nebbish n. (Yiddish) a timid unfortunate simpleton
Let's end the suspense: The Governor of Puerto Rico, Aníbal Acevedo Vilá, is a nebbish.
Timid: From body language to statements, Vilá seems to apologize for occupying your attention. He lacks assertiveness and that intangible element called "charm," which has nothing to do with physical appearance but everything to do with innate abilities.
Unfortunate: Assuming command of a government that has spent 12 years in frank decline, after being thrust into his party's leadership when the "preferred candidate" balked, AND after his own party's leader lame-ducked herself through mismanagement and an early "I quit" barely two years into her term, Vilá also has to face a contrary Senate, House and plurality of opposition mayors. Julius Caesar would have been mildly challenged; Vilá is vastly overwhelmed.
Simpleton: In times of crisis, it takes concerted, innovative thought and focused effort to rise above the fray and achieve brilliance. The condition Puerto Rico is in demands brilliance, for nothing less will make a difference. Instead of that, Vilá chooses half-baked ideas (pre-budget taxing, "voluntary" job reductions) and considers "wait and see" bolstered by mealy-mouthed salvos against the opposition as a viable strategy, the kind of "leadership" that can only be described as "simplistic."
What this amounts to is a leadership void that sucks potential out of the entire government, a veritable wasteland even at its best. A great team led by a nebbish, no matter how well-intentioned he or she may be, is mediocre; a lousy team led by a nebbish (no matter how...) is doomed. Unfortunately for Us, We have a lousy team...
...unless We realize that the team is NOT The Fools in and out of government, but Us. And that We are NOT really "led" by a nebbish and his counterparts, but by Our Own Talents. To keep waiting for the government, to keep acting as if the government were the end-all and be-all of Our Future, to act as if the government is a wallet We just have to dip into is to give undue power to Nebbish-led Foolishness. To accept that "That's the way things are" and shrug like oxen beset by flies is to allow the worst of what We are--or damn close to it--to determine Our Future.
We have options. They lie outside the traditional sources We have been coerced into thinking are the only ones. Let's find them, let's identify and join the women and men that are acting to develop Our Future. And let's do it now.
Hint: Those leaders have one clear-cut trait: They aren't relying on the government for anything. They may have in the past, but not anymore. They have ideas, often by the dozen, on how to make things happen without the government. Listen well and you will have found a Leader.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
13 September 2005
12 September 2005
Teamwork 3
From the top-notch Creative Generalist comes a post that The Jenius wishes He could have read 20 years ago. Despite numerous brushes with articulating this very simple, very valuable Truth, The Jenius never really got it right. A research jag into future Jenius topics uncovered this gem, to a combination of sheer admiration and a touch of chagrin.
Called "Rule 33", it tells you exactly what you need--and don't need--to create a successful project team:
"Rule 33 is really quite simple. It goes as such: There are three things that a strong team absolutely must have and there are three things that a strong team must absolutely do away with. 3 and 3. Like I said, simple.
A strong team must consist of a bunch of incredibly talented individuals who understand their role and everyone else's roles within an organization and who work their asses off to get done whatever it is they do.
Conversely, a strong team absolutely cannot accommodate idiots, slackers, and big egos.
That's it. Your team is soaring if it has all of the first three things and none of the last three things.
In a nutshell:
---Talented Individuals - people who are already themselves capable and driven.
---Understood Roles - it's a concert, a symphony, a fastbreak...the interaction and passing is what counts here.
---Hard Work - anything worth accomplishing requires effort; lots of it.
---No Idiots - just don't hire dumb people; leave them for the competition.
---No Slackers - everyone must be firing on all cylinders; get rid of the deadwood.
---No Prima Donnas - check your ego at the door, cause nobody's bigger than the project."
Simple. But like so many simple things, so very difficult to do. Twenty years and hundreds of projects tell Me Steve Hardy has encapsulated a Business Law, that rarity of such value that it should be engraved in every business person's mind.
Start now. Look at your own projects at see if any of them live up to Rule 33. If they don't, do something about it. And don't settle for less than full adherence to Rule 33 in your future projects.
Take it from Me: you can't afford to settle for less.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
Called "Rule 33", it tells you exactly what you need--and don't need--to create a successful project team:
"Rule 33 is really quite simple. It goes as such: There are three things that a strong team absolutely must have and there are three things that a strong team must absolutely do away with. 3 and 3. Like I said, simple.
A strong team must consist of a bunch of incredibly talented individuals who understand their role and everyone else's roles within an organization and who work their asses off to get done whatever it is they do.
Conversely, a strong team absolutely cannot accommodate idiots, slackers, and big egos.
That's it. Your team is soaring if it has all of the first three things and none of the last three things.
In a nutshell:
---Talented Individuals - people who are already themselves capable and driven.
---Understood Roles - it's a concert, a symphony, a fastbreak...the interaction and passing is what counts here.
---Hard Work - anything worth accomplishing requires effort; lots of it.
---No Idiots - just don't hire dumb people; leave them for the competition.
---No Slackers - everyone must be firing on all cylinders; get rid of the deadwood.
---No Prima Donnas - check your ego at the door, cause nobody's bigger than the project."
Simple. But like so many simple things, so very difficult to do. Twenty years and hundreds of projects tell Me Steve Hardy has encapsulated a Business Law, that rarity of such value that it should be engraved in every business person's mind.
Start now. Look at your own projects at see if any of them live up to Rule 33. If they don't, do something about it. And don't settle for less than full adherence to Rule 33 in your future projects.
Take it from Me: you can't afford to settle for less.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
09 September 2005
Disunity Disaffection
A common complaint heard in Puerto Rico is about how Cubans, for example, arrive on the Island and within a short period of time, become quite successful. The Jenius has heard several otherwise-bright folks rail against "Cuban luck," "the undue influence Cubans have in higher government" or--indefensibly--"Cuban greed."
The truth is rather simple: Cubans arrive here willing to work hard, join a community that looks out for each other and don't wait for opportunities or benefits to arrive, but rather go out and get them. It's called hustle and Puerto Ricans hate it.
This "Cuban" mythos has been largely replaced by the "Dominican" one, with an added factor of base prejudice, a "looking down the nose" at Our close neighbors that is crass and baseless. That Puerto Ricans hate "hustle" is The Jenius's way of noting that We have an innate tendency to want to be given things, that for some reason working hard to achieve goals is seen as contemptuous and that incurring risk to change one's situation is considered stupid when compared to sheeplike conformity.
That Cubans, and now Dominicans, achieve a level of success that engenders envy in too large a portion of Puerto Ricans is a fact. That what they do to achieve it is beyond Our means is not. Cooperating and collaborating, in effect, seeking synergy to make 1 + 1 = 3 or more is simply good business sense. Lending a hand to your fellow man and woman is considered the basis for good community behavior. But We don't do that very often, preferring to pull inward rather than reach outward.
Local entrepreneurs are familiar with this "disconnection" factor, often laboring in isolation because fear is the over-arching concern when it comes to looking at other businesses: instead of seeing allies, they see enemies. They play it "cool" by working hard, but not working smart to create a network. Instead of "networking," they ply the "what can I get from you" attitude that directly implies "unless you give me a lot, I won't give you anything." They don't reach out, they reach down and in: down to the other's pockets and in to their own.
In unity lies strength. To go it alone, or worse, to act like the surrounding community is the problem instead of the opportunity, leads to the kind of disjointed, ineffective and misguided business growth We "enjoy." Maybe it's the immigrant "Us against Them" mentality that imposes unity. (Puerto Ricans in the U.S. tend to cooperate better with each other.) The answer is definitely not a bunker mentality, but one that goes a step beyond and sees the world as an "Us to Them" proposition. Puerto Rico is not the only market, nor is it even remotely a big one, when compared to global opportunities. If Our attitude is an obstacle--and it is--then changing it is the first step on the path to greater internal and external success.
If there was ever a time for isolation, it is long ended. Global markets demand global vision, connecting and reconnecting consistently to adapt to and create new opportunities. Standing on the sidelines and being snooty about Cubans, Dominicans or Puerto Ricans who are working hard to make a better tomorrow was never good form. Seeing an enemy where an ally surely stands is economic blindness. Staying in that same mindset is to toss Our Future away...every day.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
The truth is rather simple: Cubans arrive here willing to work hard, join a community that looks out for each other and don't wait for opportunities or benefits to arrive, but rather go out and get them. It's called hustle and Puerto Ricans hate it.
This "Cuban" mythos has been largely replaced by the "Dominican" one, with an added factor of base prejudice, a "looking down the nose" at Our close neighbors that is crass and baseless. That Puerto Ricans hate "hustle" is The Jenius's way of noting that We have an innate tendency to want to be given things, that for some reason working hard to achieve goals is seen as contemptuous and that incurring risk to change one's situation is considered stupid when compared to sheeplike conformity.
That Cubans, and now Dominicans, achieve a level of success that engenders envy in too large a portion of Puerto Ricans is a fact. That what they do to achieve it is beyond Our means is not. Cooperating and collaborating, in effect, seeking synergy to make 1 + 1 = 3 or more is simply good business sense. Lending a hand to your fellow man and woman is considered the basis for good community behavior. But We don't do that very often, preferring to pull inward rather than reach outward.
