According to José Miguel Guzman, I may be the 3 billionth person to have been born into the human race. Jose Miguel heads up the UN organisation that looks at the impact of population and development. The 7 billionth has recently been chosen "symbolically". Congratulations, Danica!
UNFPA have published a great tool that is as informative as it is entertaining. You can try it for yourself at www.7billionandme.org. It's brilliant and I am sure it will provoke you to think.
Lots of the statistics made me gasp. Take this as an example. I am already older than nearly three quarters of the world's population and by the time we reach 9 billion, I will be over 80. Unless we can master Asimov's Bi-Centennial Man science, I am unlikely to see the 10 billion. That's fine.
People are getting older and living longer in the developed world. Take the UK as my example but its trends mirror those of other developed societies. In a little more than my lifetime, the population of UK residents over 65 has increased by 80%. By 2050, the number of older persons worldwide in developed societies is expected to rise by some 10% over 2011 numbers, with some Western countries having close to a third of their population in this category.
If you couple this with the increasing number of people being diagnosed with some form of age-related dementia, then you have a growing problem in need of an international approach. I have written before about solving problems at scale and the role that we will have to allow intelligent machines to play.
You will know too I am optimistic about how robotics will help make a positive difference, providing we work together to address the myriad of obstacles seemingly placed in the way. Some things are worth striving for and, in this case, the prize is a worthy one.
And then where are we all going to live? Increased urbanisation will have over 70% of the population living in cities in the next 30 years - most in the developing world.
Few
doubt that this century will present the Earth with its greatest ever ecological
and social challenge. With our global population edging ever closer towards that frightening 10 billion, resources are finite. Conventional wisdom (to the extent any of this is conventional) is suggesting the Earth will be full, once we reach between 9 and 10 billion inhabitants. This is (happily) the point when we might also reach what I call the "one in - one out" point, where for every one born, one dies.
The problem becomes matching the location of the birth and the death!
Science and technology will no doubt provide part of the rescue service, but science is finite and it is also highly likely that we will need markedly to change many of our (western) views. Our model of immodest consumption has to change. Seems that, even with a world population of less than our current 7 billion, if everyone lived like a "European" we would need 3 Earths to sustain us. Live like a North American and that number rises to 5!
We will need new, if to some unpalatable, sources of food. According to the UN, there are over 1900 edible insects to choose from and David Gordon is ahead of the game with his cookbook on how best to prepare them!
And one to finish on: every time you use Google for a look up, you use the same amount of energy as when boiling a kettle. This is "hotly" contested by Google, but nothing is for free!
I wonder how much energy this blog uses?
Monday, 15 July 2013
Tuesday, 4 June 2013
rEDUCTIO ad aBSURDUM
I keep coming back to the importance of the balance of judgement, learning and experience in making the right decisions. It's becoming so interesting that I am considering a more formal approach, even maybe some classes! Now, back to school, that would be a real change for me.
I was entertained by a radio interview with Daniel Dennett, a populist philosopher and author. He was talking about his book - Intuition Pumps and Other Tools for Thinking - and made a chance remark that made me smile, then made me think. Aren't those the best ones? I bought the book and my head is perhaps a little bigger but hurting nonetheless.
Dennett was explaining one of his ideas and compared learning to downloading an application to the "neck top". His way of getting a message across. Beautiful.
What a wonderful idea! Imagine being able to learn in the same way as we access smartphone software. Gone all those days of cramming and revising. Learning rhymes to tackle lists of scientific formulae or kings and queens, all consigned to a bygone age. Wouldn't that be fantastic? Or would it?
Then some days ago, I watched a segment on the BBC at breakfast time, examining changing attitudes to spelling and how it seemed to be becoming much less important, because spell checkers re-skewed the lazy. There is a great soundbite about the reliance on spelling auto-correction being akin to following a sat-nav blindly and ending up in a canal or, perhaps in Croatia, like this unfortunate Belgian driver! Add predictive text and the consequences could be worse still.
It would be ironic to let ourselves consider that technology and the internet enslave us rather than set us free and that the great web pioneers are more short-sellers like Kane rather than Abel-ers playing the longer-term game.
Then to contrast today, an admiring article about the daughter of another BBC correspondent in Paris, talking about learning philosophy as part of the French 'bac literaire. The defence of ideas and the discipline of thinking can build great ideas and great ideas can make greater things happen.
It seems that learning HOW to think and not WHAT to think is the fundamental mission of teaching.
As we accelerate towards some sort of singularity of people and technology, we would probably do well to be wary of some of the sat-navs we encounter.
In fact, I consider sat-navs to be inherently dangerous. They should be banned.
Imagine what would happen if NASA used this technology to conquer space. A sat-nav directed mission to Mars would be fraught with unpredictable dangers, especially as the minimum and maximum distances to the Red Planet vary by close to 350 million km. This is because of the way both planets orbit the Sun. The smallest miscalculation could bring social disaster.
Think, astronauts might arrive so unexpectedly early that the Martians hadn't had time to do the shopping or so late that the welcoming dinner might have been spoiled and they'd gone to bed, all unhappy.
Now that's just absurd.
I was entertained by a radio interview with Daniel Dennett, a populist philosopher and author. He was talking about his book - Intuition Pumps and Other Tools for Thinking - and made a chance remark that made me smile, then made me think. Aren't those the best ones? I bought the book and my head is perhaps a little bigger but hurting nonetheless.
Dennett was explaining one of his ideas and compared learning to downloading an application to the "neck top". His way of getting a message across. Beautiful.
What a wonderful idea! Imagine being able to learn in the same way as we access smartphone software. Gone all those days of cramming and revising. Learning rhymes to tackle lists of scientific formulae or kings and queens, all consigned to a bygone age. Wouldn't that be fantastic? Or would it?
Then some days ago, I watched a segment on the BBC at breakfast time, examining changing attitudes to spelling and how it seemed to be becoming much less important, because spell checkers re-skewed the lazy. There is a great soundbite about the reliance on spelling auto-correction being akin to following a sat-nav blindly and ending up in a canal or, perhaps in Croatia, like this unfortunate Belgian driver! Add predictive text and the consequences could be worse still.
It would be ironic to let ourselves consider that technology and the internet enslave us rather than set us free and that the great web pioneers are more short-sellers like Kane rather than Abel-ers playing the longer-term game.
Then to contrast today, an admiring article about the daughter of another BBC correspondent in Paris, talking about learning philosophy as part of the French 'bac literaire. The defence of ideas and the discipline of thinking can build great ideas and great ideas can make greater things happen.
It seems that learning HOW to think and not WHAT to think is the fundamental mission of teaching.
As we accelerate towards some sort of singularity of people and technology, we would probably do well to be wary of some of the sat-navs we encounter.
In fact, I consider sat-navs to be inherently dangerous. They should be banned.
Imagine what would happen if NASA used this technology to conquer space. A sat-nav directed mission to Mars would be fraught with unpredictable dangers, especially as the minimum and maximum distances to the Red Planet vary by close to 350 million km. This is because of the way both planets orbit the Sun. The smallest miscalculation could bring social disaster.
Think, astronauts might arrive so unexpectedly early that the Martians hadn't had time to do the shopping or so late that the welcoming dinner might have been spoiled and they'd gone to bed, all unhappy.
Now that's just absurd.
Thursday, 16 May 2013
Hakuna Matata - Tantric Interview Techniques
A few weeks ago, I read something about the fact that too much experience gets in the way of successful innovation. It was on the HBR Blog Network, written by the CEO of a "managed innovation company" (my words) and flagged by the owner of a boutique firm advising on strategy. I guess they both have some interest in this proposition being true.
Strange to think that they are both offering their wealth of experience to avoid you being weighed down by your own! All experience is equal but some experience is clearly more equal. That's what self-help is all about, after all. And it's a hundred and fifty years old. Snake-oil anyone?
The HBR article talks about the curse of knowledge and the situation where some variant of pattern recognition causes us to make assumptions that are simply wrong. Sound familiar? The technical term is cognitive bias. All organisations and people have cognitive bias and there are many ways around to try to assist us in thinking out of the box, but in a structured way. Why is so much of management speak "oxy-moronic"?
You may well ask why I am coming back to this idea. It's part of my own self-help regime and I wanted to share it. I am at a stage in my career where I might easily fall victim to excessive cognitive bias - ECB - (being a know-it-all or inadvertently positioning as a know-it-all). So, this post offers some gratuitous (see definition 2) advice on how to avoid the pitfall.
I had a conversation today about a CEO position. Just an early exploration. Just a friendly exchange. Would it be interesting? Small company, so would I be able to "re-size"? Could there be a cultural fit? Is the industry interesting for me? Is relocation an issue? You can guess the format. It was not a cold call. We had set up a time.
Thankfully, the call turned out fine - we will explore further and the role is very interesting - but looking back, I feel my interviewer had to make unnecessary allowances. In short, I was trying to close a sale and the potential customer was just browsing the aisles. This customer was even kind enough to make their intentions clear from the outset. I didn't listen carefully enough. I did not pick up the signs well enough.
It's always a temptation to want to take control in these situations, seeming to know intuitively what needs to be said, in what tone and at what point. Our ECB sends twice as many signals to our mouth than it does to our ears. And that is precisely the wrong ratio. Evolution/God (delete as appropriate) gave us one mouth and two ears, maybe to be deployed with that same balance!
