====

“The whole difference between construction and creation is exactly this: that a thing constructed can only be loved after it is constructed; but a thing created is loved before it exists.”

Charles Dickens

====

Sometimes happiness can be found in the nuance or the distinction in thought.

Some people are good at constructing.

Some people are good at creating.

One is not any better than the other.

Both are to be, well, ‘loved’ in Dickens terminology.

Both make people happy because both are grounded in (a) doing and (b) outcome.

That said. In a binary world it seems like we too often try to put a higher value on one versus the other <and it depends on your perspective on which you put a higher value> where it becomes an odd-ish competition if not an unhealthy “us versus them” narrative.

Businesses, in particular, seems to try and assess value to each end of the spectrum constantly swinging back & forth with such force your stomach roils and you want to puke.

I sometimes worry we do the same with kids and what we tell them.

Regardless.

We need both.

And we need people who love construction and creation and, in a utopian business and world, each should love the other.

Ok.

But we do not have a utopian business world <mostly we eye each other with a certain feeling of disdain … maybe sympathy> so, realistically, let’s just say ‘you can do no wrong if you place yourself as close to the enemy as possible.’ <paraphrasing Admiral Nelson for business>

Let’s just say that in a great business environment the culture can find chemistry in the conflict.

The combination, and friction, between creators and constructors is positively powerful. Equal as ‘enemies’ and in value.

For a great idea, creation, is meaningless <i.e., less than great> if it never gets constructed let alone of it gets constructed poorly.

As a corollary, a lovingly constructed shitty idea is simply a Potemkin. A movie set. Looks beautiful but empty behind the facade.

Look. I tend to believe we would love each other <well … okay … certainly respect> if everyone would leave us alone to do so.

If businesses would stop trying to put value on one versus the other.

If parents didn’t always suggest “you need to be realistic”.

If life would stop suggesting if you are one you have less value than the other or even that you need to be both <which, oddly, in a binary world SHOULD be of the highest value but yet it is of no value because you haven’t chosen a side>.

Let me say this.

The reality is most likely a person loves to construct or loves to create.

Sorry.

Just saying the truth.

Which leads me to a wonderful thought from a young blogger:

“I’d rather pour myself into a world I love and understand than try to make something up out of nothing.”

Rainbow Rowell

What a wonderful thought and kind of a human truth before we all get battered by what society, or business, starts telling us what is right or what we should do.

It’s not about being a dreamer versus a doer.

It’s not about ‘doing something you are passionate about’.

It’s about pouring yourself into what you are good at in an environment, a culture, you love <once again, not doing something you love>.

Just as an example.

I found a career not DOING something I loved. I found a career where I was IN a world I loved surrounded by smart curious restless people. Some were creators. Some were constructors. But in that world all were smart curious people.

Oh.

And restless.

I never had to create something from nothing. I was in a world, a business environment, in which I could simply reach out and grab something wherever I looked. I imagine I share that because we tend to currently live in a world where we want to define things and people and slot them and say ‘what are you passionate about.’

Well.

Maybe we should be discussing <more often> “what environment would you love to be in.” Not ‘what do you want to do.’

I know … that is crazy talk.

But I am also the guy who would build a business around a culture and character rather than a 5 year strategic plan.

Yeah.

Give me some restless curious learning people and I bet we could figure out how to both create and construct something in an industry we elected to drop ourselves into.

Yeah.

Now THAT is crazy.

Ponder.

transient assertions:

they are true today, but may not have been true yesterday or may not be true tomorrow

=======

My weakness, professionally, is the lack of any specific ‘hard’ skill. To be clear. I am fairly sure my ‘soft skills’ are not a strength. Regardless. That hard skill weakness makes my biggest professional vulnerability, well, stability. What I mean by that is a specific hard skill gains importance the more replicable or consistent a context is. What I also means by that is in order to facilitate my own professional survival I had to embrace progress or some version of consistent contextual change <facilitate organizational/brand/business continuous improvement>. It also meant not only embracing ‘transient assertions’, but figure out how to articulate the value of transient assertions.

Now. This does not mean everything changes. I have also said, and still do, that the best organizations typically run on parallel, but interconnected, paths – consistency/replicable and emergent/improvement.

But if you don’t have a specific skill to hang your hat on you need (blue to emphasize) to move upstream in a business. If you do, and you are really worth a shit, you’ll find your thinking, whether purposeful or not, has scraps of the larger company identity/strategy/vision underpinnings in it no matter how downstream you go once up that stream. This has a mutual benefit of imbuing the more tactical with the more strategic <or mission oriented> and imbuing the vision with some more pragmatic aspects. You become more able in linking scraps of skills with scraps of vision slowly but surely positioning yourself as a tapestry maker, or, a transient assertionist (I made that term up). The truly interesting aspect of this professional thought is that if you are any good you find you not only start sneaking into other conversations and other departments, but you are even welcomed or asked to. In addition, you will also find that “non asked for business building ideas” are more about company things then any brand things (but brands would benefit).

So, regardless of your actual ‘skill’ you just become comfortable wandering into the business of doing business.

That said.

I do think it matters what someone has done from a practical experience when doing a job. I struggle to think of an industry, department or function I have not interacted with professionally. I have worked with retail, CPG, services, franchises, multi-unit, global with local needs, technology startups and almost any business configuration imaginable. But, maybe more importantly, I have used all those experiences as Edward de Bono suggested, through lateral thinking to transfer appropriate learnings from one to another to create successful, distinct initiatives, ideas and improvements <value creation>.

I do think it matters what someone has done from a practical experience when doing a job. I have either worked in or directly managed Direct Marketing, Media, Ad agency Account Management, Creative process, brand planning, brand strategy, strategic planning (business consulting), social media, organizational behavior, digital planning, behavioral dynamics, etc. and as a result am quite familiar with how to guide thinking to practical output to results.  Heck. I have taught and implemented strategic planning, managed an advertising agency and, in general, have been able to elevate a variety of businesses to new points of distinction in competitive environments.

*** note: Points of distinction. Let me be specific.  It would be easy for someone to suggest a supermarket is a supermarket, an enzyme is an enzyme, a motor oil is a motor oil, a bank is a bank or whatever you would like to add. I used those because I have direct experience on those, as well as a variety of commodity-like industries, and I do not agree. A person has to understand how to identify the underlying components that create the distinctness of any business, often the subtle little things, and bring them to life in a way that will resonate with people and, ultimately, create some connection. I imagine I am suggesting connection and distinction have a looped relationship and one cannot exist without the other if you seek create value.