Local entrepreneurs are familiar with this "disconnection" factor, often laboring in isolation because fear is the over-arching concern when it comes to looking at other businesses: instead of seeing allies, they see enemies. They play it "cool" by working hard, but not working smart to create a network. Instead of "networking," they ply the "what can I get from you" attitude that directly implies "unless you give me a lot, I won't give you anything." They don't reach out, they reach down and in: down to the other's pockets and in to their own.
In unity lies strength. To go it alone, or worse, to act like the surrounding community is the problem instead of the opportunity, leads to the kind of disjointed, ineffective and misguided business growth We "enjoy." Maybe it's the immigrant "Us against Them" mentality that imposes unity. (Puerto Ricans in the U.S. tend to cooperate better with each other.) The answer is definitely not a bunker mentality, but one that goes a step beyond and sees the world as an "Us to Them" proposition. Puerto Rico is not the only market, nor is it even remotely a big one, when compared to global opportunities. If Our attitude is an obstacle--and it is--then changing it is the first step on the path to greater internal and external success.
If there was ever a time for isolation, it is long ended. Global markets demand global vision, connecting and reconnecting consistently to adapt to and create new opportunities. Standing on the sidelines and being snooty about Cubans, Dominicans or Puerto Ricans who are working hard to make a better tomorrow was never good form. Seeing an enemy where an ally surely stands is economic blindness. Staying in that same mindset is to toss Our Future away...every day.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
08 September 2005
Learning To Learn
When did you learn how to learn?
A Google search on the definition of "learn" returned these results:
1---acquire or gain knowledge or skills; "She learned dancing from her sister"; "I learned Sanskrit"; "Children acquire language at an amazing rate"
2---get to know or become aware of, usually accidentally; "I learned that she has two grown-up children"; "I see that you have been promoted"
3---memorize: commit to memory; learn by heart; "Have you memorized your lines for the play yet?"
4---be a student of a certain subject; "She is reading for the bar exam"
5---teach: impart skills or knowledge to; "I taught them French"; "He instructed me in building a boat"
6---determine: find out, learn, or determine with certainty, usually by making an inquiry or other effort; "I want to see whether she speaks French"; "See whether it works"; "find out if he speaks Russian"; "Check whether the train leaves on time"
Most people will probably think The Jenius means definition 3 above when they think of "learn." However, The Jenius is referring to definition 1: acquire or gain knowledge or skills. The difference is very fundamental and very important, for although memorizing is definitely a part of learning, it is a dead end, whereas the process of acquiring knowledge and/or skills is an infinite universe.
Memorization is a dead end because it simply piles fact and data with no true connection to insight: instead of growth you get clutter. Even if you can keep it organized enough to sustain its vividness over the years (unlike the "test syndrome" where you memorize what you need and forget it immediately after the test), you are not adding knowledge. To learn how to learn, to learn how to acquire knowledge and skills, is often an accidental discovery, for the educational system We pass through does almost nothing to teach Us a learning process.
For many, the discovery is part of one's own exploration of the world. For others it is the product of a loving parent's attention or a brilliant influential teacher. In whatever form the gift arrives, once received, it is never lost again. First school, then work becomes amazingly easier. The struggle others engage in to shove facts helter-skelter into a brain evolved over millions of years to find relationships is avoided entirely. And that is the key point of learning how to learn: allowing the mind to form relationships of the facts it receives. The natural function of the mind is battered into submission and shunted aside for the ungainly model of "this fact here, that fact there" that makes the educational system the sorry sewage pipe We must crawl through.
To pull together diverse facts. To assign relationships between them. To assign weights to those relationships so that relevant importance and nuances become part of the mental picture. To understand and note the gaps of the created relationships so that questions can be asked that lead to discovering the missing connections. To be willing, even eager, to seek out new facts and data with the confidence that their addition will exponentially increase the total value of your knowledge. To know that knowledge is a power you can gain as easily as breathing deeply...that is the immensity of learning how to learn.
How can We expect to meet the challenges of an ever-changing world with a never-changing mind? The product of Our educational system, the ideal product, is a mind like a rock, facts fused into a static lump. The mind that can teach itself is a liquid energy that defies time and space. Which would you rather have to face the chaos of modern times? Which do you wish your children to have? How will you go about giving them your choice?
The Jenius Has Spoken.
A Google search on the definition of "learn" returned these results:
1---acquire or gain knowledge or skills; "She learned dancing from her sister"; "I learned Sanskrit"; "Children acquire language at an amazing rate"
2---get to know or become aware of, usually accidentally; "I learned that she has two grown-up children"; "I see that you have been promoted"
3---memorize: commit to memory; learn by heart; "Have you memorized your lines for the play yet?"
4---be a student of a certain subject; "She is reading for the bar exam"
5---teach: impart skills or knowledge to; "I taught them French"; "He instructed me in building a boat"
6---determine: find out, learn, or determine with certainty, usually by making an inquiry or other effort; "I want to see whether she speaks French"; "See whether it works"; "find out if he speaks Russian"; "Check whether the train leaves on time"
Most people will probably think The Jenius means definition 3 above when they think of "learn." However, The Jenius is referring to definition 1: acquire or gain knowledge or skills. The difference is very fundamental and very important, for although memorizing is definitely a part of learning, it is a dead end, whereas the process of acquiring knowledge and/or skills is an infinite universe.
Memorization is a dead end because it simply piles fact and data with no true connection to insight: instead of growth you get clutter. Even if you can keep it organized enough to sustain its vividness over the years (unlike the "test syndrome" where you memorize what you need and forget it immediately after the test), you are not adding knowledge. To learn how to learn, to learn how to acquire knowledge and skills, is often an accidental discovery, for the educational system We pass through does almost nothing to teach Us a learning process.
For many, the discovery is part of one's own exploration of the world. For others it is the product of a loving parent's attention or a brilliant influential teacher. In whatever form the gift arrives, once received, it is never lost again. First school, then work becomes amazingly easier. The struggle others engage in to shove facts helter-skelter into a brain evolved over millions of years to find relationships is avoided entirely. And that is the key point of learning how to learn: allowing the mind to form relationships of the facts it receives. The natural function of the mind is battered into submission and shunted aside for the ungainly model of "this fact here, that fact there" that makes the educational system the sorry sewage pipe We must crawl through.
To pull together diverse facts. To assign relationships between them. To assign weights to those relationships so that relevant importance and nuances become part of the mental picture. To understand and note the gaps of the created relationships so that questions can be asked that lead to discovering the missing connections. To be willing, even eager, to seek out new facts and data with the confidence that their addition will exponentially increase the total value of your knowledge. To know that knowledge is a power you can gain as easily as breathing deeply...that is the immensity of learning how to learn.
How can We expect to meet the challenges of an ever-changing world with a never-changing mind? The product of Our educational system, the ideal product, is a mind like a rock, facts fused into a static lump. The mind that can teach itself is a liquid energy that defies time and space. Which would you rather have to face the chaos of modern times? Which do you wish your children to have? How will you go about giving them your choice?
The Jenius Has Spoken.
07 September 2005
Techno Sapiens: Roberts and Branson
Hot on the heels of The Incomplete Manifesto comes a pair of shorter lists that aim at the same general target: your creative success. The first is from Kevin Roberts, CEO of Saatchi & Saatchi, a major worldwide advertising agency.
Kevin Roberts' Credo
1. Ready. Fire! Aim.
2. If it ain't broke...break it!
3. Hire crazies.
4. Ask dumb questions.
5. Pursue failure.
6. Lead, follow or get out of the way!
7. Spread confusion.
8. Ditch your office.
9. Read odd stuff.
10. Avoid moderation!
Most of you will probably find this list easier to absorb, remember and put into practice than a 43-item manifesto. Different strokes and all that. But if you still found it too long, try Sir Richard Branson's 5 rules:
Sir Richard Branson's Rules:
1) Follow your passions.
2) Keep it simple.
3) Get the best people to help you.
4) Re-create yourself.
5) Play.
In any case, notice how the pursuit of creative power leads to a vision of life that is far from the beaten path. We invest so much of Our Time--of Our Life--in work and careers that settling for drudgery and routine seems criminal. Even if your chosen path is one that The Jenius or anyone else might find "boring," doing it with passion, engaging it with flair and vivid imagination cannot help but be a life-affirming and life-enhancing attitude. And it will lead to developing your best efforts.
Manifesto, credo or rules, they all give structure to freedom. Choose it now.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
Kevin Roberts' Credo
1. Ready. Fire! Aim.
2. If it ain't broke...break it!
3. Hire crazies.
4. Ask dumb questions.
5. Pursue failure.
6. Lead, follow or get out of the way!
7. Spread confusion.
8. Ditch your office.
9. Read odd stuff.
10. Avoid moderation!
Most of you will probably find this list easier to absorb, remember and put into practice than a 43-item manifesto. Different strokes and all that. But if you still found it too long, try Sir Richard Branson's 5 rules:
Sir Richard Branson's Rules:
1) Follow your passions.
2) Keep it simple.
3) Get the best people to help you.
4) Re-create yourself.
5) Play.
In any case, notice how the pursuit of creative power leads to a vision of life that is far from the beaten path. We invest so much of Our Time--of Our Life--in work and careers that settling for drudgery and routine seems criminal. Even if your chosen path is one that The Jenius or anyone else might find "boring," doing it with passion, engaging it with flair and vivid imagination cannot help but be a life-affirming and life-enhancing attitude. And it will lead to developing your best efforts.