I am sharing this now because it was not intuitive. If it's not intuitive for you either, learn from my error.
I felt very wise when posting my views on dealing with recruiters in February, somehow pushing the idea that you always have to take the initiative and create the momentum. The reality turns out to be that this is perhaps not always appropriate, or even necessary.
As in all things tantric, getting to the end takes time. Be calm. No worries. Let it build.
Strange to think that they are both offering their wealth of experience to avoid you being weighed down by your own! All experience is equal but some experience is clearly more equal. That's what self-help is all about, after all. And it's a hundred and fifty years old. Snake-oil anyone?
The HBR article talks about the curse of knowledge and the situation where some variant of pattern recognition causes us to make assumptions that are simply wrong. Sound familiar? The technical term is cognitive bias. All organisations and people have cognitive bias and there are many ways around to try to assist us in thinking out of the box, but in a structured way. Why is so much of management speak "oxy-moronic"?
You may well ask why I am coming back to this idea. It's part of my own self-help regime and I wanted to share it. I am at a stage in my career where I might easily fall victim to excessive cognitive bias - ECB - (being a know-it-all or inadvertently positioning as a know-it-all). So, this post offers some gratuitous (see definition 2) advice on how to avoid the pitfall.
I had a conversation today about a CEO position. Just an early exploration. Just a friendly exchange. Would it be interesting? Small company, so would I be able to "re-size"? Could there be a cultural fit? Is the industry interesting for me? Is relocation an issue? You can guess the format. It was not a cold call. We had set up a time.
Thankfully, the call turned out fine - we will explore further and the role is very interesting - but looking back, I feel my interviewer had to make unnecessary allowances. In short, I was trying to close a sale and the potential customer was just browsing the aisles. This customer was even kind enough to make their intentions clear from the outset. I didn't listen carefully enough. I did not pick up the signs well enough.
It's always a temptation to want to take control in these situations, seeming to know intuitively what needs to be said, in what tone and at what point. Our ECB sends twice as many signals to our mouth than it does to our ears. And that is precisely the wrong ratio. Evolution/God (delete as appropriate) gave us one mouth and two ears, maybe to be deployed with that same balance!
I am sharing this now because it was not intuitive. If it's not intuitive for you either, learn from my error.
I felt very wise when posting my views on dealing with recruiters in February, somehow pushing the idea that you always have to take the initiative and create the momentum. The reality turns out to be that this is perhaps not always appropriate, or even necessary.
As in all things tantric, getting to the end takes time. Be calm. No worries. Let it build.
Tuesday, 14 May 2013
It's not fair - nar, nar, de nar, nar!
Larry Page once opened the door for me as I went to have lunch in Google's canteen. I think I said Thank You but otherwise we didn't speak. I was visiting to discuss co-operation.
And this week, another Google personality has got me thinking. Not about what to have for my free lunch but about progress. That other "googler" (a normal employee being a "googlee") is Eric Schmidt being interviewed by McKinsey. I like the interview, especially as I don't think he mentions Big Data once!
About a year ago, a close friend brought some of his grandchildren to stay. We had a great time but one rather precocious youngster had an annoying habit of shouting "It's not fair", if she didn't get her own way. She shouted a lot, until my wife told her that life isn't fair and she had better get used to it. She shouted a little less after that.
So how do you build a bridge between such a brat and my friend's grandchild?
Well - you ask MIT, of course.
Erik Brynjolfsson (MIT Prof) co-authored a book (short title Race Against the Machine, followed by a longer, worthier codicil) about how technology is marginalising mankind. This gloomy assessment is mine but, in less than 100 pages, the book paints a pretty bleak picture - offering only truisms as hope. Schmidt uses less threatening language and talks about Man not "against" but "with" the Machine, with computers becoming quasi-friends.
I tend towards Schmidt and I am sure that will make him sleep better at night. In getting to understand robotics better, I looked at the implications of Technology Singularity Theory - easy version stating that humankind gets overtaken by machines by around 2050. I coined My Best Friend's a Robot to describe my positive view on how this would impact the future.
Erik and Eric both make another valuable point - that progress does not by definition reward everyone. Indeed, progress will tend to reward fewer and fewer people with more and more. As Orwell said "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".
So that young lady was right after all - it is indeed not fair.
But that is how it has to be. We need to recognise and over-reward innovation and step-function change. That creates egos and, occasionally, monsters. Against these latter beasts, we need to protect ourselves.
Over the weekend, I saw a brilliant old movie. It's called The Man in the White Suit - excuse for some sound effects - and tells the story of a chemist who invents a fabric that never gets dirty and never wears out. The really interesting thing is how big business and ordinary workers unite to destroy the invention. The film shows how hard it is sometimes to know who are the good guys and who are the bad guys.
Alongside such shifts, we need more than ever to work on societal solutions that recognise that growing the economic pie is unlikely to benefit us all and will likely rather create bigger divisions between richer and poorer - dixit OECD Report. That is indeed the biggest challenge that technology will bring in the next 20-30 years.
The problem is that we are not always good at solving problems this big - tending to quick-fixes and band-aids. Maybe we just need to wait a while and ask a computer for the answer? Or a Big Brother? Or maybe a poet?
FWIW
Nar is a Dutch word for a fool - something of an English court jester. The jester was a critical position at court. The Nar was the only person able to make fun of the King, and live to tell the tale. Through the Nar's buffoonery, the King could gently be educated - sometimes to be told he was not wearing kingly clothes before others found out!
And this week, another Google personality has got me thinking. Not about what to have for my free lunch but about progress. That other "googler" (a normal employee being a "googlee") is Eric Schmidt being interviewed by McKinsey. I like the interview, especially as I don't think he mentions Big Data once!
About a year ago, a close friend brought some of his grandchildren to stay. We had a great time but one rather precocious youngster had an annoying habit of shouting "It's not fair", if she didn't get her own way. She shouted a lot, until my wife told her that life isn't fair and she had better get used to it. She shouted a little less after that.
So how do you build a bridge between such a brat and my friend's grandchild?
Well - you ask MIT, of course.
Erik Brynjolfsson (MIT Prof) co-authored a book (short title Race Against the Machine, followed by a longer, worthier codicil) about how technology is marginalising mankind. This gloomy assessment is mine but, in less than 100 pages, the book paints a pretty bleak picture - offering only truisms as hope. Schmidt uses less threatening language and talks about Man not "against" but "with" the Machine, with computers becoming quasi-friends.
I tend towards Schmidt and I am sure that will make him sleep better at night. In getting to understand robotics better, I looked at the implications of Technology Singularity Theory - easy version stating that humankind gets overtaken by machines by around 2050. I coined My Best Friend's a Robot to describe my positive view on how this would impact the future.
Erik and Eric both make another valuable point - that progress does not by definition reward everyone. Indeed, progress will tend to reward fewer and fewer people with more and more. As Orwell said "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".
So that young lady was right after all - it is indeed not fair.
But that is how it has to be. We need to recognise and over-reward innovation and step-function change. That creates egos and, occasionally, monsters. Against these latter beasts, we need to protect ourselves.
Over the weekend, I saw a brilliant old movie. It's called The Man in the White Suit - excuse for some sound effects - and tells the story of a chemist who invents a fabric that never gets dirty and never wears out. The really interesting thing is how big business and ordinary workers unite to destroy the invention. The film shows how hard it is sometimes to know who are the good guys and who are the bad guys.
Alongside such shifts, we need more than ever to work on societal solutions that recognise that growing the economic pie is unlikely to benefit us all and will likely rather create bigger divisions between richer and poorer - dixit OECD Report. That is indeed the biggest challenge that technology will bring in the next 20-30 years.
The problem is that we are not always good at solving problems this big - tending to quick-fixes and band-aids. Maybe we just need to wait a while and ask a computer for the answer? Or a Big Brother? Or maybe a poet?
FWIW
Nar is a Dutch word for a fool - something of an English court jester. The jester was a critical position at court. The Nar was the only person able to make fun of the King, and live to tell the tale. Through the Nar's buffoonery, the King could gently be educated - sometimes to be told he was not wearing kingly clothes before others found out!
Friday, 26 April 2013
Edgy Enough? Striking the Right Interview Balance
I came runner-up in a race last week. The race was to find a new role. No medals for a second place though and so I need to get back in training. This post reflects my thoughts on the role and the feedback I got. But really it's more about what it teaches me about authenticity.
First a bit of context. The role was to run marketing for a PE-backed spin-out. It's an already at-scale organisation that needs to establish a distinct identity in a crowded market. The culture is "big company" and there is need for new, transformational leadership. A case of no lack of competence (low current recognition but there is clearly an ambitious roadmap) but with a need to increase confidence, with clients and partners but importantly within the organisation too. Leaving home for the first time is a big deal, after all.
Most of the above could have been understood even before I arrived. I did my research into the company, its backers, the market and all its players. I trawled everything from social media to industry analysts' reports. I did my homework. I liked what I found. I was sure I could be a great head of marketing for them. I even interviewed the company driver on the way from the airport. I was ready.
