’t expect a country whose economy is 42 times smaller than the US Economy to have a president who sounds smarter, speaks smarter, shares smarter information and handles himself more smartly than the president of the USA. Let alone watching the poor Columbian President trying to be diplomatic when he clearly wanted to look at Trump and say “are you a complete fucking idiot?”

It bothered me a little less as we watched Angela Merkel of Germany a month ago stand side by side with Donald J Trump and his words and speech made him shrink before our eyes <and earned Merkel the title of ‘leader of the free world’>.

Yeah.

That’s tough competition for any president so while I cringed at the shrinkage I figured it may be one of Donald J’s most difficult contrast & comparison situations.

But in between yesterday’s unfortunate public display and Merkel’s hint of what was to come we see time and time again he is placed side by side with the leader of another country and he shrinks in comparison as soon as they both start talking.

By the way … this is a problem.

Not just for Donald J Trump but also for America.

When he shrinks in comparison America shrinks globally. This doesn’t mean we will not retain the world’s largest economy which demands that people have to deal with America regardless … but … it effectively shrinks our leadership role globally.

Sigh.

I honestly don’t know what I would do with Donald J Trump if I was his communications director. I know I would be honest with the Trumpster and say “stop giving interviews because you don’t know when to stop talking” … “don’t answer in paragraphs but rather in sentences because you cannot assemble a coherent paragraph thought” … “never talk about yourself when standing side by side with a peer” … “lets schedule some more of those fake campaign speeches  in front of your few rabid followers so you can feel free and complain about everyone & everything and explain how great you are because they will love it.”

I also know my honesty would get my ass fired so quickly don’t blink because you would miss my time in the White House.

Media training is a pain in the ass but in its pain it grinds you down to reality about yourself. You learn to duck the bad comparisons a little better and seek the opportunities to contrast positively a little better.

I don’t believe we need a member of the Mensa society to be the president or even to be effective in positively contrasting themselves in a tough situation in which the other is smart, thoughtful & articulate. But you do need someone who is self-aware in the moment & environment. Media training almost above any other training you may receive in business harshly introduces you to self-awareness.

What I do know is that without some very harsh media and communications training President Trump will continue to shrink in comparison time and time again.

==========

“Oh, How insanely outside the window

О,   как   безумно   за       окном

Howls and rages the evil storm,

Ревёт, бушует  буря злая”

–

Alexander Blok

===========

“Every advantage is temporary.”

―

Katerina Stoykova Klemer

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

“The weather-cock on the church spire, though made of iron, would soon be broken by the storm-wind if it did not understand the noble art of turning to every wind.”

–

Heinrich Heine

=========

In business we talk incessantly about visions and missions and purpose and strategic objectives and important long term type thinking to insure everyone knows where they are going and how they will go about doing it.

We worry about how to smartly effectively compete.

We worry through some fairly random details, talk about being the best and then … uhm … proceed to be anything but the best.

So … you know what?

If you are better and have a better offering and are truly worth a shit and want people to know you are worth a shit … well then … there is no real intellectual challenge.

You get on with getting on.

I am not suggesting being stupid about competing.

Nor am I suggesting bludgeoning the industry and competitors with some dull edged hammer.

I mean … for god’s sake we can talk forever on all the topics I just listed and stew over all the long term type shit … but … we all know the holy grail of business success actually resides in ‘windows of opportunity.’

Now.

Windows of opportunity arise all the time if you are paying attention.

As I have noted before ‘white space’ analysis in positioning is archaic thinking mostly because it explores a stagnant 2 dimensional industry when in reality any business in today’s world is 4 dimensional, at its most simplistic, and constantly moving & a swirl of constant activity in which no one competitor is ever truly standing still.

What that means is, basically, in today’s business world you set out down a road you want to go down and seek small windows in the chaos of normal business activity to “hit the hole.” Just like as a running back there is a huge mass of men & pads in front of you and you ‘just get going’ assuming a hole will open and you get through it.

Ah.

And then … of course … there are the windows that get placed in front of you. you don’t need to go looking for them … they are just there.

Windows of opportunities come in all shapes and sizes but the one you kill for is the opportunity for a stark contrast.

Stark contrast is the holy trinity of windows because it is the opportunity to create distinction, separation and build value. Uhm. That is if you actually use this window of opportunity correctly.

We assess this type of window two ways <because stark contrast also represents potential issues>.

• A stark contrast shouldn’t really come at the obvious detriment of a competitor. While a stark contrast certainly represents an opportunity to laugh at a competitor or possibly make them look foolish to do so is to miss the larger opportunity. The larger opportunity isn’t to diminish their value to make yours look bigger but rather use a stark contrast to leverage more value for you.

• A stark contrast really shouldn’t come at the obvious detriment of the category/industry. This one is a little tricky but is a corollary to my first point. You don’t want to make the category look stupid or ‘less than.’ A part of how you conduct your business is protecting the larger institution. In other words … you never sacrifice the greater institution simply to try and gain a temporary advantage for yourself. .

<note: both of these are incredibly hard lessons to maintain in a highly competitive, selfish thinking, short term view business world>

And then, of course, even if we do think those two things through well and then take that temporary advantage offered us I will note that we, in business, are incredibly poor at knowing when to quit the contrast so we keep pounding the nail into the board even though it is already all the way in.

That said.

The true value of this stark contrast opportunity is distinction. Why do I put such a high value n distinction?

Distinction is one of those fabulous things that the more you try to be distinct the less likely you will actually be so <at least in a meaningful way>.

And if I could convince more companies to think about this with clear heads I am not sure I would make any more money but I am sure they would.

i know, I know … easy for me to say.