Manifesto, credo or rules, they all give structure to freedom. Choose it now.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
06 September 2005
The Incomplete Manifesto
Written in 1998, The Incomplete Manifesto, penned by Bruce Mau Design Group, seems like a blueprint of Web 2.0 creativity. Read through these salient points and notice how distant--or how close--We are as a People to this kind of creative energy. (Bold text indicates The Jenius is adding his "Amen!")
Bruce Mau: The Incomplete Manifesto
1. Allow events to change you.
2. Forget about good. Good is a known quantity. Good is what we all agree on. Growth is not necessarily good. Growth is an exploration of unlit recesses that may or may not yield to our research. As long as you stick to good you'll never have real growth.
3. Process is more important than outcome. When the outcome drives the process we will only ever go to where we've already been.
4. Love your experiments (as you would an ugly child). Joy is the engine of growth. Exploit the liberty in casting your work as beautiful experiments, iterations, attempts, trials, and errors. Take the long view and allow yourself the fun of failure every day.
5. Go deep. The deeper you go the more likely you will discover something of value.
6. Capture accidents. The wrong answer is the right answer in search of a different question.
7. Study.
8. Drift. Allow yourself to wander aimlessly. Explore adjacencies. Lack judgment. Postpone criticism.
9. Begin anywhere. John Cage tells us that not knowing where to begin is a common form of paralysis.
10. Everyone is a leader. Growth happens. Whenever it does, allow it to emerge. Learn to follow when it makes sense. Let anyone lead.
11. Harvest ideas. Edit applications.
12. Keep moving. The market and its operations have a tendency to reinforce success. Resist it.
13. Slow down.
14. Don't be cool. Cool is conservative fear dressed in black.
15. Ask stupid questions.
16. Collaborate. The space between people working together is filled with conflict, friction, strife, exhilaration, delight, and vast creative potential.
17. ----------. Intentionally left blank. Allow space for the ideas you haven't had yet, and for the ideas of others.
18. Stay up late. Strange things happen when you've gone too far, been up too long, worked too hard, and you're separated from the rest of the world.
19. Work the metaphor. Every object has the capacity to stand for something other than what is apparent.
20. Be careful to take risks.
21. Repeat yourself. If you like it, do it again. If you don't like it, do it again.
22. Make your own tools. Hybridize your tools in order to build unique things.
23. Stand on someone's shoulders.
24. Avoid software. The problem with software is that everyone has it.
25. Don't clean your desk.
26. Don't enter awards competitions. Just don't. It's not good for you.
27. Read only left-hand pages. Marshall McLuhan did this. By decreasing the amount of information, we leave room for what he called our "noodle."
28. Make new words. Expand the lexicon. The new conditions demand a new way of thinking. The thinking demands new forms of expression. The expression generates new conditions.
29. Think with your mind. Forget technology. Creativity is not device-dependent.
30. Organization = Liberty. Real innovation in design, or any other field, happens in context. That context is usually some form of cooperatively managed enterprise. Frank Gehry, for instance, is only able to realize Bilbao because his studio can deliver it on budget. The myth of a split between "creatives" and "suits" is what Leonard Cohen calls a 'charming artifact of the past.'
31. Don't borrow money. Once again, Frank Gehry's advice. By maintaining financial control, we maintain creative control. It's not exactly rocket science, but it's surprising how hard it is to maintain this discipline, and how many have failed.
32. Listen carefully.
33. Take field trips.
34. Make mistakes faster.
35. Imitate. Don't be shy about it. We have only to look to Richard Hamilton and his version of Marcel Duchamp's large glass to see how rich, discredited, and underused imitation is as a technique.
36. Scat. When you forget the words, do what Ella did: make up something else ... but not words.
37. Break it, stretch it, bend it, crush it, crack it, fold it.
38. Explore the other edge. Try using old-tech equipment made obsolete by an economic cycle but still rich with potential.
39. Coffee breaks, cab rides, green rooms. Real growth often happens outside of where we intend it to, in the interstitial spaces - what Dr. Seuss calls "the waiting place."
40. Avoid fields. Jump fences. Disciplinary boundaries and regulatory regimes are attempts to control the wilding of creative life.
41. Laugh.
42. Remember. Growth is only possible as a product of history. Without memory, innovation is merely novelty. History gives growth a direction.
43. Power to the people. Play can only happen when people feel they have control over their lives. We can't be free agents if we're not free.
The Jenius Has Quoted.
Bruce Mau: The Incomplete Manifesto
1. Allow events to change you.
2. Forget about good. Good is a known quantity. Good is what we all agree on. Growth is not necessarily good. Growth is an exploration of unlit recesses that may or may not yield to our research. As long as you stick to good you'll never have real growth.
3. Process is more important than outcome. When the outcome drives the process we will only ever go to where we've already been.
4. Love your experiments (as you would an ugly child). Joy is the engine of growth. Exploit the liberty in casting your work as beautiful experiments, iterations, attempts, trials, and errors. Take the long view and allow yourself the fun of failure every day.
5. Go deep. The deeper you go the more likely you will discover something of value.
6. Capture accidents. The wrong answer is the right answer in search of a different question.
7. Study.
8. Drift. Allow yourself to wander aimlessly. Explore adjacencies. Lack judgment. Postpone criticism.
9. Begin anywhere. John Cage tells us that not knowing where to begin is a common form of paralysis.
10. Everyone is a leader. Growth happens. Whenever it does, allow it to emerge. Learn to follow when it makes sense. Let anyone lead.
11. Harvest ideas. Edit applications.
12. Keep moving. The market and its operations have a tendency to reinforce success. Resist it.
13. Slow down.
14. Don't be cool. Cool is conservative fear dressed in black.
15. Ask stupid questions.
16. Collaborate. The space between people working together is filled with conflict, friction, strife, exhilaration, delight, and vast creative potential.
17. ----------. Intentionally left blank. Allow space for the ideas you haven't had yet, and for the ideas of others.
18. Stay up late. Strange things happen when you've gone too far, been up too long, worked too hard, and you're separated from the rest of the world.
19. Work the metaphor. Every object has the capacity to stand for something other than what is apparent.
20. Be careful to take risks.
21. Repeat yourself. If you like it, do it again. If you don't like it, do it again.
22. Make your own tools. Hybridize your tools in order to build unique things.
23. Stand on someone's shoulders.
24. Avoid software. The problem with software is that everyone has it.
25. Don't clean your desk.
26. Don't enter awards competitions. Just don't. It's not good for you.
27. Read only left-hand pages. Marshall McLuhan did this. By decreasing the amount of information, we leave room for what he called our "noodle."
28. Make new words. Expand the lexicon. The new conditions demand a new way of thinking. The thinking demands new forms of expression. The expression generates new conditions.
29. Think with your mind. Forget technology. Creativity is not device-dependent.
30. Organization = Liberty. Real innovation in design, or any other field, happens in context. That context is usually some form of cooperatively managed enterprise. Frank Gehry, for instance, is only able to realize Bilbao because his studio can deliver it on budget. The myth of a split between "creatives" and "suits" is what Leonard Cohen calls a 'charming artifact of the past.'
31. Don't borrow money. Once again, Frank Gehry's advice. By maintaining financial control, we maintain creative control. It's not exactly rocket science, but it's surprising how hard it is to maintain this discipline, and how many have failed.
32. Listen carefully.
33. Take field trips.
34. Make mistakes faster.
35. Imitate. Don't be shy about it. We have only to look to Richard Hamilton and his version of Marcel Duchamp's large glass to see how rich, discredited, and underused imitation is as a technique.
36. Scat. When you forget the words, do what Ella did: make up something else ... but not words.
37. Break it, stretch it, bend it, crush it, crack it, fold it.
38. Explore the other edge. Try using old-tech equipment made obsolete by an economic cycle but still rich with potential.
39. Coffee breaks, cab rides, green rooms. Real growth often happens outside of where we intend it to, in the interstitial spaces - what Dr. Seuss calls "the waiting place."
40. Avoid fields. Jump fences. Disciplinary boundaries and regulatory regimes are attempts to control the wilding of creative life.
41. Laugh.
42. Remember. Growth is only possible as a product of history. Without memory, innovation is merely novelty. History gives growth a direction.
43. Power to the people. Play can only happen when people feel they have control over their lives. We can't be free agents if we're not free.
The Jenius Has Quoted.
05 September 2005
1:100 Redux
[Note: Another recent Jenius post was picked up by Global Voices.]
A few friends were intrigued by my recent 1:100 post. Commentary, suggestions and even a few criticisms were tossed at The Jenius. A suggestion is analyzed, one criticism is deemed merited and the others are shown to be off the mark.
The merited criticism is that My description of the process did not identify Apex as a small to medium-sized business, i.e., a company that would receive a very positive impact from a $500,000 revenue increase in one quarter. That was a definite oversight.
A second criticism extended to the amount of money each team member would make if an idea was accepted: $1,000 per member, for a total of $5,000. The Jenius was told no company would pay that, to which My reply is: Yes, the smart ones will. Though that might be a circular argument, the fact is that any company reviewing the 1:100 concept would understand that the challenege--and value--lies not in the money expended, but in the result created. If you could buy lottery tickets for $5,000 with the guarantee of winning $500,000, wouldn't you do it?