What is more difficult is knowing what matters most in making the decision to hire. There is what the company asks for and then, there is what it needs and feels. They are not always the same. There is what is explicit but, in this case, there was a set of implicits. This is where someone else did better than the "polished" me that arrived that day.
They said I met the competence brief. I hit all the right buttons, with good empathy on what the likely challenges would be. I knew the market, the technology and enough of the customers. I seemed to have good energy and a sense of humour. But the winning candidate was "more edgy" and that got the role. That was the implicit factor that mattered.
I looked up "edgy". It means tense, nervous and irritable! What? But, when applied to music, it means daring, dangerous and exciting. The winner was just more exciting.
I posted something at the start of the year about what I called R.A.P.P.O.R.T - how to sell yourself in headhunter /interview situations. I still think it mostly holds true and, looking back to how the discussions went, I do think I used it pretty well. But it didn't work.
In hindsight, I went from the "R" to the "T" of rapport, but was not "aRTy" enough to succeed. My music was too smooth - too lounge and not enough garage. Maybe coming across a little too rehearsed. Singing the song but not connecting with the words.
Preparation is critical. Technique means a great deal. But there is a big learning I have taken from this encounter - the importance of authenticity. I was authentic. I did care about the potential role and I do still think I will be the best head of marketing this company never had.
They believed in someone else more than in me. A good lesson indeed.
First a bit of context. The role was to run marketing for a PE-backed spin-out. It's an already at-scale organisation that needs to establish a distinct identity in a crowded market. The culture is "big company" and there is need for new, transformational leadership. A case of no lack of competence (low current recognition but there is clearly an ambitious roadmap) but with a need to increase confidence, with clients and partners but importantly within the organisation too. Leaving home for the first time is a big deal, after all.
Most of the above could have been understood even before I arrived. I did my research into the company, its backers, the market and all its players. I trawled everything from social media to industry analysts' reports. I did my homework. I liked what I found. I was sure I could be a great head of marketing for them. I even interviewed the company driver on the way from the airport. I was ready.
What is more difficult is knowing what matters most in making the decision to hire. There is what the company asks for and then, there is what it needs and feels. They are not always the same. There is what is explicit but, in this case, there was a set of implicits. This is where someone else did better than the "polished" me that arrived that day.
They said I met the competence brief. I hit all the right buttons, with good empathy on what the likely challenges would be. I knew the market, the technology and enough of the customers. I seemed to have good energy and a sense of humour. But the winning candidate was "more edgy" and that got the role. That was the implicit factor that mattered.
I looked up "edgy". It means tense, nervous and irritable! What? But, when applied to music, it means daring, dangerous and exciting. The winner was just more exciting.
I posted something at the start of the year about what I called R.A.P.P.O.R.T - how to sell yourself in headhunter /interview situations. I still think it mostly holds true and, looking back to how the discussions went, I do think I used it pretty well. But it didn't work.
In hindsight, I went from the "R" to the "T" of rapport, but was not "aRTy" enough to succeed. My music was too smooth - too lounge and not enough garage. Maybe coming across a little too rehearsed. Singing the song but not connecting with the words.
Preparation is critical. Technique means a great deal. But there is a big learning I have taken from this encounter - the importance of authenticity. I was authentic. I did care about the potential role and I do still think I will be the best head of marketing this company never had.
They believed in someone else more than in me. A good lesson indeed.
Wednesday, 20 March 2013
In-Yer-Face (Interface) My Best Friend's a Robot
I have spent the last 3 days at the Innorobo event in Lyon on a mission to change the world, get rich and meet committed people. This is the place where the great and good of the robotics world, primarily from Europe (even if the Koreans won the cutest hair prize), come to show off, find inspiration and maybe a future.
There is a second event being held in Lyon in parallel. Called eu Robotics Forum, it's maybe a bit more in depth. The French Government is a sponsor, so I guess they are worthy. The organisers wanted 350 Euros to have me along, and that was enough to pay for my hotel. I am quite new to robotics - mad keen but learning my route - called SLAM for those who know. Maybe I will go next year?
I am on a start-up friendly, strict budget and staying at the Campanile close to the TGV and a short tram ride away from the conference centre. I mention the hotel only as it has an example of one of the main issues that robotics seems to face (no pun intended) today. It's about the in-yer-face interface - aka getting the best out of a product with the greatest utility and potential.
I woke early yesterday and went to shave, trying to fill the sink with an ecologically aware depth of hot water. Failure. There was an interface problem between the size of the plug and the size of the plug hole. The plug was too big (or the hole too small?).
I managed to shave in the shower with only minor cuts.
Robotics is fast becoming an area of special importance. The French government announced a package of initiatives this week to drive investment and innovation. France also boasts to be the home of Aldebaran and their famous Shanghai dancing Nao robot: but even this company is small with under 300 employees worldwide. Nice to see their CEO today out of that dark suit and playing ball with his robot (expect cute pictures soon on the site?).
The market is growing fast - supposedly a US$ 40Bn market in service robotics by 2015 (dixit GIA via eu Robotics Co-ordination Action and FP7 money). That gives room for a dozen or more players at real scale and a couple of giants! Professional service robotics is growing at some 85% a year. That's gotta be attractive! Most of these types of robots end up with the military (a post of its own, given the debate on human-out-the-loop robotics nicely captured here) or in milking parlours.
Well, we will always drink milk and, sadly, probably keep fighting. So, it's a dairy farmer or a soldier. The availability of good, empirical data is critical to making good career decisions!
The personal robotics scene looks less attractive compared to that of its professional cousins - even if every exhibitor seems to have developed a use case that fits. Sort of Corporate Social Responsibility baked into every start-up. Clearly, the current economic straits are an issue with less disposable income afforded to edutainment robots and the like. The growth here is much more modest and the associated market sizes hardly move the dial.
And as for robots that make life easier, outside of having your lawn manicured or your 4 year-old prepared for their GMAT, don't go there.
So where's the issue? What's getting in the way? So far I can see 3 big hurdles. None seems impossible to clear. The first is a negative public perception of robots; the second a set of issues around safety and product liability and the third seems to be the lack of a workable industry structure and business model.
As yet, I claim no grand insight but, through the eyes of children, emperors sometimes lose their clothes.
Robots scare us. We don't really want them in some key parts of our lives. The European Union did a large study on the public's attitudes to robotics across the 27 Member States, surveying those over 15. This work is current, published in the last 6 months. Overall there is a generally positive view on robots - with a more than 50% approval rating and the Nordics just love them with a whopping 88% positive view - cuddling a robot on those long winter nights perhaps?
But close to two thirds of Europeans see no role for robots in mainstream education, care of the elderly or healthcare. They have a view robots can be dangerous and unpredictable, best restricted to roles where humans might see themselves potentially endangered (rescue etc) or where dull repetition is needed. This may need to change over the very near term. We are going to have over a billion people aged over 60 around in the coming years. We will need new ways to care for them, as they age further.
Are robots to be seen as slaves? For now maybe but perhaps we will need emancipation sooner and not later.
And let's also hope those slavery folks don't get too familiar with (Technology) Singularity Theory from Vinge, Van Neumann and with the more recent musings of Kurzweil and Storrs-Hall. Basically, we meet the machine cleverer than we are around 2045. If that's true, someone needs to stop Fiona getting out of her cyber-bed or at least brush up on their Spanish!
Adoption needs Acceptance and that needs Education. As one expert may have once remarked, you may be afraid of robots being allowed to help you, but think of that every time you ride in a lift!
Now what about product liability and perceived danger? Progress takes bravery. Around 150 years ago, the UK passed the Locomotive Act, restricting horseless carriages (cars) to a speed of 4mph and demanding they be piloted by a crew of 3, with one of them carrying a red flag in front of the vehicle. At Innorobo, I have seen several robots still following this legislation!
And there was a bill in Pensylvannia, thankfully vetoed in 1896, that required any car encountering a person or livestock to be stopped, dismantled and hidden behind a bush. No bushes at Innorobo!
Clearly, personal assistance robots need stringent safety regulation. This is so important. It cannot be left to individual companies and cannot be afforded by them either. Is there no European-level idea on assisted testing? New industries need support, and surely this is one area where we could make the investment at the European level. There is aligned work in ISO standardisation on this topic. I came across this upbeat assessment from Dr Chris Harper but still need to understand where we now are. Such work is worthy to be supported and accelerated. It seems too important to fail and the effort to get it right is clearly worthwhile.
Talking to exhibitors, it is the business model that perplexes me most. I attended the panel on Investments in Robotics. I heard a lot of truisms and worried at the sound of people scribbling and feverishly noting down these apparent pearls of wisdom and religious truths. I felt we'd been here before.
I heard Dmitry Grishin of Grishin Robotics explain three ways to make money in robotics - sell them, rent them or give them away and make money on the services. He made a lot of valid points - especially about affordability and beauty - but his philosophy seemed reminiscent of the mobile phone industry of the Noughties.
Robotics looks too like an industry that wants to maintain a vertically-integrated business model. My strong sense is that to grow that this industry has to find a way to split the robot body from the rest of the application/use case and to do that quickly. Clearly, open source software helps massively, but I had a bit the feeling that open source support was a rite of passage to the robotics community and not yet a real lever for success. This could just be about maturity and the academic focus of many concerns here. Perhaps, we need to be patient. They will come and build it!