But the pursuit of the elusive distinction can sometimes drive businesses to some fairly irrelevant, if not absurd, and absolutely meaningless places. I know it sounds crazy but, if they ignored it, I bet it would happen. Well. It would happen if they were smart about focusing on themselves … who they were and who they wanted to be … uhm … and took the temporary advantage offered them in stark contrast windows of opportunity.

So let’s call it a crazy smart idea.

But tough to do <as most crazy smart ideas are>. Tough because it doesn’t exactly match up with the standard “this is how you are supposed to do it” management guides. Waiting for opportunities isn’t something that they teach you in ‘how to aggressively beat the crap out of your competition in the industry” school.

Anyway.

Maybe that is the most important point.

There are a lot, a shitload, of crazy smart business people out there.

But there are not a lot of crazy smart business people who seem to be willing to do something crazy like ignore the business books “plan to success” blueprints.

Here is where I put my money.

The few. Those crazy enough to not plan for distinction but rather let distinction and originality simply evolve from who they are, what they think and their vision of what they think they should be and the ones who ‘get going’ smartly to starkly contrast themselves when a window opens.

Crazy?

Probably.

But in a world where the majority of businesses, and new ideas, fail … maybe this isn’t a crazy a thought as it sounds.

And, at its core, the concept of what I just outlined isn’t that crazy because businesses are always seeking an advantage.

And they should.

I imagine the point I am going to make is that most businesses don’t consider ‘advantage’ as temporary. When it actually happens … they treat it as sustainable.

And ultimately that becomes their downfall.

Windows of opportunity close. And 90% of the time they close quickly. And maybe that is where the ‘sustainable ‘ belief really screws most businesses. They jump through the window of opportunity, and let’s say they even treat the stark contrast opportunity correctly and do all the right things, they then act like they are going to stay on that side of the window <acting as if the advantage and opportunity is sustainable>.

Wrong.

Bad decision.

Windows of opportunity are meant to be jumped through … opportunity maximized … and then you jump back before it closes again.

Why?

Stark contrasts are most typically contextual to a certain situation. Most businesses are smart enough if they give you a stark contrast opportunity to actually change the context to insure the contrast opportunity ceases.

In addition … knowledge never stops. Knowledge, in and of itself, changes environment … it is never stagnant.

Sustainable advantage is really rare.

Extremely rare.

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. 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.

Ok.

My last point on a stark contrast window of opportunity.

While everything I just discussed is about opportunity to build value and distinction a stark contrast opportunity offers you the one thing which is the one thing you dream about as a business – an interested person.

In general, in a sea of business sameness and a cluttered world of meaningless communication, whether you are trying to sell something or showcase value you will be faced with a great barrier of lack of interest.

People, in general, don’t care until they have to care.

I would like to point out that while we all say “the greatest thing since sliced bread” that sliced bread was not that great to people in the beginning … people just didn’t care about sliced bread … they liked what they had <unsliced>.

Anyway.

The corollary to that thought?

Everything is interesting at some point.

Yup.

Everything.

It’s all about uncovering the most relevant time to be relevant <and interesting>. Pick the wrong time and you waste $’s because the consumer just doesn’t care. Be interesting at the right time and the brand becomes relevant <and sales increase>.

Whenever I bring this topic up oddly <in general> I find everyone gravitating to the ends of the spectrum … half believe whatever their widget is that everyone is interested in it … and the other half suggest the world has gone to hell in a hand basket and people don’t care about anything.

Regardless.

Assume people don’t care about what it is you want to tell them. And assume they don’t care about your product <until you do something wrong>.

But the one time you may actually have a chance to generate some interest in a stark contrast. Most times your advantage or difference or distinctness is almost indiscernible to the human eye <despite how proud you may be of it>. and that is where a stark contrast offers you the greatest part of the opportunity – it is discernible.

All businesses need to remember that people just don’t care until they have to care … but people always care about vivid comparisons and take note of hem in a grayish world — that is why you take advantage of stark contrasts windows of opportunity.

That’s it for businesses and stark contrast windows of opportunity.

In general … stark contrast opportunity or not, personally, I believe many businesses mismanage any ‘advantage’ opportunities.

In attitude and in behavior.

They think incorrectly, or have a flawed view when they think, and implement too slowly. They overthink the wrong things and under think the right things.  They think long term sustainable within what are really short term opportunities. They think of ROI in terms of “time I have maintained active or the advantage” rather than viewing time in a “37 seconds used wisely is a lifetime.”

I tend to believe it is because businesses try to simplify as much a possible with the intent to replicate as much as possible. Neither of those thoughts in that last sentence are particularly effective with regard to a stark contrast window of opportunity. Oddly, the pursuit of simplicity increases cumbersome less-than-effective responses.

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

“The world is not as simple as we like to make it out to be. The outlines are often vague and it’s the details that count.

Nothing is really truly black or white and bad can be a disguise for good or beauty … and vice versa without one necessarily excluding the other.

Someone can both love and betray the object of its love … without diminishing the reality of the true feelings and value.

Life and business <whether we like to admit it or not> is an uncertain adventure in a diffuse landscape whose borders are constantly shifting where all frontiers are artificial <therefore unique is basically artificial in its inevitable obseletion> where at any moment everything can either end only to begin again … or finish suddenly forever … like an unexpected blow from an axe.

Where the only absolute, coherent, indisputable and definitive reality … is death. We have such little time when you look at Life … a tiny lightning flash between two eternal nights.

Everything has to do with everything else.

Life is a succession of events that link with each other whether we want them to or not.”

–

Arturo Perez Revarte

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

Whether you want to simplify or not … one of the wisest things you can always keep in mind is … Everything has to do with everything else. Life is a succession of events that link with each other whether we want them to or not.

Another wise thing to keep in mind is windows of opportunity always arise but the ones that offer stark contrast may be one of the most valuable opportunities you can ever encounter in business.