Ah, but that leads to a third criticism: what if the idea doesn't work? The Jenius was almost accused of smarmily side-stepping the issue by placing a priori blame on the company for not executing properly. The 1:100 concept takes into account that whatever ideas are presented must be done so within the context of the business as it is in order to be accepted for what they can do. If the company's leaders can see a clear path between idea, potential execution and potential benefit, is it the team's fault if--after they leave--the execution and/or result are not up to potential? The 1:100 team is hired to create a launch pad, not pilot the spaceship into and through the ether.
Another comment was that 1:100 was not very impressive, that 1:1,000 should have been used. (It was couched as a suggestion, so The Jenius took it as a comment, not criticism.) The Jenius agrees, but understands that most people will not believe that a 1:100 ratio can be achieved as indicated, so offering 1:1,000 would simply overwhelm the mind: $5,000 for a $5 million return in 90 days? Also, let's face it: if any of Us could create a return for a small to medium-sized business in the $5 million/90 days range, he/she/they would definitely be worth much much than $5,000.
Another criticism is that The Jenius was focusing on short-term gain with a possible long-term loss, something He has fought against most of His career. Too many businesses make short-term decisions that kill their long-term prospects: hiring too soon or too many, accepting too large a contract too soon, etc. The Jenius accepts that a company could be faced with this dilemma, but the team itself would be aware of this potential mistake and would seek ways to avoid long-term pitfalls. It can be expected that the company leaders would ask what can be expected beyond the 90-day framework and acceptance of the idea(s) would require a cogent and reasonable answer.
Another criticism is that by only increasing revenue, the team could lead a company to grow too fast or take too big a risk. That criticism implies that the 1:100 team would ignore the danger of over-extending the company, ignore the power of "cost reduction plus revenue increase" and ignore the reality of using the company's current resources to the fullest extent possible. That's simply out of the question because ignoring those "details" makes the team's task virtually impossible to achieve.
And finally, one friend indicated that The Jenius was setting up the team to have their ideas ripped off, for what's to stop a company from simply listening (or recording) everything, then deciding to stiff Us, collect Our money and then do the best idea(s) anyway? A Non-Disclosure Agreement would be needed going in (the company would be providing sensitive data), but nothing would compel a company to act in an honorable manner other than the moral and ethical values of its leaders. The Jenius believes that most people are decent, honest and will play fair. The few that don't, though, could discover that within a few days of their "rejection" of the 1:100 team's idea(s), the team is now working for their competitor. A Non-Compete Agreement would solve that potential problem, one that defines that the 1:100 team would not work for a competitor for a period of one year after they were paid for their idea(s). Fairly standard arrangement for consulting and most likely would keep 90% of the potential vermin away from the concept.
The Jenius thanks those who took the time to discuss the 1:100 concept. And to the person who asked why The Jenius selected the gentlemen listed, here is a partial reply: Several more people could have been listed. The Jenius has the fortune of knowing quite a few Geniuses...and relishes the opportunity to work with any and all of them.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
A few friends were intrigued by my recent 1:100 post. Commentary, suggestions and even a few criticisms were tossed at The Jenius. A suggestion is analyzed, one criticism is deemed merited and the others are shown to be off the mark.
The merited criticism is that My description of the process did not identify Apex as a small to medium-sized business, i.e., a company that would receive a very positive impact from a $500,000 revenue increase in one quarter. That was a definite oversight.
A second criticism extended to the amount of money each team member would make if an idea was accepted: $1,000 per member, for a total of $5,000. The Jenius was told no company would pay that, to which My reply is: Yes, the smart ones will. Though that might be a circular argument, the fact is that any company reviewing the 1:100 concept would understand that the challenege--and value--lies not in the money expended, but in the result created. If you could buy lottery tickets for $5,000 with the guarantee of winning $500,000, wouldn't you do it?
Ah, but that leads to a third criticism: what if the idea doesn't work? The Jenius was almost accused of smarmily side-stepping the issue by placing a priori blame on the company for not executing properly. The 1:100 concept takes into account that whatever ideas are presented must be done so within the context of the business as it is in order to be accepted for what they can do. If the company's leaders can see a clear path between idea, potential execution and potential benefit, is it the team's fault if--after they leave--the execution and/or result are not up to potential? The 1:100 team is hired to create a launch pad, not pilot the spaceship into and through the ether.
Another comment was that 1:100 was not very impressive, that 1:1,000 should have been used. (It was couched as a suggestion, so The Jenius took it as a comment, not criticism.) The Jenius agrees, but understands that most people will not believe that a 1:100 ratio can be achieved as indicated, so offering 1:1,000 would simply overwhelm the mind: $5,000 for a $5 million return in 90 days? Also, let's face it: if any of Us could create a return for a small to medium-sized business in the $5 million/90 days range, he/she/they would definitely be worth much much than $5,000.
Another criticism is that The Jenius was focusing on short-term gain with a possible long-term loss, something He has fought against most of His career. Too many businesses make short-term decisions that kill their long-term prospects: hiring too soon or too many, accepting too large a contract too soon, etc. The Jenius accepts that a company could be faced with this dilemma, but the team itself would be aware of this potential mistake and would seek ways to avoid long-term pitfalls. It can be expected that the company leaders would ask what can be expected beyond the 90-day framework and acceptance of the idea(s) would require a cogent and reasonable answer.
Another criticism is that by only increasing revenue, the team could lead a company to grow too fast or take too big a risk. That criticism implies that the 1:100 team would ignore the danger of over-extending the company, ignore the power of "cost reduction plus revenue increase" and ignore the reality of using the company's current resources to the fullest extent possible. That's simply out of the question because ignoring those "details" makes the team's task virtually impossible to achieve.
And finally, one friend indicated that The Jenius was setting up the team to have their ideas ripped off, for what's to stop a company from simply listening (or recording) everything, then deciding to stiff Us, collect Our money and then do the best idea(s) anyway? A Non-Disclosure Agreement would be needed going in (the company would be providing sensitive data), but nothing would compel a company to act in an honorable manner other than the moral and ethical values of its leaders. The Jenius believes that most people are decent, honest and will play fair. The few that don't, though, could discover that within a few days of their "rejection" of the 1:100 team's idea(s), the team is now working for their competitor. A Non-Compete Agreement would solve that potential problem, one that defines that the 1:100 team would not work for a competitor for a period of one year after they were paid for their idea(s). Fairly standard arrangement for consulting and most likely would keep 90% of the potential vermin away from the concept.
The Jenius thanks those who took the time to discuss the 1:100 concept. And to the person who asked why The Jenius selected the gentlemen listed, here is a partial reply: Several more people could have been listed. The Jenius has the fortune of knowing quite a few Geniuses...and relishes the opportunity to work with any and all of them.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
02 September 2005
Spin-offs & Senior Management
There are times when an established company is faced with the opportunity to help develop a spin-off or launch an additional company. Senior management gets involved and unless certain rules are observed, the process can be one of pushing to create, only to let the newborn languish.
So here are The 4 Rules for Senior Management of Spin-offs:
1) Think beyond the money: Oftentimes, senior management looks at a potential project in terms of expenses and revenue. That's only part of the equation. From unconvering new opportunities and skill sets to elevating morale and attracting a wider range of talented employees, the decision to foster a spin-off effort has very positive intangibles. Leaving those off the decision matrix will most likely lead to a bad decision. And money is only part of the resources senior management and the company can bring to the project table. Everything from streamlining procedures to marketing and public relations are part of the toolbox a project needs for a successful launch, especially when senior management has experience in the same general field.
2) Give freedom and maintain control: No, The Jenius hasn't become a Zen monster. Senior management must allow the freedom for the spin-off team to seek solutions and make mistakes, while maintaining overall control of what the spin-off project needs to achieve. Upper management in these cases is not a player, but a coach. Stepping in to try to micromanage the project almost always weakens the effort, while simply letting the project team "do its own thing" tends to create spin-offs with no clear purpose to either the established company or any specific markets.
3) Establish clear "pull the plug" numbers: The worst thing for a spin-off project is to be shut down. To avoid the image of arbitrary or subjective decision-making, as well as reducing the potential effect of internal politics on the effort, clear objectives must be established and reviewed periodically. Not only does the process keep the team focused on achieving results, it also provides for an automatic project review with little extra effort. Obstacles are quickly identified and if more resources need to be allocated, they can be weighed and committed when needed.
4) Once the spin-off launches is when your real work begins: Senior management is not a checkbook and office space: it is a leadership role and leaders act. The moment a spin-off is ready to hit the market is when senior management is needed most, because they are the first, best and most respected salespeople for the project. Letting the spin-off try to "find its legs" is like building a bicycle and expecting it to be a motorcycle. At that point, the engine is senior management and a few weeks of ales and marketing by senior management may very well be the difference between spin-off success and limbo.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
So here are The 4 Rules for Senior Management of Spin-offs:
1) Think beyond the money: Oftentimes, senior management looks at a potential project in terms of expenses and revenue. That's only part of the equation. From unconvering new opportunities and skill sets to elevating morale and attracting a wider range of talented employees, the decision to foster a spin-off effort has very positive intangibles. Leaving those off the decision matrix will most likely lead to a bad decision. And money is only part of the resources senior management and the company can bring to the project table. Everything from streamlining procedures to marketing and public relations are part of the toolbox a project needs for a successful launch, especially when senior management has experience in the same general field.