I read a great book lately that sought to explain the dramatic shifts brought about by what could be called the democratisation of technology - albeit it's rather a first world view. The book is called L'Age de la Multitude by Nicolas Colin and Henri Verdier. It is strongly written, drawing on top class and recent research to make its points.
Bottom line, the authors argue persuasively that technology is cheap; this fuels an innovation and change ACCELERATION; and most importantly this innovation is external - no entity can hope to manage all the ingredients of success anymore. Innovation to be successful is becoming Open Innovation. This is where the literal and actual multitude takes centre stage.
The world is learning to code. It's seemingly the new Latin and the major Internet players are right behind it. And those building the internet are supporting too. We have a capability revolution coming fast.
To make the most of these new capabilities, robotics companies need to build clean technical architectures that focus on abstraction and virtualisation and then couple that with resilient tool kits that promote the mass adoption of robots. This is how almost all successful software companies work. A long time ago in technology speak, the rules that split platforms, applications and integration were written. Through the many changes we experience every day, these rules have stayed in place.
Do not try or expect to do everything anymore. The product architecture should support the desired business model. Keeping control of all the levers is as impossible, as it is eventually undesirable.
In this way, we may overcome many of the issues associated with fear of the robotic unknown. We will garner the capability of professionals to develop more and more relevant vertical applications and create a virtuous flywheel effect. It's amazing but it seems over 80% of Wikipedia's content is generated free and anonymously. It's mostly, but not all, about the money.
There are angels out there. Finding them? Well that's going to need a lot more than just an ordinary App Store business model.
I did succumb and bought a small personal robot. There are many other robots available but this matches my desk. Delivery is only at the end of April, so I'll need to wait a few weeks to begin my new robotic future!
I took a decision not to paste pictures of all those cute creations. We need to make robotics a serious topic.There is a second event being held in Lyon in parallel. Called eu Robotics Forum, it's maybe a bit more in depth. The French Government is a sponsor, so I guess they are worthy. The organisers wanted 350 Euros to have me along, and that was enough to pay for my hotel. I am quite new to robotics - mad keen but learning my route - called SLAM for those who know. Maybe I will go next year?
I am on a start-up friendly, strict budget and staying at the Campanile close to the TGV and a short tram ride away from the conference centre. I mention the hotel only as it has an example of one of the main issues that robotics seems to face (no pun intended) today. It's about the in-yer-face interface - aka getting the best out of a product with the greatest utility and potential.
I woke early yesterday and went to shave, trying to fill the sink with an ecologically aware depth of hot water. Failure. There was an interface problem between the size of the plug and the size of the plug hole. The plug was too big (or the hole too small?).
I managed to shave in the shower with only minor cuts.
Robotics is fast becoming an area of special importance. The French government announced a package of initiatives this week to drive investment and innovation. France also boasts to be the home of Aldebaran and their famous Shanghai dancing Nao robot: but even this company is small with under 300 employees worldwide. Nice to see their CEO today out of that dark suit and playing ball with his robot (expect cute pictures soon on the site?).
The market is growing fast - supposedly a US$ 40Bn market in service robotics by 2015 (dixit GIA via eu Robotics Co-ordination Action and FP7 money). That gives room for a dozen or more players at real scale and a couple of giants! Professional service robotics is growing at some 85% a year. That's gotta be attractive! Most of these types of robots end up with the military (a post of its own, given the debate on human-out-the-loop robotics nicely captured here) or in milking parlours.
Well, we will always drink milk and, sadly, probably keep fighting. So, it's a dairy farmer or a soldier. The availability of good, empirical data is critical to making good career decisions!
The personal robotics scene looks less attractive compared to that of its professional cousins - even if every exhibitor seems to have developed a use case that fits. Sort of Corporate Social Responsibility baked into every start-up. Clearly, the current economic straits are an issue with less disposable income afforded to edutainment robots and the like. The growth here is much more modest and the associated market sizes hardly move the dial.
And as for robots that make life easier, outside of having your lawn manicured or your 4 year-old prepared for their GMAT, don't go there.
So where's the issue? What's getting in the way? So far I can see 3 big hurdles. None seems impossible to clear. The first is a negative public perception of robots; the second a set of issues around safety and product liability and the third seems to be the lack of a workable industry structure and business model.
As yet, I claim no grand insight but, through the eyes of children, emperors sometimes lose their clothes.
Robots scare us. We don't really want them in some key parts of our lives. The European Union did a large study on the public's attitudes to robotics across the 27 Member States, surveying those over 15. This work is current, published in the last 6 months. Overall there is a generally positive view on robots - with a more than 50% approval rating and the Nordics just love them with a whopping 88% positive view - cuddling a robot on those long winter nights perhaps?
But close to two thirds of Europeans see no role for robots in mainstream education, care of the elderly or healthcare. They have a view robots can be dangerous and unpredictable, best restricted to roles where humans might see themselves potentially endangered (rescue etc) or where dull repetition is needed. This may need to change over the very near term. We are going to have over a billion people aged over 60 around in the coming years. We will need new ways to care for them, as they age further.
Are robots to be seen as slaves? For now maybe but perhaps we will need emancipation sooner and not later.
And let's also hope those slavery folks don't get too familiar with (Technology) Singularity Theory from Vinge, Van Neumann and with the more recent musings of Kurzweil and Storrs-Hall. Basically, we meet the machine cleverer than we are around 2045. If that's true, someone needs to stop Fiona getting out of her cyber-bed or at least brush up on their Spanish!
Adoption needs Acceptance and that needs Education. As one expert may have once remarked, you may be afraid of robots being allowed to help you, but think of that every time you ride in a lift!
Now what about product liability and perceived danger? Progress takes bravery. Around 150 years ago, the UK passed the Locomotive Act, restricting horseless carriages (cars) to a speed of 4mph and demanding they be piloted by a crew of 3, with one of them carrying a red flag in front of the vehicle. At Innorobo, I have seen several robots still following this legislation!
And there was a bill in Pensylvannia, thankfully vetoed in 1896, that required any car encountering a person or livestock to be stopped, dismantled and hidden behind a bush. No bushes at Innorobo!
Clearly, personal assistance robots need stringent safety regulation. This is so important. It cannot be left to individual companies and cannot be afforded by them either. Is there no European-level idea on assisted testing? New industries need support, and surely this is one area where we could make the investment at the European level. There is aligned work in ISO standardisation on this topic. I came across this upbeat assessment from Dr Chris Harper but still need to understand where we now are. Such work is worthy to be supported and accelerated. It seems too important to fail and the effort to get it right is clearly worthwhile.
Talking to exhibitors, it is the business model that perplexes me most. I attended the panel on Investments in Robotics. I heard a lot of truisms and worried at the sound of people scribbling and feverishly noting down these apparent pearls of wisdom and religious truths. I felt we'd been here before.
I heard Dmitry Grishin of Grishin Robotics explain three ways to make money in robotics - sell them, rent them or give them away and make money on the services. He made a lot of valid points - especially about affordability and beauty - but his philosophy seemed reminiscent of the mobile phone industry of the Noughties.
Robotics looks too like an industry that wants to maintain a vertically-integrated business model. My strong sense is that to grow that this industry has to find a way to split the robot body from the rest of the application/use case and to do that quickly. Clearly, open source software helps massively, but I had a bit the feeling that open source support was a rite of passage to the robotics community and not yet a real lever for success. This could just be about maturity and the academic focus of many concerns here. Perhaps, we need to be patient. They will come and build it!
I read a great book lately that sought to explain the dramatic shifts brought about by what could be called the democratisation of technology - albeit it's rather a first world view. The book is called L'Age de la Multitude by Nicolas Colin and Henri Verdier. It is strongly written, drawing on top class and recent research to make its points.
Bottom line, the authors argue persuasively that technology is cheap; this fuels an innovation and change ACCELERATION; and most importantly this innovation is external - no entity can hope to manage all the ingredients of success anymore. Innovation to be successful is becoming Open Innovation. This is where the literal and actual multitude takes centre stage.
The world is learning to code. It's seemingly the new Latin and the major Internet players are right behind it. And those building the internet are supporting too. We have a capability revolution coming fast.
To make the most of these new capabilities, robotics companies need to build clean technical architectures that focus on abstraction and virtualisation and then couple that with resilient tool kits that promote the mass adoption of robots. This is how almost all successful software companies work. A long time ago in technology speak, the rules that split platforms, applications and integration were written. Through the many changes we experience every day, these rules have stayed in place.
Do not try or expect to do everything anymore. The product architecture should support the desired business model. Keeping control of all the levers is as impossible, as it is eventually undesirable.
In this way, we may overcome many of the issues associated with fear of the robotic unknown. We will garner the capability of professionals to develop more and more relevant vertical applications and create a virtuous flywheel effect. It's amazing but it seems over 80% of Wikipedia's content is generated free and anonymously. It's mostly, but not all, about the money.
There are angels out there. Finding them? Well that's going to need a lot more than just an ordinary App Store business model.
I did succumb and bought a small personal robot. There are many other robots available but this matches my desk. Delivery is only at the end of April, so I'll need to wait a few weeks to begin my new robotic future!