All of what you have just read may seem, uhm, restless. Well. It is.

But despite all the restlessness I have just highlighted there is a core consistency – principled thinking and principled application. While I believe if a business, and initiative, is not moving it will not survive, I also believe “continuous movement” demands embedding strategy in every tactic and tactical thinking within a strategy and embedding the organizational vision into every strategy. Maybe better said, mastering transient assertions to the benefit of the long-term business.

Anyway.

Here is the one thing I am consistent on. I believe every business, every product, every service, every initiative, has something worth telling a story about. If you are in business and do not believe that you should be in a different career. I also believe if you can stand up and tell a story with your knowledge, or what you know, all your restlessness can create value. What I mean by that is I could stand in front of accounting, ops, sales, customer service, a board … and tell a story (usually in a cascading dialogue – here is situation, here is what someone says first, the response, what some thinks, what some says, etc.) and thru the dialogue story cemented some credibility, offered some solutions/words thru the story dialogue and made the strategic point.

Stories even some things out which is helpful because restlessness tends to create some unevenness or asymmetry. That last point is important because growth just by its natural properties creates imbalances AND the business world <as well as the world writ large> encourages us to believe things should be tidy. Unfortunately, people are inherently untidy irrational things, improvement is rarely tidy and stories tend to tidy some things up.

Look.

Restless consistency is valuable because I believe business, in general, is a constant tug of war between freedom and focus.

It’s a little bit easier to have this tug of war if you have established business/brand heuristics because then in the debate you can lean in on them to gain some flexibility elsewhere.

But.

Large businesses worry so much about challengers (& are defensive rather than offensive) so they tend to conservatively hunker down on what they are afraid to lose rather than focus on what they could gain. It creates an inherent focus, but also stagnancy & lets others play in the “hey, I am interesting” zone.

Small businesses are scared about standing for nothing. They have had it pounded into their heads that the path to success is “stand for one thing.”  This creates a tightrope for any strategist in that they have to be able to articulate core focus as an incredibly solid lily pad while suggesting some freedom aspects and a “let’s follow what works” plan of action.

And new companies? Yikes. I just think new businesses have less margin for error and with business inherently attracted to ‘evenness’ & consistency (the list of reasons of why span from political to managing upwards to budgeting to articulation/looking smart) and, if you aren’t resilient and diligent, the arc of activity will always go to ‘one thing well’ not ‘restless consistency.’

Look.

Business itself is restless. Consistently restless.

Business itself is a transient assertion. Consistently transient.

I imagine my point is you have a couple of choices with regard to your career.

First. Hunker down and master a skill on the consistent part <and hope the transient part of business doesn’t kill that particular consistency>.

Second. Hunker down on restless learning and get good at applying that learning against the transient part.

I will not tell you which is better because, well, both offer value to a business and, yet, both do not offer any guarantee of business success. All I know is that in hunting and in business, a moving target is more difficult to hit so restless consistency may make your survival probabilities increase. Just think about it.

===

“You try to be greedy when others are fearful.

And you try to be fearful when others are greedy.”

Warren Buffett

===

Well. I have been involved in several “stop spending money on those things because it is a waste of money” and “stop parsing out money in nickels & dimes and spend some hundred dollar bills for gods sake” business discussions throughout my career.

Suffice it to say, one of the most challenging aspects of being in business is managing money and how & when you spend your money.

That said. This discussion rears its ugliest head when … uh oh … you can see you are running out of money.

Let me be clear. Businesses rarely actually run out of money completely. More often than not it is “I don’t have enough money to spend after “x” date.”

This is called ‘spending over time’ budgeting.

This is called ‘wrong way to budget.’

Budgeting should always be based on ‘spend money to make money’ running parallel to the unfortunate business truth  that “you actually have to spend money to make money.”

** note: when I say spend money to make money I am not just referring to direct marketing or simple ’cause & effect’ advertising, but rather even if your objective is brand awareness your ultimate objective is to sell shit, i.e., having everyone know you and not buy anything is a non-business model.

I am tempted to refer to my ‘no formula’ post here because I believe every business has an edge just as they <assuming it is actually a good idea> always have an opportunity or opportunities. Using formulas when budgeting expenditures typically does not translate to edges, maximizing the edge nor offer real solutions to drive & create business. Formulas tend to say what has worked in the past which doesn’t often offer real solutions when discussing ‘we are going to run out of money.’

Suffice it to say that when budgets get limited <or you can see a zero balance on the horizon> and when a business comes to grips with the fact it is going to run out of money there are some hard choices to make.

The easy choice? Stretch it out and hope <the business is maintained or some additional funds come your way>. I would be remiss if I didn’t point out hoping is never a good strategy.

The difficult choice? How do I spend it now <or within a specific window of time> to drive up awareness/sales/connections so that I make an impact.

While it sounds flippant to say you have to spend money to make money and it is even more difficult to explain “there is something worse than not having any more money to spend.”

Uhm. What is worse?

Spending the money you did have … poorly.

There may be nothing worse in business than wasting money. And I don’t mean on frivolous expenditures <which is wasteful & stupid> or on ‘legacy programs’ <which is usually wasteful or at minimum ‘less than efficient’>, but actual well intended planning and wasting the money in doing so.

That said. The most common poor budgeting strategy is time based.

“If I don’t budget wisely I will use up my money by <insert some date>.”

Well. That is actually “how can I spread my money out for as long as I can” budgeting. I don’t have enough time to list how many things are wrong, and will go wrong, spending your money this way.

Basically you run the risk of spreading yourself so thin you don’t make any impact which defeats the purpose of spending money.

The purpose of spending money in business? <just as a reminder>

To make money.

But, remember, you have to pull the trigger on spending – having money does you no good if you do not actually spend it. A business should demand money spent to show how it creates money <some high falutin’ marketing experts will toss around “ROI” here>.

In startups it is to receive additional funding.

In some businesses it is that your budget is based on % of sales.

In other businesses it is simply that the business has some financial objective <sales, profit, widgets, etc.> and you are spending to meet and/or exceed it.

And while everyone in business knows this, for some reason, time takes on an extraordinarily high importance in planning. It becomes “I have 12 months to use this money” rather than “how do I spend the money to make the most money.”

Yes.

Sometimes those things coincide.

But more often than not, under the scrutiny of truth, they do not.