2) Give freedom and maintain control: No, The Jenius hasn't become a Zen monster. Senior management must allow the freedom for the spin-off team to seek solutions and make mistakes, while maintaining overall control of what the spin-off project needs to achieve. Upper management in these cases is not a player, but a coach. Stepping in to try to micromanage the project almost always weakens the effort, while simply letting the project team "do its own thing" tends to create spin-offs with no clear purpose to either the established company or any specific markets.
3) Establish clear "pull the plug" numbers: The worst thing for a spin-off project is to be shut down. To avoid the image of arbitrary or subjective decision-making, as well as reducing the potential effect of internal politics on the effort, clear objectives must be established and reviewed periodically. Not only does the process keep the team focused on achieving results, it also provides for an automatic project review with little extra effort. Obstacles are quickly identified and if more resources need to be allocated, they can be weighed and committed when needed.
4) Once the spin-off launches is when your real work begins: Senior management is not a checkbook and office space: it is a leadership role and leaders act. The moment a spin-off is ready to hit the market is when senior management is needed most, because they are the first, best and most respected salespeople for the project. Letting the spin-off try to "find its legs" is like building a bicycle and expecting it to be a motorcycle. At that point, the engine is senior management and a few weeks of ales and marketing by senior management may very well be the difference between spin-off success and limbo.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
01 September 2005
1:100
Imagine this scenario at mythical Apex, Inc.:
At 8 A.M., five people walk into the main conference room at Apex. On the table are five packets containing reports provided by Apex to describe the company, its operations, markets, current plans, objectives and obstacles. The conference room has a whiteboard, two computers with Internet access, index cards, PostIt Notes, notepads, pens, markers, etc.
At 9 A.M., the five-person team begins to brainstorm ideas that could lead Apex to generate a minimum revenue increase of $500,000 in the following quarter.
At 12 noon, the group is served an elegant lunch.
At 1 P.M. the group reconvenes to polish the best ideas and prepare brief presentations on the best ones, or an in-depth presentation of the main idea if only one is to be presented.
At 2 P.M., Apex's top brass files in to hear the idea(s). The group runs through its presentation(s) verbally, using a minimum of PowerPoint. (None at all would be best.)
Between 3 and 3:30, the top brass decide which idea or ideas they wish to see developed further. If no idea is deemed worthy, each member of the group pays $100 to Apex, to cover the expenses incurred during this one-day exercise. If one or two ideas are deemed worthy, the group then proceeds to create 1 or 2 outlines (2-4 pages long) that delineate the major steps needed to put an idea into action. By 5 P.M., they hand in the outlines and each person in the group receives a check for $1,000.
Thus Apex invests $5,000 in order to receive a $500,000 revenue boost in the coming quarter. That's a ratio of $1 invested with a $100 return, a 1:100 ratio.
Farfetched? Not at all. With a group of results-minded, entrepreneurial, rules-bending, solution-provider brains, achieving the 1:100 result is practically guaranteed. It takes fresh approaches to make a difference and injecting $500,000 into a company is the kind of short-term result that could springboard Apex (or any other outfit) into an entirely new level of success.
But maybe the whole plan falls apart and the revenue is not generated. If the company's top brass believes an idea is worth pursuing, but then botch the execution, that's not the group's fault. Having deemed an idea worth attempting and being given an outline on its major points should be enough for any competent organization to put into practice and achieve the desired result.
And what does it really cost a company to try this? What was shown above: a little over $5,000. Even if it costs as much as $10,000, a return in the $500,000 range could mean a yearly revenue increase of $2 million... or much much more. That's a result most medium-sized businesses would be happy to enjoy.
If any would-be Apexes ask The Jenius to do this, He would invite Roberto Filomeno, Art Medina, Ivan Merced and Kevin Shockey to that conference room. Think about it: for every dollar invested here, 100 will be coming back.
1:100. Think about it.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
At 8 A.M., five people walk into the main conference room at Apex. On the table are five packets containing reports provided by Apex to describe the company, its operations, markets, current plans, objectives and obstacles. The conference room has a whiteboard, two computers with Internet access, index cards, PostIt Notes, notepads, pens, markers, etc.
At 9 A.M., the five-person team begins to brainstorm ideas that could lead Apex to generate a minimum revenue increase of $500,000 in the following quarter.
At 12 noon, the group is served an elegant lunch.
At 1 P.M. the group reconvenes to polish the best ideas and prepare brief presentations on the best ones, or an in-depth presentation of the main idea if only one is to be presented.
At 2 P.M., Apex's top brass files in to hear the idea(s). The group runs through its presentation(s) verbally, using a minimum of PowerPoint. (None at all would be best.)
Between 3 and 3:30, the top brass decide which idea or ideas they wish to see developed further. If no idea is deemed worthy, each member of the group pays $100 to Apex, to cover the expenses incurred during this one-day exercise. If one or two ideas are deemed worthy, the group then proceeds to create 1 or 2 outlines (2-4 pages long) that delineate the major steps needed to put an idea into action. By 5 P.M., they hand in the outlines and each person in the group receives a check for $1,000.
Thus Apex invests $5,000 in order to receive a $500,000 revenue boost in the coming quarter. That's a ratio of $1 invested with a $100 return, a 1:100 ratio.
Farfetched? Not at all. With a group of results-minded, entrepreneurial, rules-bending, solution-provider brains, achieving the 1:100 result is practically guaranteed. It takes fresh approaches to make a difference and injecting $500,000 into a company is the kind of short-term result that could springboard Apex (or any other outfit) into an entirely new level of success.
But maybe the whole plan falls apart and the revenue is not generated. If the company's top brass believes an idea is worth pursuing, but then botch the execution, that's not the group's fault. Having deemed an idea worth attempting and being given an outline on its major points should be enough for any competent organization to put into practice and achieve the desired result.
And what does it really cost a company to try this? What was shown above: a little over $5,000. Even if it costs as much as $10,000, a return in the $500,000 range could mean a yearly revenue increase of $2 million... or much much more. That's a result most medium-sized businesses would be happy to enjoy.
If any would-be Apexes ask The Jenius to do this, He would invite Roberto Filomeno, Art Medina, Ivan Merced and Kevin Shockey to that conference room. Think about it: for every dollar invested here, 100 will be coming back.
1:100. Think about it.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
31 August 2005
A Theoretical Question
On a scale of 1 (the world is populated only by members of the Bush family) to 100, how talented is Puerto Rico? More precisely, on a scale of 1 (see above) to 100, how talented are the people of the island of Puerto Rico?
The Jenius will further define the point to actual, demonstrable talent, not potential talent. Potential talent, like a politician's worth, is a theoretical concept and one must always allow for the possibility of existence up to the infinite. (Yes...sigh...even for a Fool.)
You have your answer. Here's Mine: 25.
From a conversation with the all-too-often mentioned Kevin Shockey, The Jenius had this sense of trying to--in some fashion--provide a numerical construct for a basically immeasurable concept. But once the question was formulated, the number answer was clear: 25.
Taken in one way, one could assume that the number is in some way a percentage and that 25% of the roughly 4 million persons on the Island are "talented." Clearly, that ain't right (and yes, The Jenius is aware some of the 4 million are not strictly Puerto Rican. Point noted.) The problem, if there is one, lies in the slipperiness of defining "talent," but The Jenius posed the question and will answer it not based on any particular definition of talent, but on the concept of "talent in action". (Note: This entire premise is altogether too vague. Go with it, humor Me, let it take you where it may. The goal is a discussion, not a debate on semantics.)
So 25 it is. It could mean that of Our theoretical limit, 25 is the score similar to the point on a sloped line: of the total distance/height, We have reached point "25". Whether percentage or graphic, 25 is not anything to crow about. And it may seem to some of you to be a denial of what The Jenius has stated before via a vis Our Talent. Rest assured, it denies nothing stated here before. It merely reflects the notion that what We have is less than what We need/deserve, a consistent theme in these posts.
Whether you agree or not, The Jenius sees a problem with enormous upside: there is plenty of room for improvement. That verbal statement would elicit more nods than shakes of the head. To baldly state 25 when ego, pride, jingoism or a tendency to deny reality would mandate a number at least in the high 60s-low 70s is akin to a gentle, maybe even not-so-gentle slap in the Face of Us.
So be it. Although that was not The Jenius' intention, it could be taken that way. But think of the impact of a vaguely-posed question with a low number attached to it versus the hundreds--thousands--of words written here on the same subject. That a 25 could have caused a bigger stir in some people's minds as compared to reasoned, impassioned argument says something interesting about the way Our minds work. Or don't.
You might even want to ask your co-workers, friends, neigbors, children, parents, long-lost cousins twice-removed who live in a wooden shack and drive a late-model SUV this same question: On a scale of 1 (the pits) to 100, how talented are the people of the island of Puerto Rico?