Thursday, 14 March 2013
Customer Service - A Tragedy in 1 Act
The weather has played havoc across Europe in the past days. Airports closed, people stranded, anxiety heightened and tempers frayed. Just the time for companies to stand up and deliver excellent customer service. We always remember those who remember us when we are in trouble. And conversely...
I wrote a short piece about customer service in an earlier blog and even created my own abbreviation, TCA - Truly Customer Aware. I see too - thanks Patrick - that Forbes are re-awakening to its importance.
Well this week I experienced a company with a lot still to learn about TCA. I will not name the company but I did want to capture my experience. So I wrote a short(ish) play that I propose to share with company xxxxx's Customer Relations team.
My Superviser says...
Noon - sunny - east of London - the M25 is suspiciously quiet - tired and driving back to Belgium - turn on radio - news update: Operation Stack coming into operation: A16 in France closed: long delays: police advise to postpone non-essential journeys.
Him: I'll just call the xxxxx to check what's happening and maybe change the ticket. We can stay with P and perhaps travel tomorrow once the weather improves. Strange though, it's so sunny.
Her: We really need to get home. Geert is waiting and we need to tell him how high to build that wall. But let's see what's happening. Call them. They'll know the latest and then we'll decide.
Him calls the not-free number. Ring, ring, ring, Hello you're through to xxxxx. Voice explains all the great offers and deals they can offer Him. No clue how long the wait will be. After 4 minutes....
Him: I suppose they are pretty busy. They must have a lot of people like us just asking what's the best thing to do. I'm sure they're prepared.
Phone is answered.
Him (in friendly, cheery voice): Hello. Perhaps you can help. I am booked on the 1420 this afternoon but have just heard on the radio there are travel problems and that even the motorway out of Calais is closed.
Voice #1: Can I have your booking reference please? (Him asks Her to find the piece of paper Him wrote it on and tells Voice #1). Well, Mr Mottram we are operating 1 service an hour and there are minor delays at the terminal. So you should be OK.
Him: Well, we heard there were real issues and that you were stacking lorries and that the A16 was closed. We're not sure we should travel today.
Voice #1: Well, sir, whether you travel or not is your own decision. We have 1 service running per hour, with minor delays.
Him: That's fine, but what do you know about the A16 problems? It seems strange the BBC are telling me not to travel but you seem unaware.
Voice #1: I'll just put you on hold while I check.
Time passes slowly.
Voice #1: Hello Mr Mottram. I have spoken to my superviser and we do think there were problems earlier with an accident on the quais at Calais but it's all fine now. France is fine.
Him: Are you sure because we are out of contact here in the car and only have the BBC to go on?
Voice #1: I'm sure, but as a special dispensation, we will change your ticket providing you do travel tomorrow.
Him to Her: What do you think?
Her: We do need to get home. Let's see how far we get and we'll call him back if we end up in a mess.
Him to Voice #1: Is that OK?
Voice #1 hangs up and car gets very stuck indeed in Operation Stack, now in Phase 2 (rather serious) whilst 2 BBC radio stations insist Kent is ice-bound, the A16 is closed and France is in hibernation.
Him calls back xxxxx again but talks to Voice #2 - after an even longer list of special offers and deals.
Him (in a less cheery voice but still friendly): Hello I am on the 1420 service and spoke to one of your colleagues around noon time about these weather conditions. Just wanted to check the situation, as we are stuck in the Operation Stack queue and may wish to change our ticket as your colleagues suggested.
Voice #2: Can I have your booking reference, please? (Him provides the reference). Thank you, Mr Mottram. We are operating 1 service an hour and you can expect to be delayed by about another 30 minutes at the terminal.
Him: Thanks for that but we are still hearing about issues on the Calais side on the BBC and I don't want to get caught in a jam there with nowhere to go.
Voice #2: I am afraid I cannot comment on that, sir. We can only advise on what's happening on this side of the Channel. Any decision to travel has to be up to you. I am afraid we cannot give you any help or advice on that.
Him (now not very cheerful): Sorry. Are you saying you have no advice at all? Can't you at least re-check the A16 position? Well, I guess we best rebook for tomorrow. We don't want to get marooned. Can we fix that please?
Voice #2: Sorry sir, but your ticket was on a special 5-day deal and it expires at midnight tonight. So you'll have to buy a new one, if you want to travel tomorrow.
Him (sounds of aarrghh in the background): No. We agreed with your colleague that we could change, if we could not reliably travel today and agreed to travel tomorrow.
Voice #2: I'll need to talk to my superviser. I have only just come on duty and this is a bit complicated. Can you give me your number and I will call you back in 10 minutes?
Voice #2 (with number given) hangs up and calls back 40 mimutes later.
Voice #2: Hello Mr Mottram, xxxxx here. Sorry about the delay but I was on another long call. I have spoken to my superviser and he says he is not willing to allow you to change your ticket and we cannot find any record of your telephone call with my colleague. Are you sure you called from this number?
Him (unhappy voice): Of course, I am stuck in my car. Where else could I have called from? I did make that call and you did offer to allow me to change the reservation, providing I travelled tomorrow. Can I talk to your superviser please?
Voice #2 puts him on hold and returns after 5 minutes.
Voice #2: Mr Mottram, there's no point in talking to my superviser. He's only going to tell you he won't help. I suggest you just buy another ticket for tomorrow and then maybe you can fix it with Customer Relations later.
Discussion between Him and Her. Decision to try to carry on.
Him to Voice #2: No. We'll just go for it but be sure this is pretty shabby service. You cannot just say it's all up to me and you have no advice. And then not do what you said you would. Is no-one given any discretion in xxxxx?
Voice #2: Sorry about all this but my superviser is adamant. What I can do is change your crossing to a later time. You know you are going to miss the one you're booked on, don't you?
Him looks out of car window at the traffic, going nowhere and agrees with him, loudly.
Him: Yes, we will carry on but don't change anything. We will just get to the terminal as fast as we can and see what happens.
Voice #2 hangs up. 40 minutes later, Him and Her arrive at the crossing and discover their reservation has been changed by Voice #2 to a later time. They watch as their new boarding letter is gradually relegated to later and later crossings. Exasperated, they put their letter in the glove box and join the next departure.
The A16 was closed to high-sided vehicles and it was very windy. I do wish the BBC would be a bit more accurate.......
I wrote a short piece about customer service in an earlier blog and even created my own abbreviation, TCA - Truly Customer Aware. I see too - thanks Patrick - that Forbes are re-awakening to its importance.
Well this week I experienced a company with a lot still to learn about TCA. I will not name the company but I did want to capture my experience. So I wrote a short(ish) play that I propose to share with company xxxxx's Customer Relations team.
My Superviser says...
Noon - sunny - east of London - the M25 is suspiciously quiet - tired and driving back to Belgium - turn on radio - news update: Operation Stack coming into operation: A16 in France closed: long delays: police advise to postpone non-essential journeys.
Him: I'll just call the xxxxx to check what's happening and maybe change the ticket. We can stay with P and perhaps travel tomorrow once the weather improves. Strange though, it's so sunny.
Her: We really need to get home. Geert is waiting and we need to tell him how high to build that wall. But let's see what's happening. Call them. They'll know the latest and then we'll decide.
Him calls the not-free number. Ring, ring, ring, Hello you're through to xxxxx. Voice explains all the great offers and deals they can offer Him. No clue how long the wait will be. After 4 minutes....
Him: I suppose they are pretty busy. They must have a lot of people like us just asking what's the best thing to do. I'm sure they're prepared.
Phone is answered.
Him (in friendly, cheery voice): Hello. Perhaps you can help. I am booked on the 1420 this afternoon but have just heard on the radio there are travel problems and that even the motorway out of Calais is closed.
Voice #1: Can I have your booking reference please? (Him asks Her to find the piece of paper Him wrote it on and tells Voice #1). Well, Mr Mottram we are operating 1 service an hour and there are minor delays at the terminal. So you should be OK.
Him: Well, we heard there were real issues and that you were stacking lorries and that the A16 was closed. We're not sure we should travel today.
Voice #1: Well, sir, whether you travel or not is your own decision. We have 1 service running per hour, with minor delays.
Him: That's fine, but what do you know about the A16 problems? It seems strange the BBC are telling me not to travel but you seem unaware.
Voice #1: I'll just put you on hold while I check.
Time passes slowly.
Voice #1: Hello Mr Mottram. I have spoken to my superviser and we do think there were problems earlier with an accident on the quais at Calais but it's all fine now. France is fine.
Him: Are you sure because we are out of contact here in the car and only have the BBC to go on?
Voice #1: I'm sure, but as a special dispensation, we will change your ticket providing you do travel tomorrow.
Him to Her: What do you think?
Her: We do need to get home. Let's see how far we get and we'll call him back if we end up in a mess.
Him to Voice #1: Is that OK?
Voice #1 hangs up and car gets very stuck indeed in Operation Stack, now in Phase 2 (rather serious) whilst 2 BBC radio stations insist Kent is ice-bound, the A16 is closed and France is in hibernation.
Him calls back xxxxx again but talks to Voice #2 - after an even longer list of special offers and deals.