I got very lucky early in my career in that I was mentored and worked with some excellent ‘difficult money decision’ business people.

For example. An early difficult money decision.

It was a national brand with a long purchase cycle product <think maybe once every two years for the bulk of their purchasers>and a pretty high seasonal purchase skew where a high % of sales occurred in a three month period and a budget that didn’t support an annual national effort.

The senior brand manager decided to split the country into thirds and only provide significant support to one of the thirds each year <rolling through the nation over a three year period and then starting over>.

<note: there were some promotions and store support aspects and a couple of national cable events to maintain the other regional thirds while the other third’s effort was in place>

Yes. The initial presentation to senior management and sales was harrowing & painful. But we got research onboard and we had a sales projection team and we showed everyone how this would actually increase sales on an annual basis and how much it would net out for the company at the end of the three years and how it would provide a national foundation from which the following three years should see even higher growth projections <it would actually flatten out in years 7, 8 & 9>.

Without going into details the decisions were made to sacrifice inefficient ‘throwing money away spending’ for more impactful ‘spend to make money’ strategy & tactics. It was creative spending to create sales.

Not popular. It looked risky.

And it worked – better than even planned.

From that point on in my career I continued to propose & debate some fairly unpopular expenditure strategies because I was focused on spending money to make money.

Look.

I am not suggesting this is easy. Money & budget decisions can make or break a career. Shit. They can make or break a business.

You get judged on how a budget is spent. And you should. But the judge is often harsh and the verdict can be damning. Because of that judgement, money, and the judgement that comes along with it, can make even the most even keeled business person … well … lose sight of reality and enter into some imaginative world in which dollars get spread out in a way that appears to cover time and yet, in its worst form, does nothing over time or, in its least harmful form, does less than it could over time.

To be clear. A spending over time planning process takes incredible imagination.

To be clear. A spending money to make money is all about reality <sometimes harsh>.

Again.

I am not suggesting this is easy.

It is incredibly hard to have a start up business spend all their discretionary money in a two month period <to get results to point to>.

It is incredibly hard to have a business stop doing all the small efforts for 6 months and do one bigger effort in month 7 & 8.

It is incredibly hard to have a business “go dark” for any stretch of time.

Deciding when to spend and what to spend and face the fact that your plan means you will have used up your money <so there is nothing to use in case it doesn’t work> is incredibly hard.

That said.

I am a business guy.

And I like to increase business <to maintain it>.

And I have a nasty habit of wanting to do the right thing and not the popular thing or the thing that would ‘make the sales people happy’ or ‘look good to the board.’

I like to spend money to make money.

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

“It is perhaps the misfortune of my life that I am interested in far too much but not decisively in any one thing; all my interests are not subordinated in one but stand on an equal footing.”

–

Søren Kierkegaard

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

“I wasn’t much of a petty thief. I wanted the whole world or nothing.”

–

Charles Bukowski

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

So. Last night I had a little time before I shut down my computer to scrounge around some of my favorite websites for some thoughts, quotes and images. I don’t really believe in serendipity but within 15 minutes on three different sites I gathered the three quotes that anchor this piece.

………… restless thinking one big adventure ……..

I sat back after copying them and I realized, well, it is perhaps the misfortune of my Life that I am interested in far too much.

My misfortune is that I am incessantly curious, a relentless contrarian to existing thought & thinking and a restless thinker in general. My misfortune is that I see restless thinking as one big adventure.

I sat back after copying them and I realized I am not satisfied being a petty thief … I want the whole world.

And as I sat back I also thought a little about how I got to this place.

Growing up I remember hearing a lot of “maybe you should be more realistic” type advice. I remember it chafing.

It made me think … well … I should think smaller.

That chafed.

I am sure the ‘safer’ aspect … aiming toward more achievable things and not stretching too far possibly felt okay … but I chafed on the whole thought of not getting what I thought could be achieved or what could be done.

Shit.

I still do.

Going small just seems … well … small to me.

And, yes, there is a price to pay for thinking this way.

Ok. I will point out two prices you pay.

The first price is restlessness.

Oh. And restlessness can make people feel uneasy. It makes them uneasy because you are not easily slotted. People want you to present them with a peg and they can put it in some hole and thinking about it and look at it.

People, like me, who have the misfortune of being interested in anything and everything and not satisfied with one thing are more of a box. And while boxes represent some symmetry and some tangible aspect for people to grasp, at the same time, … sigh … it is not a peg

The second price is wins … as in quantity of wins.

Even I, probably a more pragmatic aspirationalist, don’t aim toward some truly realistic things on occasion. That means not getting done what you want to get done, not getting where you want to get to and not getting, in general, the largeness you desired. In other words you didn’t get a win while someone who aimed lower or accepted something smaller did get a win.

Does that matter? I mean life doesn’t really give out trophies, people do.

Yeah. It does matter. Watching others win when you don’t does matter to some extent. And you would be lying if you didn’t admit that.

Aiming for it all, or something bigger <more broad> than something smaller <more focused>, and not getting it can make you start thinking smaller. And why do you do that? You want a frickin’ win.

And that, well, that can affect how you think and what you do.

It does so because many of us are willing to compromise some fairly important things to win on occasion.

Shit. Even more of us are willing to compromise a lot of fairly important things <which they hadn’t even tangibly decided were important to them> in order to win on occasion.

Oh. I bring up the second group because they are the ones who don’t get the ones who have the misfortune of wanting bigger things. It’s like a petty thief most likely scoffs at the master thief.

Uhm.

But those people may just call this reality <and, therefore, kind of suggesting those who have the misfortune of wanting to know everything about everything are not realistic>.

Whew. Yeah.

It is quite likely that my reality, and those whose reality is similar, fights reality itself – I mean society & culture creates lines of reality of which we get boxed in by with regard to expectations.

Umberto Eco is the one who suggested life has “lines of resistance.” This was his version of reality.

These ‘lines of resistance’ are established mostly so that we cannot say or do whatever we like with impunity. The problem with that is they also bring along some baggage … baggage like … uhm … what is viewed as pragmatic & realistic <smaller versions of shit that are achievable by many rather than few>.

Oh.

Yeah.

But, thankfully, the lines of resistance can shift.

But, thankfully, some can reach across the lines of resistance and gain access to some bigger shit which lies outside the lines of resistance.