The answers may or may not surprise you. But don't ask a Fool. He or she would immediately say a very high number (100, most likely) just to show their "Puerto Rican-ness". Answering a question you do not understand with a response you cannot defend even if your brain quadrupled in size and was connected to the Internet is simply a waste of time. Spare yourself. Spare Us. But ponder what this question could mean and what We can do about it. It may turn out to be more fundamental and crucial to Our Future than We can imagine.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
The Jenius will further define the point to actual, demonstrable talent, not potential talent. Potential talent, like a politician's worth, is a theoretical concept and one must always allow for the possibility of existence up to the infinite. (Yes...sigh...even for a Fool.)
You have your answer. Here's Mine: 25.
From a conversation with the all-too-often mentioned Kevin Shockey, The Jenius had this sense of trying to--in some fashion--provide a numerical construct for a basically immeasurable concept. But once the question was formulated, the number answer was clear: 25.
Taken in one way, one could assume that the number is in some way a percentage and that 25% of the roughly 4 million persons on the Island are "talented." Clearly, that ain't right (and yes, The Jenius is aware some of the 4 million are not strictly Puerto Rican. Point noted.) The problem, if there is one, lies in the slipperiness of defining "talent," but The Jenius posed the question and will answer it not based on any particular definition of talent, but on the concept of "talent in action". (Note: This entire premise is altogether too vague. Go with it, humor Me, let it take you where it may. The goal is a discussion, not a debate on semantics.)
So 25 it is. It could mean that of Our theoretical limit, 25 is the score similar to the point on a sloped line: of the total distance/height, We have reached point "25". Whether percentage or graphic, 25 is not anything to crow about. And it may seem to some of you to be a denial of what The Jenius has stated before via a vis Our Talent. Rest assured, it denies nothing stated here before. It merely reflects the notion that what We have is less than what We need/deserve, a consistent theme in these posts.
Whether you agree or not, The Jenius sees a problem with enormous upside: there is plenty of room for improvement. That verbal statement would elicit more nods than shakes of the head. To baldly state 25 when ego, pride, jingoism or a tendency to deny reality would mandate a number at least in the high 60s-low 70s is akin to a gentle, maybe even not-so-gentle slap in the Face of Us.
So be it. Although that was not The Jenius' intention, it could be taken that way. But think of the impact of a vaguely-posed question with a low number attached to it versus the hundreds--thousands--of words written here on the same subject. That a 25 could have caused a bigger stir in some people's minds as compared to reasoned, impassioned argument says something interesting about the way Our minds work. Or don't.
You might even want to ask your co-workers, friends, neigbors, children, parents, long-lost cousins twice-removed who live in a wooden shack and drive a late-model SUV this same question: On a scale of 1 (the pits) to 100, how talented are the people of the island of Puerto Rico?
The answers may or may not surprise you. But don't ask a Fool. He or she would immediately say a very high number (100, most likely) just to show their "Puerto Rican-ness". Answering a question you do not understand with a response you cannot defend even if your brain quadrupled in size and was connected to the Internet is simply a waste of time. Spare yourself. Spare Us. But ponder what this question could mean and what We can do about it. It may turn out to be more fundamental and crucial to Our Future than We can imagine.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
30 August 2005
Above Average
Lucy: "What kind of world would this be if people settled for being average?!"
Linus: "What kind of world IS this anyway?"
Chalk up another one for the blanket-wielding savant. In a world where 83% of people surveyed consider themselves "above-average" drivers, something has gone terribly wrong. There's no way 83% can be above-average, and the evidence of our daily driving tends to indicate that 83% of drivers are idiots. But how many amongst Us would admit to being an "average" driver, or worse? C'mon, don't be shy! Anyone?
We say We seek excellence, but by and large We choose mediocrity instead. Instead of seeking out a path to Our Greatest Selves, We sit back in couch-potato stupor accepting the flavor-of-the-day... day after day after day.
As human beings, We are as ordinary as each other, and yet, at the same time, We are obviously and emphatically unique. Why choose to bury that uniqueness? Why take the very core of what makes each Life so valuable--it's essential distinctiveness--and smother it in conformity and banality. When We deny Our Best, We deny Our Most.
Seek excellence. Your Own standard of excellence, not the "standard" imposed by bleaters who wouldn't know excellence if it bit them in the hindquarters. Life is a unique gift that you can share with the world in a way no one else ever has or ever will. Give it Your Best and truly Live.
And do it for your own reasons in your own way, not Mine or anyone else's. It's your Life. It's now: choose.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
Linus: "What kind of world IS this anyway?"
Chalk up another one for the blanket-wielding savant. In a world where 83% of people surveyed consider themselves "above-average" drivers, something has gone terribly wrong. There's no way 83% can be above-average, and the evidence of our daily driving tends to indicate that 83% of drivers are idiots. But how many amongst Us would admit to being an "average" driver, or worse? C'mon, don't be shy! Anyone?
We say We seek excellence, but by and large We choose mediocrity instead. Instead of seeking out a path to Our Greatest Selves, We sit back in couch-potato stupor accepting the flavor-of-the-day... day after day after day.
As human beings, We are as ordinary as each other, and yet, at the same time, We are obviously and emphatically unique. Why choose to bury that uniqueness? Why take the very core of what makes each Life so valuable--it's essential distinctiveness--and smother it in conformity and banality. When We deny Our Best, We deny Our Most.
Seek excellence. Your Own standard of excellence, not the "standard" imposed by bleaters who wouldn't know excellence if it bit them in the hindquarters. Life is a unique gift that you can share with the world in a way no one else ever has or ever will. Give it Your Best and truly Live.
And do it for your own reasons in your own way, not Mine or anyone else's. It's your Life. It's now: choose.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
29 August 2005
Techno Sapiens: Be Distinct
"If there is nothing very special about your work, no matter how hard you apply yourself you won't get noticed, and that increasingly means you won't get paid much either."---Michael Goldhaber, Wired Magazine
The Rule of Positioning: "If you can't describe your position in eight words or less, you don't have a position." - Jay Levinson and Seth Godin, Get What You Deserve!
Your grandfather's dream of a factory job for 40 years, with a small pension, Social Security and Medicare is gone.
Your parents' dream of 8-hours-a-day-for-30-years, with early retirement, a good pension, Social Security, Medicare, maybe a part-time job and good credit to make loans for travel and gifts is also gone.
For the rest of Us, the times demand that We make Ourselves the best We can be. It means We make learning a daily--hourly--habit. It means We measure Our value by the value We add to the projects We initiate or participate in. It means We work on Ourselves as the absolute best investment We can make in Our individual and national Future and that We strive to become unique contributors.
To borrow from Tom Peters, it is no longer "Get better" versus "Get different". More than becoming better, becoming different is an increasingly vital key to success.
Look at the positioning statement for The Jenius: Creating and supporting transcendental change. Sets a high standard. Makes it public. Requires that The Jenius put his money where His mouth is. Every day in every project He works in or on. Can you name anyone else with that kind of positioning? Makes The Jenius distinct. An important point because, paraphrasing that Tom Peters gent again: Be Distinct or Become Extinct.
For the herd, drudgery and oblivion. For the rest of Us, adventure and a true chance to make a difference in Our world and everybody else's. It all starts with the choices to follow your dreams, constantly improve, become a distinctly valuable talent and seek the best projects in which to apply that value. The world awaits, with an almost empty playground, for the unique player you can be.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
The Rule of Positioning: "If you can't describe your position in eight words or less, you don't have a position." - Jay Levinson and Seth Godin, Get What You Deserve!
Your grandfather's dream of a factory job for 40 years, with a small pension, Social Security and Medicare is gone.
Your parents' dream of 8-hours-a-day-for-30-years, with early retirement, a good pension, Social Security, Medicare, maybe a part-time job and good credit to make loans for travel and gifts is also gone.
The dream now is whatever you want to make of it, because your dream is your responsibility. Companies rise and fall and seldom give a rat's heinie about you and your dream. For every Enron and WorldCom out there shafting their employees there are "good" companies like General Motors and Boeing firing people by the thousands because they can no longer compete.
For the rest of Us, the times demand that We make Ourselves the best We can be. It means We make learning a daily--hourly--habit. It means We measure Our value by the value We add to the projects We initiate or participate in. It means We work on Ourselves as the absolute best investment We can make in Our individual and national Future and that We strive to become unique contributors.
To borrow from Tom Peters, it is no longer "Get better" versus "Get different". More than becoming better, becoming different is an increasingly vital key to success.
Look at the positioning statement for The Jenius: Creating and supporting transcendental change. Sets a high standard. Makes it public. Requires that The Jenius put his money where His mouth is. Every day in every project He works in or on. Can you name anyone else with that kind of positioning? Makes The Jenius distinct. An important point because, paraphrasing that Tom Peters gent again: Be Distinct or Become Extinct.
For the herd, drudgery and oblivion. For the rest of Us, adventure and a true chance to make a difference in Our world and everybody else's. It all starts with the choices to follow your dreams, constantly improve, become a distinctly valuable talent and seek the best projects in which to apply that value. The world awaits, with an almost empty playground, for the unique player you can be.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
26 August 2005
Techno Sapiens: Renaissance Minds
If you haven't thought of making a career--a Life--outside of a cubicle/office or feel that underselling your freedom to a corporate or government overlord in the name of "security" is a good thing, drop by Creative Generalist. Suspend your irrational beliefs for a few minutes and explore a world where security comes from your own mind, its knowledge, imagination, talents and capacity to learn.
