The need to be there
Some of us are looking for a challenge.
I have never been sure what this exactly means; chances are that it is just a figure of speech, meaning that I need to find another job, gig, investment opportunity, whatever.
Some of us just need to be there; the rest is details.
Examples:
VCs: the ones looking for a deal (challenge) are running processes; go through the motions, use the same criteria, getting referrals from the same people, asking the same questions, showing the same reactions, seemingly looking at the same deal, etc.
The ones who just need to be there know:
- we MUST do this play
- we MUST work with this guy / team / etc.
- we MUST be in this segment
Consultants:
the ones looking for a challenge are fishing. Cast a wide net and see what they catch (their publication, their networking activities, their extra curricular activities serve this purpose).
the ones that need to be there are gravitated towards particular clients; the type of clients who also need to be there.
It is a question of identity. There is absolutely no stronger draw, no stronger certainty.
The people who need to be there, will create challenges.
There are more people looking for challenges.
I’d hire the ones who need to be there /here in a New York minute.
The tragi-comedy of customer service
Millions of stories have been written about bad customers service. It would be too easy to write another one, too easy to analyze the details, to pinpoint how they make all the mistakes that are logically possible to make and -with a twisted, reverse-creativity that defies “logic”- even more.
Recently I filled out a SURVEY! after my interaction with Skype customer service. The last question was: what can we do to improve customer service.
I think there is only one answer and this applies to everybody:
I WANT TO INTERACT WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE POWER TO CHANGE THINGS TO ACCOMMODATE MY NEEDS ! ! !
I WANT THINGS TO BE CHANGED AFTER MY INTERACTIONS ! ! !
That’s pretty much it.
If customer service doesn’t have the power to do anything but providing information I should know anyways, if they don’t even know the information I know, if they are AUTOMATED, if customer service is performed by minimum wage temps until they find something better, etc. customer service is a tragi-comedy, nothing more.
The rest is details but these details may provide insight into how the company differentiates itself: should this be done by product developers, marketing folks, strategy guys, god forbid by the CEO once in a while, what kind of organization structure may support such efforts, etc.
9.99
Recently I saw a b2b company pricing their services like supermarkets price their products.
Would I be more prone to paying $19,999 for marketing services than $20,000? No; I guess I’d think that these people are either joking or insulting me.
I think it’s always insulting when people want to play a well known trick on us. Are they serious? Do they assume that I don’t know the trick or perhaps I happily go roleplay with them? 9.99 is comparable to a used car sales man starting the spiel by: “let me ask you this question, first name”, or the stock broker barking “this company is hot, first name, and right now the price is rock bottom, ya gotta buy now” to a complete stranger on the other end of the continent right after he answered the phone.
On second thought: if this practice is ridiculous in b2b why is it acceptable in retail?
“Fair is not a good deal”
At least it often isn’t perceived to be.
Maximizing benefits is a mindset that often perceives fair to be a threat.
This mindset always thinks short term, it is mechanical and it thinks in opposites: it operates on an either or basis. Either with me or against me. If I don’t get everything, I get nothing. I am happy or I am pissed.
The will and the ability to create fair typically comes from a mindset that thinks in analogies or unity.
Ironically the “gray area” was invented by binary minds (feeling lost), while black and white clarity is characteristic to an intelligence that’s able to differentiate: between truths and half truths, shades of gray, etc.
The periphery – Grenzgebiet
Interesting things happen on the periphery, right at the border where things enter and where things leave. The energy level is always the highest there. Exponentially higher than in the “mainstream”. Analogies:
Physics:
- the stretched rubber exerts the highest resistance right before it breaks. The system is hostile to those who are leaving it. The pullback is always violent. The mainstream is suspicious towards those who leave it.
- physical laws seem to be changing drastically near the absolute 0 temperature (inconsistent strength in gravitation, etc.). Those who “operate” on the periphery defy mainstream laws; differently put: you must leave mainstream laws behind if you’re pushing the limits.
Wine:
- Red wine gains an extra dimension at border territories. An example is the Burgundy- Eger altitude, north of which there is already beer (and some white wine) territory. There is an interesting creative tension at the border.
The distance is big between the mainstream and the periphery. To experience this, you must go there!
The concept and the practice
I have witnessed several discussions about the question: which one is more important: theory or practice? strategy or operations? or strategy or management; all this follow a similar flawed (binary) way of thinking.
A good theory is always practical, a good practice is always based on the right context. If this is not the case, the theory is just an abstraction, and the practice is self-serving, often rather stupid.
The diligent type
Lots of collectors nowadays. I think we are brought up to be collectors.
Kids are collecting good grades, in sports they are collecting scores, and people build careers by collecting titles. There are of course those who are collecting goals and they happily check them out as they achieve them. Then they are collecting rewards and trophies.
Collectors are diligent, reliable, busy and mediocre, since in the middle of the number game persistent mediocrity becomes a valued style element.
Not everybody is happy being busy collecting. Some people feel out of place in a collectors’ environment.
They are capable of perceiving value. They organize their time according to priorities of value. They find time for what’s important and they take the effort to perform their activities the way it is appropriate, with class and style.
It’s difficult for the two types to live amicably side by side.
Harmony comes only from hierarchical ordination whereby quantity is subordinated to quality….otherwise war conditions prevail and horizontally the numbers tend to win.
Buy the ticket
When I clearly state what I want in the right context it’s straight forward communication.
When I don’t say what I want and I am just selling myself AND I am out of context it’s projecting.
This happens often when people are looking for a job or when they are in a sales position.
Projecting is bad for you! It leaves a very limited impression. When you make statements about your value system, your top 3 strengths, etc. in a simple networking conversation, without being asked, it is limiting; what you are saying is that you’re good. Like everybody else.
If you bring a topic to unexpected heights you show that you’re good. If you do this neutrally, meaning that your ego is not involved, it shows that you’re great; this is your ticket for setting the context for other topics that maybe of personal interest to you.
The safe choice
Once the guy becomes aware that it’s a safe choice, it is of course no longer safe. It’s always safe relative to something and that something tends to be the right one and in comparison to the right one, the safe choice presents the wrong compromise; from a higher point of view the wrong compromise is never safe!
There is of course the question of the stupid choice; but the opposite of the stupid choice is not the safe one, but also: the right one.
The safe choice is of course always “smart”, it always makes a lot of sense, it’s easy to find support for it.
From a higher point of view the safe choice is always unintelligent.
Choosing safe, when being aware of what’s right means lack of integrity.
So if the guy becomes aware, he must choose right, not matter what.
Change
Essentially there are only two types of changes, representing two opposing ends of a large spectrum:
Inert change, the direction of which is downwards and controlled change, the direction of which is upwards.
Ironically, as they fall, organizations rationalize their lack of control with what they call change management.
There is no compromise, consensus or management in architecting and leading upward change.
“Tools” for architecting change are
- The concept, which serves as a platform of integration for strategy and leadership must be articulated. Such concept must be based on principles (not in the conventional sense).
- Strategy and organizational design
- Essential (vertical) leadership
Upward change essentially goes against the current (fights convictions), since the environment is falling. The challenges are tremendous and in this context terms like courage, integrity and loyalty regain their original, undistorted meaning.
Upward change is transformative especially when initiated in modern business organizations.
Upward change accomplishes what people experiencing inert change are only dreaming about: synthetic integration between actors of the given system and those of the environment (be it customers, stakeholders, whatever).