All that said. Life, and these lines of resistance, encourage some people … mostly those who have the misfortune to be interested in far too much but not decisively in any one thing to shrink them … encourage them to think smaller and, inevitably, maybe be smaller than what they should be.

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

“Most of my life has been spent trying to shrink myself.

Trying to become smaller. Quieter. Less sensitive. Less opinionated. Less needy. Less me.  

Because I didn’t want to be a burden.

I didn’t want to be too much or push people away. I wanted people to like me. I wanted to be cared for and valued. I wanted to be wanted. So for years, I sacrificed myself for the sake of making other people happy. And for years, I suffered.

But I’m tired of suffering, and I’m done shrinking. It’s not my job to change who I am in order to become someone else’s idea of a worthwhile human being.  

I am worthwhile. Not because other people think I am, but because I exist, and therefore I matter. My thoughts matter. My feelings matter. My voice matters. And with or without anyone’s permission or approval, I will continue to be who I am and speak my truth.

Even if it makes people angry. Even if it makes them uncomfortable. Even if they choose to leave. I refuse to shrink. I choose to take up space. I choose to honour my feelings. I choose to give myself permission to get my needs met. I choose to make self-care a priority.

I choose me.”

Daniell Koepke

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

Let me be clear.

Smaller is safer. Smaller can actually be very satisfying. Smaller, in some ways, can actually permit you to live a fuller Life <although I would argue it’s not really a bigger Life>. And while small, in this case, could be construed as bad or lesser than … it is not. It is simply a viable choice for people with regard t their Life and how they want to live it.

Just as those who have the misfortune to want the whole world, well, that is their choice.

And I would argue that whatever your choice we are all aiming toward the same place … lets call it our “home.” That home within. The place within you that either sits on the favorite Barcalounger safe & sound in a Life lived well in smaller aspects or the one who wanders forever restlessly over hill & thru the dale seeking the next interest or learning or new thing.

Personally, I am the latter. I am a nomad thinker.  I want to know it all. And when I know something I want to know more. But that topic is for another day.

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

“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 

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

Today I would suggest whether you have the misfortune of wanting to know it all or whether you believe in something bigger than you or simply believe there is something bigger within you to be found by not wanting it all … your compass & your map resides within … not some external place or location which may appear to fulfill some aspect of ‘home.’

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

so far out to sea <‘restless’>

so far out to sea

     standing on impassive intensity

                     of restless possibilities

oh,

     push back the curtain

of slumbering elements

      of disordered solitude.

stir up a peace of

       desolate despair

                       drowning out a cacophony

       of restless disinterested

                           distant thoughts.

restless sun

               reflects upon the path chosen,

                      stand frozen,

      restless mind

                    wander the waves roaming

so far out to sea

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

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

“Lots of folks confuse bad management with destiny.”

—-

Kin Hubbard

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

“So it is with minds. Unless you keep them busy with some definite subject that will bridle and control them, they throw themselves in disorder hither and yon in the vague field of imagination … and there is no mad or idle fancy that they do not bring forth in the agitation.”

―

Michel de Montaigne

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

“Have you noticed that even the busiest people are never too busy to take time to tell you how busy they are?”

―

Bob Talbert

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

Well. I don’t care what you do, where you work or what matters to you, we all want to get credit for the shit we do and we all know that part of ‘getting credit’ is looking like you are actually doing something.

By the way, this is different than the art of looking busy. Looking busy is all about making it look like you have too much to do and have so much responsibility that:

<a> people will look at you as so important that everyone has given you all that stuff to do, and

<b> no one should dare to give you any more to do because you already have so much to do.

Yes.

This is an art in and of itself. But the art of looking like you are actually doing something is a completely different heinous skill. On this one the person is actually trying to attach themselves to some types of outcomes.

I call this a heinous skill because in order to be truly effective at this art you:

<a> aren’t actually doing a shitload of meaningful stuff,

<b> you invest a lot of energy wandering in the middle of actual responsibility so that you can absolve yourself of bad shit and take credit/responsibility for good shit, and

<c> take credit for a shitload of shit you have never actually ever done.

I thought about this topic because Donald J Trump may be the poster child for the art of looking like you are doing something. He may have a PhD in it. He is a master at the two things which make up a successful “looking like he is doing something:”

• Everything revolves around me.

The corollary to this is “nothing good could ever happen unless I was involved”.

The corollary to that is “anything bad that happens is because they didn’t involve me enough”.

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

“We don’t need all the people they want us to get. Let me tell you ― the one that matters is me. I’m the only one that matters because when it comes to it, that’s what the policy is going to be.”

Donald J Trump

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

Now. For the everyday schmuck like me it is easy to shuffle paperwork, get on the computer with two screens <one personal, one work so you can switch and not get busted> and a variety of little things at your desk that kind of fill up some down time all the while implying good shit is happening because of me. This is what doers do. Make their doing look essential (and in many cases it actually is). It’s part of showcasing you have value although your work may not look like it’s that valuable.

But at the senior management level, it is truly an art.

They have the ability to paint a picture of ‘my job is so important that my company wouldn’t make it without me’ that, well, some really senior people start believing it!

Look. There is truly being essential and then there is claiming to be essential. Those who are essential don’t need to try and look like they are doing something, 95% of the time they are simply in demand. People want them to be involved. That’s how you find essential people. They are the ones in demand. No one demands the jerk who wants to look like they are doing something, but don’t actually do something.

Next.

• insure you have enough wins to point to because the bigger the win the less you have to do elsewhere (the art of metaphorical winning).

Metaphorical winning is like having medals for nothing (but you have medals). Resumes are strewn with this type of shit under the guise of “all the things I have done.”

Anyway. Insuring you have enough wins is tricky for the “looking like doing something” artists.

“Lots of little wins” doesn’t work because … uhm … to have lots of real tangible little wins you will actually have had to have done something.

“Lots of little <fake> wins” is difficult to make work because keeping track of things you have supposedly done while simply looking like you were getting something done takes a shitload of work and bullshitting.

Now. Here is where the masters of looking like you are doing something are truly skilled – they are the ones who can envision the future. Huh? They can see no big wins in the immediate future and they recognize that imperils their just looking like they are doing something and they start worry that they may actually have to do something.  So they get to work.

What do they do? They find some small win and make it look exponentially better and bigger than it is. They make gestures with flamboyance to create an illusion of “bigness.” It is small stuff that is just bigly in appearance.