A recent post reads:
Renaissance Geeks
The absolutely qualified high school graduate who can compete for a good job in the 21st century will be a “renaissance geek,” the Region V director of the U.S. Small Business Administration, Patrick Rea, said June 14.
That graduate will have a lifelong love of learning, both formal and informal, where the jobs he fills will likely need to be “learned, unlearned and relearned,” Rea said.
Quoting Alvin Toffler, author of Future Shock and a self-described “futurist,” he said, “The illiterates of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read or write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn and relearn.” ...
(Rea's) presentation was based on “21st Century Jobs and Entrepreneurship in the Midwest: A Study Capturing the Future of the Heartland’s Economic Landscape,” which was recently completed by (the S.B.A.)
Okay, maybe you don't believe the government, even when it happens to stumble on the Truth. The breakneck pace of the economy is like a highly-desirable habitat, and on those terms, We can look back for a glimpse into the future:
"It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change." -Charles Darwin
Well, hell, Darwin's dead. How about someone who's alive and making a difference now? Please meet Richard Florida, author of The Rise of the Creative Class, a controversial book that puts a tangible framework on the synergy needed for economic development. However, his basic postulate is short and undeniable: "Human creativity is the ultimate economic resource."
Not "corporations," not "profits," not "pension plans that pay you a fraction of your worth in exchange for decades of your life as an indentured slave." Human creativity.
Now, of course, being an indentured slave is easy: you give up your will and your need to make decisions and simply follow orders. Your biggest effort of thought is trying to figure out how you're going to cheat the system. Imagination in the service of decreased moral and ethical behavior. No wonder The Fools are thriving.
But as a creative worker, as a lifelong student, as a value-adding producer, you have to make the effort to think, to learn, to explore and to act to make a difference. Merely existing is not enough. The indefatigable Tom Peters sums up what We need to do every day to make the most of Our value:
Guiding Tenets/Daily Fare
---Innovate!
---Re-imagine!
---Adapt!
---Prepare!
Renaissance Minds are out to change the world, even if it's only the portion they live in. They are not waiting for government to "listen" or provide enslaving handouts, they are not sitting on their expanding asses behind mass-produced desks waiting for 12 and 5 to roll around and they are not bitching and moaning about "50 cents an hour and my birthday off" stupidities. They are definitely players on the global economic field, not simply spectators.
The Future, for each of Us, belongs to those who choose to be voracious learners, independent thinkers, imaginative solution providers and paragons of self-worth.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
A recent post reads:
Renaissance Geeks
The absolutely qualified high school graduate who can compete for a good job in the 21st century will be a “renaissance geek,” the Region V director of the U.S. Small Business Administration, Patrick Rea, said June 14.
That graduate will have a lifelong love of learning, both formal and informal, where the jobs he fills will likely need to be “learned, unlearned and relearned,” Rea said.
Quoting Alvin Toffler, author of Future Shock and a self-described “futurist,” he said, “The illiterates of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read or write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn and relearn.” ...
(Rea's) presentation was based on “21st Century Jobs and Entrepreneurship in the Midwest: A Study Capturing the Future of the Heartland’s Economic Landscape,” which was recently completed by (the S.B.A.)
Okay, maybe you don't believe the government, even when it happens to stumble on the Truth. The breakneck pace of the economy is like a highly-desirable habitat, and on those terms, We can look back for a glimpse into the future:
"It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change." -Charles Darwin
Well, hell, Darwin's dead. How about someone who's alive and making a difference now? Please meet Richard Florida, author of The Rise of the Creative Class, a controversial book that puts a tangible framework on the synergy needed for economic development. However, his basic postulate is short and undeniable: "Human creativity is the ultimate economic resource."
Not "corporations," not "profits," not "pension plans that pay you a fraction of your worth in exchange for decades of your life as an indentured slave." Human creativity.
Now, of course, being an indentured slave is easy: you give up your will and your need to make decisions and simply follow orders. Your biggest effort of thought is trying to figure out how you're going to cheat the system. Imagination in the service of decreased moral and ethical behavior. No wonder The Fools are thriving.
But as a creative worker, as a lifelong student, as a value-adding producer, you have to make the effort to think, to learn, to explore and to act to make a difference. Merely existing is not enough. The indefatigable Tom Peters sums up what We need to do every day to make the most of Our value:
Guiding Tenets/Daily Fare
---Innovate!
---Re-imagine!
---Adapt!
---Prepare!
Renaissance Minds are out to change the world, even if it's only the portion they live in. They are not waiting for government to "listen" or provide enslaving handouts, they are not sitting on their expanding asses behind mass-produced desks waiting for 12 and 5 to roll around and they are not bitching and moaning about "50 cents an hour and my birthday off" stupidities. They are definitely players on the global economic field, not simply spectators.
The Future, for each of Us, belongs to those who choose to be voracious learners, independent thinkers, imaginative solution providers and paragons of self-worth.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
25 August 2005
Techno Sapiens: Choose To Excel
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?"--Mary Oliver
"Nobody can prevent you from choosing to be exceptional." --Mark Sanborn, The Fred Factor
We look at education as a way to certify We can get paid, instead of the never-ending building process it truly is.
We let society--usually our families--determine Our careers, muzzling Our desires under the fears they cower to.
We let The Fools strip away Our sense of nation, Our rightful claim to dignity, Our money and Our Future and allow these Fools to place absurdly narrow limits on Our development.
Why?
We can choose Our own education, without restrictions, aimed at developing Our skills instead of buckling under an unjustly-imposed "need" to be put in a box while still alive.
We can shun society's fears and accept that the only true path to developing Our fullest potential lies in acknowledging Our dreams as goals...and pursuing them relentlessly.
We can tear down The Fools' false walls of limitations as We tear them down from their gilded outhouses. Their time never was; their actions were never aimed at Our Future, only theirs.
Each of Us has a Life, a single moment in Time that will never be again. Why give it away to Fools, a box, a collection of fears, a paltry "reward" in exchange for a Life?
Look around you. Look at what accepting this "exchange" creates: mediocrity. The Fools wallow in the vaccuum mediocrity leaves, the collective yielding of will, hope and striving for excellence is the space The Fools need to harvest from Us to their piggish heart's content.
You have but a single Life. Don't give it up. Don't give away your irreplaceable Life for dirt clods. Nothing--nothing--can stand in the way of your excellence, if you choose to pursue it. But it won't happen by itself: you have to choose excellence. It is by far the harder road, but it is the only road that leads to Your--to Our--Best Future.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
"Nobody can prevent you from choosing to be exceptional." --Mark Sanborn, The Fred Factor
We look at education as a way to certify We can get paid, instead of the never-ending building process it truly is.
We let society--usually our families--determine Our careers, muzzling Our desires under the fears they cower to.
We let The Fools strip away Our sense of nation, Our rightful claim to dignity, Our money and Our Future and allow these Fools to place absurdly narrow limits on Our development.
Why?
We can choose Our own education, without restrictions, aimed at developing Our skills instead of buckling under an unjustly-imposed "need" to be put in a box while still alive.
We can shun society's fears and accept that the only true path to developing Our fullest potential lies in acknowledging Our dreams as goals...and pursuing them relentlessly.
We can tear down The Fools' false walls of limitations as We tear them down from their gilded outhouses. Their time never was; their actions were never aimed at Our Future, only theirs.
Each of Us has a Life, a single moment in Time that will never be again. Why give it away to Fools, a box, a collection of fears, a paltry "reward" in exchange for a Life?
Look around you. Look at what accepting this "exchange" creates: mediocrity. The Fools wallow in the vaccuum mediocrity leaves, the collective yielding of will, hope and striving for excellence is the space The Fools need to harvest from Us to their piggish heart's content.
You have but a single Life. Don't give it up. Don't give away your irreplaceable Life for dirt clods. Nothing--nothing--can stand in the way of your excellence, if you choose to pursue it. But it won't happen by itself: you have to choose excellence. It is by far the harder road, but it is the only road that leads to Your--to Our--Best Future.
The Jenius Has Spoken.
24 August 2005
Dinars For Dummies
The Jenius was going to let this one pass... Puerto Rico State Department officials are removed from their posts because of perceived ethical violations in the sale of Iraqui dinars for dollars. Apparently, Prudencio "Bill" Méndez, second-in-command at the State Department, was shilling the dinars for his son, James Méndez.
"Another Fool and his latrine soil," thought The Jenius. That two other Fools were also caught was simply a statistic. But the latrine soil hit The Jenius' fan when Jimmy-boy's company name was mentioned in the article: Internet Management Services.
Jimmy-boy, if you want to sell Iraqui dinars to brain-dead compatriots or even brain-dead foreigners, that's your business. You and P.T. Barnum are simply a fact of life in the human cavalcade. But to call your company "Internet Management Services" is an insult to the many talented people that work Internet-related businesses. Real businesses, Jimbo, not fake "management" shops. The Jenius and many others are speaking up to help spread the word in Puerto Rico about the value of the Internet and reaching for global markets. In the midst of that urgent mission, you and several other lumps, including your father (so it's probably genetic) combine "Internet" and "global" into what can best be described as an "idiot trap."
Jimster, there's no accounting for taste or stupidity. You base your ""business"" (the doubled quotes are sarcasm, Jiminy; have someone explain it to you) on selling colorful pieces of "Iraqui" paper printed in England with the "promise" that someday, somehow, those little pieces of colored paper will be worth actual money. Investment experts are kind--or polite--enough to consider your offer "a high risk investment." The Jenius will save letters and call it crap.