Him (in a less cheery voice but still friendly): Hello I am on the 1420 service and spoke to one of your colleagues around noon time about these weather conditions. Just wanted to check the situation, as we are stuck in the Operation Stack queue and may wish to change our ticket as your colleagues suggested.
Voice #2: Can I have your booking reference, please? (Him provides the reference). Thank you, Mr Mottram. We are operating 1 service an hour and you can expect to be delayed by about another 30 minutes at the terminal.
Him: Thanks for that but we are still hearing about issues on the Calais side on the BBC and I don't want to get caught in a jam there with nowhere to go.
Voice #2: I am afraid I cannot comment on that, sir. We can only advise on what's happening on this side of the Channel. Any decision to travel has to be up to you. I am afraid we cannot give you any help or advice on that.
Him (now not very cheerful): Sorry. Are you saying you have no advice at all? Can't you at least re-check the A16 position? Well, I guess we best rebook for tomorrow. We don't want to get marooned. Can we fix that please?
Voice #2: Sorry sir, but your ticket was on a special 5-day deal and it expires at midnight tonight. So you'll have to buy a new one, if you want to travel tomorrow.
Him (sounds of aarrghh in the background): No. We agreed with your colleague that we could change, if we could not reliably travel today and agreed to travel tomorrow.
Voice #2: I'll need to talk to my superviser. I have only just come on duty and this is a bit complicated. Can you give me your number and I will call you back in 10 minutes?
Voice #2 (with number given) hangs up and calls back 40 mimutes later.
Voice #2: Hello Mr Mottram, xxxxx here. Sorry about the delay but I was on another long call. I have spoken to my superviser and he says he is not willing to allow you to change your ticket and we cannot find any record of your telephone call with my colleague. Are you sure you called from this number?
Him (unhappy voice): Of course, I am stuck in my car. Where else could I have called from? I did make that call and you did offer to allow me to change the reservation, providing I travelled tomorrow. Can I talk to your superviser please?
Voice #2 puts him on hold and returns after 5 minutes.
Voice #2: Mr Mottram, there's no point in talking to my superviser. He's only going to tell you he won't help. I suggest you just buy another ticket for tomorrow and then maybe you can fix it with Customer Relations later.
Discussion between Him and Her. Decision to try to carry on.
Him to Voice #2: No. We'll just go for it but be sure this is pretty shabby service. You cannot just say it's all up to me and you have no advice. And then not do what you said you would. Is no-one given any discretion in xxxxx?
Voice #2: Sorry about all this but my superviser is adamant. What I can do is change your crossing to a later time. You know you are going to miss the one you're booked on, don't you?
Him looks out of car window at the traffic, going nowhere and agrees with him, loudly.
Him: Yes, we will carry on but don't change anything. We will just get to the terminal as fast as we can and see what happens.
Voice #2 hangs up. 40 minutes later, Him and Her arrive at the crossing and discover their reservation has been changed by Voice #2 to a later time. They watch as their new boarding letter is gradually relegated to later and later crossings. Exasperated, they put their letter in the glove box and join the next departure.
The A16 was closed to high-sided vehicles and it was very windy. I do wish the BBC would be a bit more accurate.......
Tuesday, 5 March 2013
Life of Pi (with chips, peas and gravy)
Life is about boundaries and exploring them. From our youngest years when we dare to dare, right up to our dotage, when we recollect on what has been and sometimes what might have been.
From when we form our earliest notions of self and discover our ego, we are experimenting. We collect bumps, scrapes and bruises - both physical and psychological. We drive parents mad. In later life, we sometimes drive partners, colleagues and friends to distraction. But aren't we always just trying to find out more about our environment and our control over it? How far can we go?
Curiosity is an essential part of being human.
So often convention and present mores prevent us from realising our full potential. Some break the mould and make major contributions. Just look at James Dyson - yes he's the "vacuum cleaning - hand drying - no moving parts fan" wunderkind or maybe a Brit-Brat (tough at 65 years old). His company looks for what one might call "thinking personalities" and rewards what his organisation describes as wrong thinking.
Is waiting too long to reflect on where we are and where we might have come from really such a missed opportunity? Some believe it is.
The notion of doing a pre-mortem (literally "before death") review has been around a long while in project management - check this HBR 2007 offering. As an idea, it makes a whole lot of sense. Imagine failure and correct it before it happens. Reminds me a little of the plot of Minority Report. Bring on the precogs. But Minority Report was wrong.
It is in thinking about what makes a breakthrough happen that I am NOT at all convinced that too much pre-mortem analysis is the best route. Sometimes what FEELS right IS right.
I read in the last few days an interesting blog post from Ron Schaich of Panera Bread. He talks about the value of applying pre-mortem analysis to one's life or career. A well-argued piece. I am just left with the niggle in my mind that getting too analytical might prevent that great moment of serendipity. That moment of wrong thinking that might change a life or change an industry. I don't mean being so naif as to be stupid. Serendipity's definition also talks about being wise (sage) - but not always too wise. Too much sage can spoil a dish!
Last week, with my friends from the furniture store, I became Mr Grumpy. I would like to thank them all for being my Mr Tickle. For a slice of this life panacea in 7 minutes, try this episode.
I was grumpy because I had had a set-back on my own journey. Nothing major but something I was rather enthusiastic about was denied me. I never had the chance to make something happen and I felt unnecessarily forlorn. I did my own sort of pre-mortem.
My life is quite pi-esque. I have been serendipitous in finding my own pie and chips with a helping of peas on the side. I guess my continuing curiosity provides the sage gravy.
Like in the book and the film, I am not sure everyone will get that ending. What's for dessert?
From when we form our earliest notions of self and discover our ego, we are experimenting. We collect bumps, scrapes and bruises - both physical and psychological. We drive parents mad. In later life, we sometimes drive partners, colleagues and friends to distraction. But aren't we always just trying to find out more about our environment and our control over it? How far can we go?
Curiosity is an essential part of being human.
So often convention and present mores prevent us from realising our full potential. Some break the mould and make major contributions. Just look at James Dyson - yes he's the "vacuum cleaning - hand drying - no moving parts fan" wunderkind or maybe a Brit-Brat (tough at 65 years old). His company looks for what one might call "thinking personalities" and rewards what his organisation describes as wrong thinking.
Is waiting too long to reflect on where we are and where we might have come from really such a missed opportunity? Some believe it is.
The notion of doing a pre-mortem (literally "before death") review has been around a long while in project management - check this HBR 2007 offering. As an idea, it makes a whole lot of sense. Imagine failure and correct it before it happens. Reminds me a little of the plot of Minority Report. Bring on the precogs. But Minority Report was wrong.
It is in thinking about what makes a breakthrough happen that I am NOT at all convinced that too much pre-mortem analysis is the best route. Sometimes what FEELS right IS right.
I read in the last few days an interesting blog post from Ron Schaich of Panera Bread. He talks about the value of applying pre-mortem analysis to one's life or career. A well-argued piece. I am just left with the niggle in my mind that getting too analytical might prevent that great moment of serendipity. That moment of wrong thinking that might change a life or change an industry. I don't mean being so naif as to be stupid. Serendipity's definition also talks about being wise (sage) - but not always too wise. Too much sage can spoil a dish!
Last week, with my friends from the furniture store, I became Mr Grumpy. I would like to thank them all for being my Mr Tickle. For a slice of this life panacea in 7 minutes, try this episode.
I was grumpy because I had had a set-back on my own journey. Nothing major but something I was rather enthusiastic about was denied me. I never had the chance to make something happen and I felt unnecessarily forlorn. I did my own sort of pre-mortem.
My life is quite pi-esque. I have been serendipitous in finding my own pie and chips with a helping of peas on the side. I guess my continuing curiosity provides the sage gravy.
Like in the book and the film, I am not sure everyone will get that ending. What's for dessert?
Tuesday, 26 February 2013
Cedrus altlantica Glauca - The Importance of Thinking Laterally
Some of you may remember I am re-modelling my garden. I use the "I" in the sense of my wife doing the real design but I have become involved at some strategic moments. Part of the work has meant we have had to remove a number of old and diseased trees. We were keen to replace them and have recently planted 6 new trees. We have tried to find mature specimens, balancing size with cost and practicality. The average small tree weighs more than 5 tonnes so getting them in the ground was something to see!
My pride and joy is the cedar below.
Under Belgian planning regulations, we are not allowed to plant trees closer than 2 metres to a boundary, so siting this beauty was a challenge. Half a day of work and there it was - in the wrong place! We had planned to be able to see it from our veranda. Sadly when my wife sat down to enjoy the view, she couldn't see the tree. It was obscured by the wall of the house. Tearful times!
We considered moving it sideways but that proved to be impractical, given it was secured above and below ground. We even thought of planting a new tree in a place nearer the house - also not realistic. That's where the lateral thinking came to the rescue. My wife came up with the idea of moving around the sofas and coffee table in the veranda in a novel way to allow her to sit and to admire the view through the window, without having to move the tree. Happy Times!
This disaster, cleverly averted, reminds me of times when the right answer is not always the obvious answer. Times when you need to take a look at an issue from a different perspective and open yourself to different interpretations and solutions.
Human beings are creatures of habit and associations. Companies are organisms of learned cultures and short-cuts. I suppose it has to be like that to manage everyday personal and business life. No time to waste on the things that are usually the same.