Some of what I have written may sound absurd because wins & achievements should be relatively easy to discern, but they are not. Most of the meaningful achievements often look frickin’ small when outlined & explained and, in today’s world, we get encouraged to show big. So the art of looking thoughtfully busy people have an edge here because they are masters at self PR.

That said. Maybe that’s where the rubber hits the road. Find the ones who are comfortable with the small, looking small, but have the bigger achievements.

In the end.

I believe senior people who have mastered the art of looking busy are assholes. They are assholes because business thrives on not looking busy, but actually doing things. Anything less than that, particularly if you are being paid more, is business malpractice.

They look thoughtful but haven’t offered a useful thought in years (all the while claiming to be a thought leader).

They look like they are successful but really don’t know how to actually do the somethings they have claimed to do.

They look like they are essential (mostly because their big wins are wrapped around “I was the energy that lifted everyone – but I cannot point to what things I did) but struggle to consistently show their essentialness other than grand results.

They look like assholes trying to look busy, and thoughtful, and sucking morale & energy away from the ones actually doing good shit and not caring who gets credit for it.

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

“Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative.”

Oscar Wilde

===========

“Consistency is the refuge of small minds”

Orson Welle

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

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.”

Ralph Waldo Emerson

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

I have to disagree with Ralphie <which is what I believe his mother called him>. Consistency and <some> predictability gets a bad rap. In other words … consistency is neither foolish nor refuge of solely small minds. Nor is it a hobgoblin of anything <let alone little minds>.

<I am pleased to be able to use the inestimable, and not oft-used, hobgoblin word>

Please note. I write this as a person who abhors being too predictable in personal life and in business. I like going left just because the directions say go right just to see what those who tell you to go right are missing.

But. Here is an uncomfortable truth <at least to me>. Most of us like some consistency in our lives. Aw heck … I will admit it … most of us like a lot <as in shitload> of consistency in our lives.

Oh. And by lives I mean Life as well as in business.

Despite the fact we so often speak of ‘throw caution to the wind’ or that we like to be unpredictable or we like to be spontaneous or ‘be random’, we really don’t.

Yes. We say it, but, rarely do it.

We like consistency and some predictability to provide a solid backbone to our lives. And as a manager of employees you absolutely cherish some consistent behavior day in and day out.

Now, to be fair to Welles & Emerson, when is consistency a refuge of small minds?

Well. I refer to this as “small living.” It is consistent just for comfort sake. It is actually lazy living but made worse because it is living under the guise of something else — lack of any risk. Hence the reason I call it ‘small living.’ This type of consistency keeps you from exploring the bigness Life has to offer those willing to discover what is beyond consistency & predictability boundaries.

Here is what I think about that. That type of thinking, in most countries and languages, inevitably leads to a ornière, rodera, keréknyom,   kiima  <rut> or être en rut, in een sleur, essere in un solco, olla kiima <be in a rut>.

Rut … as in ‘an elongated hole.’

Oh my. So being too consistent or predictable is living in a hole? Yup.

Here is a reminder about holes. They typically:

<a> have slippery slopes leading down to the bottom,

<b> it is really really difficult to stop sliding down a slippery slope once on it,

<c> you need someone to pull you out of the hole once you are in it <or you stay in it>.

Just as spontaneity is imagined to be better than it actually is <because the other word for ‘spontaneity’ is ‘surprise’ and, despite surprise’s incredible reputation, the truth is that most surprises are bad> predictability can become tantalizingly too attractive. Geez. So I have just said predictability is tantalizingly attractive … as well as consistency … and, uh oh, even spontaneity. That certainly explains why Life can be so confusing at times. All things different but tantalizingly attractive <insert a big fat ‘Yikes’ here>.

Now. Explaining life is a shitload easier than actually living it and doing what needs to be done to maximize it.

Let me explain how difficult it can be. Life best lived walks a razor thin balance of several things:

<please note … this is not research but rather Bruce quasi-vapid thinking>

–          Consistent/predicted behavior <a planned list driven life>.

–          Planned spontaneity <think vacations or scheduled parties or outings>.

–          Random spontaneity <shit that just happens>.

And I would suggest <using my research brain knowledge> that this razor thin balance is maybe an 80%-15%-5% <with a +/- 2.5% margin of error> Life mix.

Yup. Me, the lover of not being too predictable … accepts the fact that having the majority of Life be familiar and consistent and predictable as, this pains me to admit, good. Because with some people, using my margin of error. less than 2.5% of your entire Life can actually consist of any true spontaneity and you could be one of the happiest non-hobgoblins on the face of the earth.

Oh. Please note that I believe “planned spontaneity’ is possibly the biggest oxymoron of this generation.We are so obsessed with time and ‘maximizing each available moment’ for fear of ‘wasting anything’ that we actually plan our free time.

This kind of seems nuts to me.

I sometimes believe that in our objective driven world focused on predictability <including measuring success on how well we were able to predict our outcome, including happiness — which seems slightly ludicrous> that we have lost sight of the fact Life is often meant to be lived to ‘do’ & to discover and that the discovery is the measurement not the supposed end value of that discovery.

Do I value the road which was rocky, overgrown and comes to an aggravating dead end as more valuable than the one which was scenic, smooth and ends with a beautiful view?

Whew. I don’t know. I would hope that I don’t measure them against each other, but rather accept the discovery as the success. Oh. That is where predictability rears its ugly head.

Predictability and consistency is often measured in today’s time obsessed world as not only the process & the routine, but also in the result. And maybe that is where I do begin to edge into consistency being the hobgoblin of small minds. I would be foolish to suggest we don’t all aim for more positive results than negative ones because we do. Why? Simply because we all want to be happy.

But if you live your life solely focused on ‘only doing what will make me happy’ <or has the highest probability of happiness> based on predictable behavior I would suggest you have committed to not only a fairly boring path you still will not be 100% successful in reaching your intended objective.

In business? It sounds frustratingly non innovative <and a sure path down the slippery slope of mediocrity>.

And maybe that is the point.

Too much consistency and predictability only insures a life of happy <possibly content> mediocrity.

Maybe some people are content with mediocrity, but I would suggest that Life isn’t really meant to be mediocre. It is meant to be spectacularly exciting and disappointing. Maybe not all the time <any one of us would eventually get sick if 24 hours a day we rode the world’s largest rollercoaster>, but certainly we deserve to see how high we can go and how low we can get out of.

Why? Because all of that stuff defines our character <plus, who the hell wants their epitaph to be “he was consistent & predictable”?>.