However, as Hollywood, local TV and Fox News prove every day: crap sells. To the buyers of Jimmy-the-nonGreek's gamble, here's something to think about: What makes you think that Iraquis lack pride, dignity, honor, self-esteem and self-worth? The colorful bits of paper you are buying are NOT--let Me repeat--NOT the national currency of Iraq. It is worthless. To Iraquis, it is less than worthless: it is an insult. The moment a new Iraqui government is in place, they will replace the insult with their own currency. To Iraquis, currency printed by an invader--"invited" or not (and rest assured: definitely NOT invited) is, at best, toilet paper. You dummies for dinars, in your pathetic greed, are buying toilet paper from Puerto Rico's version of "Mr. Charmin".
The only way you could miss this point is if you simply cannot imagine having pride, dignity, honor, self-esteem and a sense of self-worth about your own nation. In that sense, James Méndez is simply bottom-feeding on pathetic souls.
There may be no crime in what Jim "Locate-A-Sucker" is doing. No legal crime. Morally and ethically, he is the equivalent of an open sewer on a buffet table. The saddest part is, there seems to be more of Us feeding from the sewer...
The Jenius Has Spoken.
"Another Fool and his latrine soil," thought The Jenius. That two other Fools were also caught was simply a statistic. But the latrine soil hit The Jenius' fan when Jimmy-boy's company name was mentioned in the article: Internet Management Services.
Jimmy-boy, if you want to sell Iraqui dinars to brain-dead compatriots or even brain-dead foreigners, that's your business. You and P.T. Barnum are simply a fact of life in the human cavalcade. But to call your company "Internet Management Services" is an insult to the many talented people that work Internet-related businesses. Real businesses, Jimbo, not fake "management" shops. The Jenius and many others are speaking up to help spread the word in Puerto Rico about the value of the Internet and reaching for global markets. In the midst of that urgent mission, you and several other lumps, including your father (so it's probably genetic) combine "Internet" and "global" into what can best be described as an "idiot trap."
Jimster, there's no accounting for taste or stupidity. You base your ""business"" (the doubled quotes are sarcasm, Jiminy; have someone explain it to you) on selling colorful pieces of "Iraqui" paper printed in England with the "promise" that someday, somehow, those little pieces of colored paper will be worth actual money. Investment experts are kind--or polite--enough to consider your offer "a high risk investment." The Jenius will save letters and call it crap.
However, as Hollywood, local TV and Fox News prove every day: crap sells. To the buyers of Jimmy-the-nonGreek's gamble, here's something to think about: What makes you think that Iraquis lack pride, dignity, honor, self-esteem and self-worth? The colorful bits of paper you are buying are NOT--let Me repeat--NOT the national currency of Iraq. It is worthless. To Iraquis, it is less than worthless: it is an insult. The moment a new Iraqui government is in place, they will replace the insult with their own currency. To Iraquis, currency printed by an invader--"invited" or not (and rest assured: definitely NOT invited) is, at best, toilet paper. You dummies for dinars, in your pathetic greed, are buying toilet paper from Puerto Rico's version of "Mr. Charmin".
The only way you could miss this point is if you simply cannot imagine having pride, dignity, honor, self-esteem and a sense of self-worth about your own nation. In that sense, James Méndez is simply bottom-feeding on pathetic souls.
There may be no crime in what Jim "Locate-A-Sucker" is doing. No legal crime. Morally and ethically, he is the equivalent of an open sewer on a buffet table. The saddest part is, there seems to be more of Us feeding from the sewer...
The Jenius Has Spoken.
23 August 2005
Techno Sapiens: Do or Be
"To Be somebody or to Do something"
BOYD: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War, by Robert Coram.
[Before The Jenius begins, kudos to Kevin Shockey and Myself for being selected to appear on Global Voices, sponsored by the Harvard Law Center.]
Colonel John Boyd was the fighter pilot credited with radically changing the way battles are fought. Although his war skills are not relevant here, his determination of the kind of people needed to get the job done is. Col. Boyd decided there are two kinds of people: those who do things and those who want to be something. The difference is vital to success.
"Do" people focus obsessively on "the work itself" and carry a "damn the torpedoes" attitude about everything else. "Be" people obsess on the politics, the rank, the title, the job description, the next promotion or assignment...essentially everything BUT the work itself.
Tom Peters, in his 1,400+ slide presentation, lists "My Kinda Folks," the people he just loves to work with and wants to see more of. Here's an excerpt of that list:
1) Intuitive (more than) Purely logical. (Routinely make strange connections)
2) Incredible passion for the work/Lingering idealism (though also cynical- a paradox)
3) Persistent/Relentless (to a fault)[TJ: Almost or often obsessive]
4) Like the long shots (Don Quixote-ish)
5) Stay on the case long after being ordered to drop it [TJ: See #3]
6) (Take on) cases no one else wants (hot potatoes, dead ends, political nightmares, "unimportant" victims)
7) Constant thorns in the side of bureaucracy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [TJ: Give The Fools HELL!]
8) Repeatedly exiled to professional "Siberia" (so annoyingly good and so annoying per se that others try to do him terminal professional harm)
9) Little in the way of career prospects [TJ: As defined by "Be" pukes]
10) Work mostly solo (Secretive)[TJ: Greater sense of freedom, not fear]
11) "Work" "old pals network" to get info-leads beyond their charter
12) Master of the End Run! [TJ: Create new ways to get things done]
13) Often (are) their own worst enemies
14) Don't work out enough
15) Excessive work has estranged from family
16) More or less shabbily dressed [TJ: Appearance means nothing; results are what counts]
17) Drive shabby cars [TJ: See #16]
18) Not money/security oriented (can't help themselves, just gotta get involved) [TJ: Would actually PAY to get involved in cool/great/radical projects]
19) GET THE DAMN JOB DONE!(and don't expect/get much appreciation) [TJ: Don't deny this because it is the Truth]
You know if you are a "Do" person or a "Be" person. If you want to lie to yourself and say "I'm a 'Do'" when you cling to your cubicle, timeclock and little box in a Table of Organization, go ahead: you hurt no one but yourself. The true damage is done by "Wanna-Dos"--many of them Fools--who are "Be" people from scaly head to slimy toes who clog progress, impede creativity and act as life-sapping parasites to those of Us who Live to Do.
Oh yes, The Jenius is definitely a Do person. The question is: are you?
The Jenius Has Spoken.
BOYD: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War, by Robert Coram.
[Before The Jenius begins, kudos to Kevin Shockey and Myself for being selected to appear on Global Voices, sponsored by the Harvard Law Center.]
Colonel John Boyd was the fighter pilot credited with radically changing the way battles are fought. Although his war skills are not relevant here, his determination of the kind of people needed to get the job done is. Col. Boyd decided there are two kinds of people: those who do things and those who want to be something. The difference is vital to success.
"Do" people focus obsessively on "the work itself" and carry a "damn the torpedoes" attitude about everything else. "Be" people obsess on the politics, the rank, the title, the job description, the next promotion or assignment...essentially everything BUT the work itself.
Tom Peters, in his 1,400+ slide presentation, lists "My Kinda Folks," the people he just loves to work with and wants to see more of. Here's an excerpt of that list:
1) Intuitive (more than) Purely logical. (Routinely make strange connections)
2) Incredible passion for the work/Lingering idealism (though also cynical- a paradox)
3) Persistent/Relentless (to a fault)[TJ: Almost or often obsessive]
4) Like the long shots (Don Quixote-ish)
5) Stay on the case long after being ordered to drop it [TJ: See #3]
6) (Take on) cases no one else wants (hot potatoes, dead ends, political nightmares, "unimportant" victims)
7) Constant thorns in the side of bureaucracy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [TJ: Give The Fools HELL!]
8) Repeatedly exiled to professional "Siberia" (so annoyingly good and so annoying per se that others try to do him terminal professional harm)
9) Little in the way of career prospects [TJ: As defined by "Be" pukes]
10) Work mostly solo (Secretive)[TJ: Greater sense of freedom, not fear]
11) "Work" "old pals network" to get info-leads beyond their charter
12) Master of the End Run! [TJ: Create new ways to get things done]
13) Often (are) their own worst enemies
14) Don't work out enough
15) Excessive work has estranged from family
16) More or less shabbily dressed [TJ: Appearance means nothing; results are what counts]
17) Drive shabby cars [TJ: See #16]
18) Not money/security oriented (can't help themselves, just gotta get involved) [TJ: Would actually PAY to get involved in cool/great/radical projects]
19) GET THE DAMN JOB DONE!(and don't expect/get much appreciation) [TJ: Don't deny this because it is the Truth]
You know if you are a "Do" person or a "Be" person. If you want to lie to yourself and say "I'm a 'Do'" when you cling to your cubicle, timeclock and little box in a Table of Organization, go ahead: you hurt no one but yourself. The true damage is done by "Wanna-Dos"--many of them Fools--who are "Be" people from scaly head to slimy toes who clog progress, impede creativity and act as life-sapping parasites to those of Us who Live to Do.
Oh yes, The Jenius is definitely a Do person. The question is: are you?
The Jenius Has Spoken.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)