But breakthroughs and innovations so often come from seeing what could be rather than what is.
Edward de Bono is of course most associated with lateral thinking and a reputable industry has grown up around its application. How many of us have had the benefit of wearing those Six Thinking Hats? And how many of us have found them a bad fit? Why is thinking so hard? De Bono and others place great emphasis on how important it is to practice thinking. It's a skill like any other. Practice improves performance.
I have been using a web resource recently that has helped me to stay on my mental game and learn a little in the bargain. The site is called Mind Tools . You might care to take a look. For the record I have no financial interest in this business. All muscles need exercise and some of us do not consider Sudoko to be an end in itself!
My pride and joy is the cedar below.
Under Belgian planning regulations, we are not allowed to plant trees closer than 2 metres to a boundary, so siting this beauty was a challenge. Half a day of work and there it was - in the wrong place! We had planned to be able to see it from our veranda. Sadly when my wife sat down to enjoy the view, she couldn't see the tree. It was obscured by the wall of the house. Tearful times!
We considered moving it sideways but that proved to be impractical, given it was secured above and below ground. We even thought of planting a new tree in a place nearer the house - also not realistic. That's where the lateral thinking came to the rescue. My wife came up with the idea of moving around the sofas and coffee table in the veranda in a novel way to allow her to sit and to admire the view through the window, without having to move the tree. Happy Times!
This disaster, cleverly averted, reminds me of times when the right answer is not always the obvious answer. Times when you need to take a look at an issue from a different perspective and open yourself to different interpretations and solutions.
Human beings are creatures of habit and associations. Companies are organisms of learned cultures and short-cuts. I suppose it has to be like that to manage everyday personal and business life. No time to waste on the things that are usually the same.
But breakthroughs and innovations so often come from seeing what could be rather than what is.
Edward de Bono is of course most associated with lateral thinking and a reputable industry has grown up around its application. How many of us have had the benefit of wearing those Six Thinking Hats? And how many of us have found them a bad fit? Why is thinking so hard? De Bono and others place great emphasis on how important it is to practice thinking. It's a skill like any other. Practice improves performance.
I have been using a web resource recently that has helped me to stay on my mental game and learn a little in the bargain. The site is called Mind Tools . You might care to take a look. For the record I have no financial interest in this business. All muscles need exercise and some of us do not consider Sudoko to be an end in itself!
Thursday, 21 February 2013
Gordon Bennett - RIP - The Joy of Language
After all those computer issues, I have finally been able to move into my bijou Paris pad! It all sounds rather sexy but at 20 square metres, it was never going to take too long to host a guided tour. I had a friend and his partner visit last weekend for a welcoming glass and we had to turn sideways to pass in the entrance hall.
I had become so bored with hotel nights and long journey days that I had taken the studio without seeing it. Property disappears so fast here. Caveat Emptor - emphasised by the lease that was rather clear about "what you see - or don't see - is what you get" and "don't come running to us, if you have regrets". For the moment, je ne regrette rien and with a British stiff lip, I will smile and carry on whatever.
Then of course , there's the "we have a partner who can help" with your insurance and the "caution" account, where the bank charges you a set-up fee then interest for blocking your own money, presumably because they cannot use it anymore to speculate on the currency markets! Sacres Francais was perhaps right after all.
The studio does enjoy a fantastic view - perhaps not to everyone's taste - over the cemetery at Passy. Directly over the cemetery, with all the mausoleums being just outside my window. I am clearly living in a very quiet (as the grave) part of the city; something my Paris friends would die for, if it wasn't for all that coughin' (coffin).
The owner of the studio took great pleasure in explaining who was resting where and, as she left, gave me a Monuments de Paris booklet and, with a smile, a grave map. What a house warming gift!
Well it seems that, among many French Celebres and the odd American (the tragic Pearl White of the Perils of Pauline), Mr Gordon Bennett (1841-1918) has found his final resting place at Passy. No-one is sure if he is in fact the Gordon Bennett whose name is often used as an English expression of surprise in place of a 4-letter expletive. I would like to hope so.
So it would seem to be the case that his epitaph is an epithet expressed as an eponym for a synonym and used as a euphemism! What a linguistic legacy.
It's a slow day today so just off to find where they scattered Flaming Nora's ashes. Seems even Google has a problem searching them out.
I had become so bored with hotel nights and long journey days that I had taken the studio without seeing it. Property disappears so fast here. Caveat Emptor - emphasised by the lease that was rather clear about "what you see - or don't see - is what you get" and "don't come running to us, if you have regrets". For the moment, je ne regrette rien and with a British stiff lip, I will smile and carry on whatever.
Then of course , there's the "we have a partner who can help" with your insurance and the "caution" account, where the bank charges you a set-up fee then interest for blocking your own money, presumably because they cannot use it anymore to speculate on the currency markets! Sacres Francais was perhaps right after all.
The studio does enjoy a fantastic view - perhaps not to everyone's taste - over the cemetery at Passy. Directly over the cemetery, with all the mausoleums being just outside my window. I am clearly living in a very quiet (as the grave) part of the city; something my Paris friends would die for, if it wasn't for all that coughin' (coffin).
The owner of the studio took great pleasure in explaining who was resting where and, as she left, gave me a Monuments de Paris booklet and, with a smile, a grave map. What a house warming gift!
Well it seems that, among many French Celebres and the odd American (the tragic Pearl White of the Perils of Pauline), Mr Gordon Bennett (1841-1918) has found his final resting place at Passy. No-one is sure if he is in fact the Gordon Bennett whose name is often used as an English expression of surprise in place of a 4-letter expletive. I would like to hope so.
So it would seem to be the case that his epitaph is an epithet expressed as an eponym for a synonym and used as a euphemism! What a linguistic legacy.
It's a slow day today so just off to find where they scattered Flaming Nora's ashes. Seems even Google has a problem searching them out.
Thursday, 14 February 2013
Happy Valentine - Competent and Conscious
Today is one of those days when the gift industry does well and florists do even better. Yes it's Valentines. It seems this traditional day for lovers goes back rather a long way, beginning as a widespread celebration as long ago as the Middle Ages with even Chaucer helping to popularise the feast.
I am not in great shape today - something bad, eaten last evening, has laid me a little low. This blog is replacing medication and maintaining my consciousness.
A couple of days ago I had a discussion with my Chief Cabinet Maker or Head Carpenter (HC) in Paris. We were talking about MBTI - indeed my MBTI. There are those who enthusiastically support Myers&Briggs and the statistics (at least the numbers) are pretty impressive with many millions of evaluations having been undertaken since it was first published in the early 1960's.
It is a very long time since I did an MBTI - remembered my original letters OK but had long since forgotten the nuances. They all came back. And with the distance of years, those letters have indeed proven to be pretty accurate! This should in fact be the case as most fundamental traits and notions of self are seemingly developed relatively early in life (chapeau to Carl Jung's work).
The test is all about types and about likely preferences. Mine are quite pronounced and the objective of my discussion with HC was to see how these preferences would likely impact me and those around me. But it was importantly also about developing appropriate mitigation/learning strategies.
In doing this, I was reintroduced to The Conscious Competence Matrix , although most often drawn as a ladder. I do prefer the matrix representation, as it does allow a better discussion about moving around the matrix and not getting trapped with the notion of it all learning being about a straight-up climb. We have all fallen off quite a few ladders, learning new skills. My second small recommendation is to take a look at this technique and to see if it can be of use for you. It has helped me already.
My son is on the verge of (fingers crossed) his first post-college career opportunity. He likes life-algorithms a lot. We did quite a lot of practice before his interviews, working on likely questions but also on likely interviewer reactions.
To be able to explain the universe, and the people in it, in just 4 letters would be great.
Forget identity cards. Make everyone carry their Myers/Briggs with them. Not ideal perhaps, but it might just stop a war someday. Or very importantly, get you that perfect Valentine's date!
If during your transitions or next-step career planning you get the chance to have a coached MBTI, grab the opportunity. Even seek one out.
Staying with abbreviations: Describe a hungry horse in 4 letters - MTGG. Do you have a funnier one? Does it work in French or other languages?
I am not in great shape today - something bad, eaten last evening, has laid me a little low. This blog is replacing medication and maintaining my consciousness.
A couple of days ago I had a discussion with my Chief Cabinet Maker or Head Carpenter (HC) in Paris. We were talking about MBTI - indeed my MBTI. There are those who enthusiastically support Myers&Briggs and the statistics (at least the numbers) are pretty impressive with many millions of evaluations having been undertaken since it was first published in the early 1960's.
It is a very long time since I did an MBTI - remembered my original letters OK but had long since forgotten the nuances. They all came back. And with the distance of years, those letters have indeed proven to be pretty accurate! This should in fact be the case as most fundamental traits and notions of self are seemingly developed relatively early in life (chapeau to Carl Jung's work).
The test is all about types and about likely preferences. Mine are quite pronounced and the objective of my discussion with HC was to see how these preferences would likely impact me and those around me. But it was importantly also about developing appropriate mitigation/learning strategies.
In doing this, I was reintroduced to The Conscious Competence Matrix , although most often drawn as a ladder. I do prefer the matrix representation, as it does allow a better discussion about moving around the matrix and not getting trapped with the notion of it all learning being about a straight-up climb. We have all fallen off quite a few ladders, learning new skills. My second small recommendation is to take a look at this technique and to see if it can be of use for you. It has helped me already.