I imagine all I am suggesting is that Life isn’t meant to be little. Too much consistency and predictability simply insures you have made your Life as little as it can be. I am not suggesting you have to go hog-wild and ‘live every moment like it is your last’ <which, in general, I tend to believe is fairly crappy advice> but rather … maybe it is challenging yourself to live on that razor thin balance of consistency, planned spontaneity and true spontaneity.

Look. I know this isn’t easy … and I also understand that there is a huge spectrum of living life possibilities between dangerous freedom and slavery to predictability. I know I personally swing back & forth between the two <which could make anyone’s head a little dizzy on occasion>.

But maybe it is simpler to go ahead and call this type of attitude & behavior as ‘restless consistency.’ Maybe we should aspire to live Life that way … and each of us define our restlessness however we would like, but maintain some restlessness.

I can guarantee only one thing:  it will not all go well.

Okay.

I can guarantee two things: it will not all go well but what does go well will most likely go really well.

Well. Maybe I can predict one more thing. Your Life will be bigger. Your business will be bigger.

I laughed when I saw this one. Sure. It’s kind of creepy, but it makes the point. Some things just aren’t possible.

Yeah, it is an unfortunate truth that hard work, or diligently trying to look like you are working hard, sometimes just isn’t enough.

Yeah, honestly, you can work your ass off towards something and it still isn’t possible.

The reality is that some things are truly impossible for some people (because if you don’t have the talent for something, you just don’t have the talent to even get close to the impossible).

Now. I am not opposed to hard work. And I do believe hard work:

(1) can improve upon existing abilities

(2) can overcome some deficiencies in actual talent.

Yeah, I guess it’s good to encourage kids to believe anything is possible if they work hard enough, but, well, I don’t know. I worry sometimes we establish some unrealistic expectations about what is possible.

Look. I do know Walt Disney said “It’s fun to do the impossible.” But he wasn’t talking about becoming an Olympic Greco roman wrestler. He was talking about something he was talented in doing and using that talent to show people new boundaries to what could be done.

Regardless.

Do I believe children should have a limitless imagination? Sure.

Do I believe they should think anything is possible? Sure.

Did I laugh at this illustration because it was so simple in pointing out the truth behind what is possible versus impossible? Sure.

I imagine my point is imagination is limitless but reality has some limits.

I imagine my point is that imagination is what pushes reality’s limits, but, at some point, your own reality will dictate some limits of what you can imagine.

Life is tricky. Shit. Business is tricky. Maybe what makes it all tricky is that its complex, not all correlation is causation, not everything imagined can become reality and not all of reality cannot be changed with some imagination and, well, almost nothing is simplistic binary “if this, then that.”

Look. Imagination is a good thing. Working hard is a good thing. And both good lessons.

I just hope we remember all those lessons before jumping out a window to remind us that hard work won’t teach us to actually fly (or defy gravity without a parachute).

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

“… instead of seeking new landscapes, develop new eyes.”

—

Marcel Proust

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

There are probably a zillion interpretations of this thought, but here is mine.

I am a nomad. In part it is because I am a roaming soul seeking new landscapes. Ok. Maybe I am just restless and comfortable with a general sense of impermanence. All of which make me sit back and wonder why.

In part because it is quite possible I fear if I stay in one place too long I just don’t have the ability to see things with new eyes. A fear that all the colors I loved in the beginning will simply fade to grays.

In part because it is quite possible I haven’t found a person or a reason to not be a nomad.

Now. All of those things I mention remain reasons why I envy my friends who are really happy people and not constantly moving (physically). They have had the ability to find a home and love it as much year to year because each year they find something new to love. And they also love the parallel comfort in what they fondly call home.

So somehow someway they have found both comfort & newness (yahoo ! … a contradiction I can love).

Just because they are ‘not roaming’ physically, they are not stale in any way. Their home is not tiresome or bland in any way.

In similar ways I am envious of my friends in long term marriages and relationships.

They don’t seek new landscapes. It seems each year. Each month. And for some each day. They look at the one they love with new eyes seeing not what they were but who they have become.

As well as whom they are. And constantly find new ways to be comforted in the comfort of their relationship and yet see the relationship with new eyes. And because of their ability to look with new eyes their love gets stronger in some ways and it also (I think) helps them bridge the tough times that anything that stays together for long periods of time inevitably face.

Regeadless of how you want to view what I just wrote I would point out this is an ability. Maybe not a skill but certainly a Life ability – remain in ‘one place’ and , yet, have the ability to see it as “many places.”

Anyway. Then I came across something a 20something wrote on their site:

I am home now with the heart full with the dear friends with whom I travelled both physically and mentally. I am home and do not want to let go of the momentum, the openness, and the opportunity to touch others the way they touched me. I am home. Smiling. Warm by those I met and the ones I am still to know. Never so fully aware of the importance of touching and keeping in touch. But how can I explain this attraction for things that are just there, seemingly without purpose, or for those so alive and that so effortlessly stitch themselves to the heart?
For me, there is wholesomeness in the connection to the organic and to the silent life of things, to the fabric of being, all color or the fading of it, the unknown story.

I thought it was well written and captured the essence of the Proust quote. Developing new eyes isn’t just what you can see, but it is the ‘connection to the organic and the silent life of things.”

Maybe that is the inherent ability to be able to not be a nomad and still see things as fresh.

Well. Living life is not a formula. That is for sure.

But what Proust suggests is you can avoid feeling stagnant without feeling restless or have to seek new landscapes.

Be restless in stillness.

It is probably more difficult to do than simply typing it like I just did.

But I also imagine that if we just looked a little closer at things around us … and I mean REALLY looked … you would see something new every time you looked. And still, if it is important to you, you have the comfort of standing in a place you know and love.

Man oh man. When I write something like that I have to ask my self: what is better than having comfort and new all at the same time? It’s kind like finding the optimal newness in Life. That is what good ole Marcel suggests we can all do … if we look with fresh eyes and look anew at what we already have.

————————

‘imperfection’ points more often to a lack that may be a matter of opinion

Hayakawa

————————-

So. I wanted to write something on failure and started … stopped … started again … stopped.

I don’t know why, but it was hard for some reason. Harshly? I failed. I failed at something I wanted to do. But. If creating a blog has taught me one thing <if that is at least one criteria of failing> that I fail constantly.

Little failures? Sure. But a failure nonetheless. Separately, I would note if you are not careful little failures are like dying a death of a thousand cuts.

Regardless. That REALLY got me thinking about the word failure (and how little it seems to be used these days) and failing itself & lessons and all that crap.

So I went hunting. Hunting for some inspiration for the right words to say about failing and failure.

1st. Choose the Right Word by Hayakawa.

“Failing” fell under Flaw <wow, I could write an entire book over that little insight>. Flaw has a variety of aspects:

blemish

defect

ailing

fault

foible

imperfection

mar

shortcoming

Regardless. Failure is a reflection of a flaw.

An imperfection (which seems okay).

A defect (which seems not okay).

Is failure a reflection of a defective product <product being … well … us … a human … a person>? That seems harsh. Ok.  Maybe extreme. But. In terms of “truth to oneself” think about this … ‘imperfection’ points more often to a lack that may be a matter of opinion (Hayakawa). Well. THAT certainly makes it easier to say “I am imperfect … I have failed.” Because, well, it is on a basis of opinion (and everyone has opinions).

Failure, on the other and, suggests a more severe shortcoming that has more severe consequences.

How ‘bout that? There is some tough love. But the truth is that the word failure is tough love.

A severe shortcoming. Now. If you have a shortcoming, there are consequences. In fact. More severe consequences.

It is quite possible in this politically correct world we want to soften up things a little and we don’t ‘fail’ but rather we made a mistake or took a step on the path to success or whatever. Aw. That’s bullshit. Maybe it is better to just say we failed at something.

I do believe we should be better at admitting failure. I believe it should be more acceptable to say “you failed” <without it being construed in a negative way>. I do believe we should be better at understanding we have failings … and they have consequences.

Now. Notice. Hayakawa never, anywhere, attached “negative” or “bad” adjectives to consequences. He simply points out that failures suggest shortcomings leading to consequences.

And that, my friends, is a Life truth and more people <in my eyes> should just step up to the plate and accept that truth without all the suggestions that they keep you from being a successful or ‘whole’ person.

We fail. And maybe it is because of some shortcoming and absolutely I am assuming that shortcoming will create at least one dead end in your life (toward some success).  But it doesn’t mean that it keeps you from some other path to success. It does not mean you are a failure. It just may mean you have failed, and you may fail consistently, if you pursue that path.

2nd. A blog focused solely on failure. <‘soyoufailed.wordpress’ blog no longer exists>

It wasn’t bad or negative or even totally depressing. Now. It certainly wasn’t uplifting by any stretch of the imagination, but it was kind of an interesting glimpse into what I assume was a normal every day woman kind of getting a grip on life. The blog is her way of doing it by embracing failure. As she said in her ‘about me’ section:

Who am I?

– I am female

– I’m in my mid 30′s

– I live in the Bay Area, California

– My day job is as a User Experience Designer (my 24 hour/day job is “failure” 🙂   )

– I am a mother of 2 beautiful boys

– My “other” interests besides failure are photography, learning to play the guitar, and user experience design.

I loved it. “my other interests beyond failure …” Nice perspective.

The site had glimpses of insight <albeit I wonder if writing nonstop about failure is completely healthy>. And while absolutely focused on failure, which I equate to a songwriter trying to write every song about a falling star <or God>, there are truly some nice perspectives on failing – all written from an everyday perspective.

About a failure <she says as one of 5 things> …

5. You learned something.
And that’s what life is all about. Learning something. In failing you probably learned something about yourself, about someone else, about a situation, about how to do something better next time. Failing is so valuable. Don’t focus on the failure. Focus on what you got from that failure.

So go ahead, fail on!

Life is about learning. Life is about failure.

I imagine the corollary thought would be “how boring would life be if we never failed?” there is such a stigma attached to failure … and the word itself. In fact, to be politically correct, I probably shouldn’t use the word failure.

It would be “trial & error” (what a bunch of bullhockey).

Look. We fail. And it’s okay to fail. And it’s even okay to fail on some of the really Big things in life. Not that you try to … just that … well … we do. It is called Life.

– Marriages fall apart even when you don’t really want them to.

– You try to win a game but you don’t.

– You try and lose those 10 pounds and you don’t.

– You try and be the best friend you can but miss when a good friend needs you.

Some are big things. Some are small things. But all ‘things’ examples of failing at something. And, once again, that’s okay. It’s cool. You aren’t a failure just because you failed. And that is a big, no HUGE, distinction.

You aren’t a failure (unless you don’t pay attention to #5 – you learned something), you just failed because, in fact, some failures are just part of life.

Maybe these are “failings” rather than failures but, whatever, semantics. I guess my point here is don’t aim to fail <as if any of us actually would, huh?> but recognize you do fail. And accept it IS failing.

Lastly. Here is a great example of how failure happens. And we (who are perfect of course) looking at failure happening right before our eyes … need to be very very <very> careful in our judgement with regard to failings and failure. Let me give you a really big example … a really good one … which was part of this whole ‘failure’ blog:

… my crisis started. I had reached a point where I just could not figure out what to do. I was crying and weeping and just could not calm myself down. I got to the point when I had to ask myself, “What will make you sane and get you through this moment? What will keep you from killing yourself right now?” And to me, and it is a different thing for everybody, smoking had always been the thing that I turned to when I got to such a low point. It was what got me to calm down and take a moment and just be present. For some it could be a stiff drink, a dozen donuts, or a shopping spree. For me it was smoking. So I did it. I failed my abstinence. I went to the closest Walgreens, bought a pack, and smoked a cigarette.

And I admit, I  failed even more and bought two more packs to get me through lower lows these past few months. I gave myself a break. I thought, it is better to have a crutch to get through these horrible days, than to be perfect and not have a crutch and go crazy. I took it easy on myself, I “failed” myself. Or more like I let myself have what I needed. I think at some point in our lives, when we need to, we should give in to ourselves. In our darkest times, we need to stop and think about what we need to get us through it. If you need to spend $1000 on clothing to save yourself, do it.

But know when it is time to stop. Know when the break needs to be over. Know when the fail needs to stop. For me that break is over now. I need to stop smoking now, before it becomes a full blown addiction again. Before it spirals out of control. Now it is becoming less helpful and is on the brink of being harmful. And so, while it is still easy to stop, I have stopped. I no longer need my crutch. It has done its job. It has gotten me through my darkest times.

I hope that for you, when you are going through a tough time, that you are able to stop and think about what crutch you need to get you through, and that you let yourself have that and let yourself fail. But I also hope that at some point, when you are healed, you are able to gracefully lay the crutch down.

Big thought in there.

“In our darkest times, we need to stop and think about what we need to get us through it. If you need to spend $1000 on clothing to save yourself, do it.

But know when it is time to stop. Know when the break needs to be over. Know when the fail needs to stop.”

Failing always needs context. To be clear. It doesn’t need excuses … just context.

Look. We have rules. We have guidelines. We have distinctions between what is right and wrong. And if we don’t meet them we ‘fail.’ Yes. All of that is true.

Yet. In dark times … you have to do whatever you have to do to cross that dark bridge.

“Whatever.”

Even if it means ‘failing’ in some form or fashion. Even if it means that it LOOKS like failure in someone else’s eyes.

It is okay to fail. Failing does not make you a failure.

————

“If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.”

=

John Kenneth Galbraith

———-

“It only takes a tweak to make the whole world new.”

=

Terry Pratchett

—————

This post is kind of a bookend to something I wrote a long time ago about spectacular errors and how I tend to like the business people who had the kahones to make them … I call it “spectacular error type behavior” <and I also included my thoughts on the joy & gnashing of teeth in managing them>.

This is more about business organizational decision making than it is about individuals making a decision.

Suffice it to say that typically one thing threads its way through every successful business organization, okay, 2 things:

consistency

risk or change <and errors>

Yikes. Immortality is defined by a combination of consistency and change <note: I do not mean consistent change>? Immortality is achieved through mastering two parallel paths?  Yikes. How does that happen <and can a business really do both well>?

First. No business solely dedicated to consistency will ever go down in history immortality hall of fame.

Ever.

Second. The only businesses solely dedicated to spectacular change or risk who will enter the history immortality hall of fame are the ones who flamed out with a spectacular error <they will be in the “oh, what they could have been” wing>.

Third. In this hypothetical business hall of fame of mine … the only businesses the Hall of Fame will be those who were spectacular in consistency and made some spectacular errors <and successes>.

=======

note:

I could write an entire article about how to manage a business by encouraging isolated moments of ‘spectacular error like behavior’ within isolated areas while the rest of the organization is focused on consistent behavior and output … and how you shift it around to energize progress

====

Regardless. Yes. A business can both be spectacularly consistent and make spectacular change <thru selective errors & successes>.

Now.

Back to spectacular errors <because they are actually at the root of spectacular successes assuming you survive your spectacular error>.

Spectacular errors do not have to be spectacularly big events or decisions. Sometimes a tweak can make a whole world new: sometimes good and sometimes bad.

Well. That was a little unnerving to write. So this means I need to pay attention to the little things as well as the big things?

Yes.

I don’t say this to suggest someone should be fearful of making even small tweaks or changes. I actually say this to suggest we should make more tweaks and make more changes in general and just be more aware of the potential effect from seemingly small tweaks.

Look. We are always taught to ‘think big.” Do “big things.” But … uh oh … “big mistakes” looms as impending doom should you make a ‘big wrong decision.’ Therefore maybe our decision defense mechanism kicks in and we rationalize ‘tweaks’ as minor and not earth shattering nor capable of spectacular error.

It is a bad mistake to think that way.

<note: very very very bad>

Big, medium or small decisions & actions are actually more often about risk and return.

Well.

How about … perceived risk and perceived return?

Or maybe … little risk big penalty versus big risk little penalty assessment.
I sometimes believe we focus on ‘big’ so much that we ignore the ‘tweaks.’ My counter to ‘big idea’ or ‘think big’ is I like to remind everyone that it is Chaos Theory that suggests the movement of butterfly wings can create a typhoon half a world away.

Tweaks, little or miniature, either can lead to a spectacular error or spectacular success <that is really my point>.

But. Spectacular errors can only happen if you take spectacular chances <tweak or big>.

Let me be clear.

I am not fond of irresponsible risk taking and decision-making, but I am fond of doing ‘the right thing’ even when it may appear to be going against the flow of the spineless ‘consistency is the only thing that matters’ business people.

Sometimes that means a spectacular success, sometimes a spectacular error. But always something spectacular.

What I do know is what more could you want to say about your life but that you have done something spectacular?

Even the consistency gwonks dream about it <even if they never open their mouths to utter the words>. Uhm. Here is the tricky part about immortality in business.

Sometimes immortality is attained within that tipping moment within the moment, that sometimes split second, and what you do <or don’t do>.

Unfortunately … this is a business truth whether you are discussing something ‘big’ or just a ‘tweak.’

————–

“Every great mistake has a halfway moment, a split second when it can be recalled and perhaps remedied.”

Pearl S. Buck

———————

So. I am not suggesting we all run around seeking immortality and purposefully running around seeking to make spectacular errors <businesses or individuals>. But I imagine all of us in business take a moment on occasion and do a little business directed soul-searching as you look in the mirror and say, ‘are you pleased with what you see?’

If the answer is not an unequivocal yes than, inevitably, you start thinking about possible changes that you have to make.

Immortality, as an individual, is not about fate or society or the leadership within the business you work … you have to constantly hold yourself accountable.

Immortality, as a business, is not about fate or society or the “good to great” book you have on your desk … you have to constantly hold yourself accountable.

It is up to you to decide to tweak or ‘big’ or accept the burden that comes along with spectacular errors. I could suggest that this mindset is driven by a desire to be in the business immortality hall of fame <and it could be true>, but instead I will simply suggest that most business people like to think they can think great business thoughts. And most businesses like to think they can change the world <in some form or fashion>.

———–

“Nurture your mind with great thoughts.”

Benjamin Disraeli

———–

All business people should think this … at least on occasion.

It is healthy.

All businesses should think about this … at least on occasion.

It is healthy.

And when they do they need to realize business immortality can be attained in a variety of ways – not just with something big. Spectacular, errors and successes, can occur thru big, medium and tweak size actions.

In my mind more businesses should think about this. I worry that the fear of immortality thru some spectacular error skews businesses to focus solely on consistency and delivering good, or great, shit every day. That is not necessarily bad but it it also insures no chance of the spectacular … and hence … any immortality.

Look.

Immortality can occur in a variety of ways.

But. To enter into the business immortality hall of fame you have to embrace consistency and change <risk>.

Maybe, just maybe, that is where spectacular resides – within that thought and within that space in between. All I do know is that spectacular occurs when both are embraced and they complement each other.