My son is on the verge of (fingers crossed) his first post-college career opportunity. He likes life-algorithms a lot. We did quite a lot of practice before his interviews, working on likely questions but also on likely interviewer reactions.
To be able to explain the universe, and the people in it, in just 4 letters would be great.
Forget identity cards. Make everyone carry their Myers/Briggs with them. Not ideal perhaps, but it might just stop a war someday. Or very importantly, get you that perfect Valentine's date!
If during your transitions or next-step career planning you get the chance to have a coached MBTI, grab the opportunity. Even seek one out.
Staying with abbreviations: Describe a hungry horse in 4 letters - MTGG. Do you have a funnier one? Does it work in French or other languages?
Wednesday, 6 February 2013
Silence is Golden - Isn't it?
Had a fun day out yesterday with the wardrobe mistresses in Paris, beginning the first leg of my formal "re-adjustment training". Lots more to come in the weeks ahead but I did want to share a few thoughts.
I once worked with a great colleague who had been given a poster by this wife. It was seemingly all about self perception versus how others might perhaps perceive you. I have managed to find that poster and reproduce it below to introduce this post. I guess you can already get the message?
There is not a great point in going through the (rather funny) details from yesterday but basically, you are required to sit silently in front of a small group of people you have never met for several minutes and the group is asked individually to create a word picture of you - age, training, industry, role, personal qualities and even hobbies. To cap it all, you are even challenged to assign to everyone a plant and a vegetable. For the record, I was an oak and a rabbit! Results are tabulated and then you get to respond.
The idea builds on non-verbal messages and communication. I did a short blog about that some weeks ago, around picking up the signs in your audience - although from the other side of the coin.
There is real learning here. It's about avoiding getting trapped in one's body and making sure that stereotypes are dispelled early. If I aspire to be a male model, then I suppose I need to look like one. But if I aspire to be a tax inspector, then what do I need to look like? Ditto any other role.
Can we lose an opportunity because we don't realise that our audience has a pre-conceived view of what "good for them" looks like? On reflection, I think this is a real danger.
So what do you do about it? I got to thinking - and have brainstormed my own short list of "interview perception" Do's and Don'ts. They are not all too serious but some might prove useful. I have not specified which are good and bad ideas. After all, self-determination for all was a hard-won right and any one of them might work for you!
I once worked with a great colleague who had been given a poster by this wife. It was seemingly all about self perception versus how others might perhaps perceive you. I have managed to find that poster and reproduce it below to introduce this post. I guess you can already get the message?
There is not a great point in going through the (rather funny) details from yesterday but basically, you are required to sit silently in front of a small group of people you have never met for several minutes and the group is asked individually to create a word picture of you - age, training, industry, role, personal qualities and even hobbies. To cap it all, you are even challenged to assign to everyone a plant and a vegetable. For the record, I was an oak and a rabbit! Results are tabulated and then you get to respond.
The idea builds on non-verbal messages and communication. I did a short blog about that some weeks ago, around picking up the signs in your audience - although from the other side of the coin.
There is real learning here. It's about avoiding getting trapped in one's body and making sure that stereotypes are dispelled early. If I aspire to be a male model, then I suppose I need to look like one. But if I aspire to be a tax inspector, then what do I need to look like? Ditto any other role.
Can we lose an opportunity because we don't realise that our audience has a pre-conceived view of what "good for them" looks like? On reflection, I think this is a real danger.
So what do you do about it? I got to thinking - and have brainstormed my own short list of "interview perception" Do's and Don'ts. They are not all too serious but some might prove useful. I have not specified which are good and bad ideas. After all, self-determination for all was a hard-won right and any one of them might work for you!
- Send someone else in your place - there is a great scene in Good Will Hunting when Matt Damon sends a friend to a job interview in his place. Sadly, I think it is unlikely to work in real life, but you never know...
- Wear clothes that are sympathetic with the role you want - there is a raft of literature on what not to wear and what you should wear. I did the research. "Red for Sales and Blue for Trust" about sums up all you need to know. Oh and seemingly red ties for men will draw the eye and make the interviewer look up to your lips and so listen more closely to what you are saying.
- Just get the answer from Forbes - I am finding a lot of useful stuff here. It's not necessarily always deeply insightful, but as an aide-memoire, it is very good. Reinforcement is always needed. Thank you Agnes for your "folded arms breeds hostility" insight yesterday. Forbes agrees!
- Get the introduction right - mise-en-scene - you might not look like that male model "all over" but you just might have been blessed with the best-looking "left hand third finger" nature ever created. And you would be just perfect for that diamond ring campaign. Not immediately evident but your job is to get that finger out as soon as you can! The same applies to getting folks into your story and value quickly. Getting them beyond the immediately physical and sharing your vision. No secret weapon - practice that intro and make it sing.
- The art of camouflage and misdirection is always worth a try. It's not just good to hide battleships or to give the impression that you have a bigger army than your enemy thinks. If you do have a disconcertingly pointy head, try wearing a Harry Potter wizard's hat!
Friday, 1 February 2013
My Back Itches. Does Yours?
If you decide to blog, there are loads of do's and don'ts. So many people have an opinion as to how to create an interesting, informative or even (from time to time) educational blog.
I am posting this link to a random adviser (DISCLAIMER) and just look how (s)he ignores one of their primary rules of successful blogging (for the record, it's the one about in-your-face advertising)! Lesson seems to be; a few golden rules but that gold is pretty tarnished. If there is one thing that does shine through: be true and tell it as you see it. No place for that pipotron.
I had the chance this week to spend some time with a Grade-A headhunter. No need for names or location but I thought it might be useful to share a few pointers and aides-memoire for future encounters. I mean primarily my own future encounters but I trust some others may find it useful too.
I am posting this link to a random adviser (DISCLAIMER) and just look how (s)he ignores one of their primary rules of successful blogging (for the record, it's the one about in-your-face advertising)! Lesson seems to be; a few golden rules but that gold is pretty tarnished. If there is one thing that does shine through: be true and tell it as you see it. No place for that pipotron.
I had the chance this week to spend some time with a Grade-A headhunter. No need for names or location but I thought it might be useful to share a few pointers and aides-memoire for future encounters. I mean primarily my own future encounters but I trust some others may find it useful too.
- Moving from the buy-side to the sell-side is not a natural transition. Many of my previous encounters with HH have been for one of 2 reasons - mostly when I was considering hiring them for a particular search and sometimes when I was approached about a search they were conducting. In all those encounters, I set the agenda and largely set the pace. These were my meetings and on my terms. Now I have to change that role. I am the one asking. The change is subtle but I now see it is important. One still needs to be confident, appropriately assertive - all that stuff. But one also needs to recognise the change of role and work on it, whilst still selling your value.
- Be aware - they are probably selling too - for all they know, your transition will be to even bigger and better things and that means you are potentially part of their future food chain. What does that mean? It means be sensitive. Leave room for that selling to emerge and, when it does, be interested and leave all future doors open. In simple terms, don't hog the session. Leave a space for your HH to perform too.
- Don't expect too much from these first sessions. You are not their only potential client. Hard to believe but you may not even be their best or even the only one with "those unique characteristics and experiences". The world is a big place but your alter-ego (as experienced brother or sister) is now perhaps closer than you think. And keep in mind too that most HH work to specific assignments. They are not likely to be your spontaneously enthusiastic advocate. They are more likely to be giving you the once-over with a position in mind. It's never this simple, of course, but HH are in the main stimulus driven. Be their stimulus.
- It's tough out there so it won't be easy. You should probably know the state of your candidate companies / geography / industry / profession / demographic as well as the HH you are meeting. This means you need to be realistic about the specific insight you can expect. You may be lucky. But most times you will not be. Add to that the fact that Europe is still mostly in crisis and you have a prescription for a big spoon of realism. Just hope you aren't in the UK financial services sector!
- Bring some original thinking to the session. And if I do have one piece of advice worth considering then this is probably it. Most HH will be looking to explore new ideas to create a new line of business. New domains (very tough) or more likely new clients/companies. So why not use them as your door opener into companies with whom they do not (yet) have a relationship but with whom you can convince them they could and that you are the key to the door? It will take time and effort but it is a cool move. We all win.
Sunday, 27 January 2013
Too Long in One Place - Half Life Careers
Half-Life is the time it takes for radioactive material to lose half of its radioactivity. It's a little more complex than that , involving the transition of atomic particles, but it will serve as a blog definition.
The other important thing about half-life is that it is a long time. The numbers are really big. Just to make the point and if we take spent reactor fuel as an example, it will take around 6 million years for it to reach radioactivity levels that are the same as those found in the ambient environment. For the purists, I am using the European method of calculation and not the US one.
Put that into perspective with human history, where "homo - first attempt" has been around less than 3 million years and recorded history is even less than 6 thousand years.
So where do you put an individual on that timeline?
We have all heard of the notion that, if all the time since the origins of the Earth was expressed as a 24 hour clock, mankind would have arrived rather late on. And using that same approach and making a modern career 50 years (just to scare the Generation Y'ers and support the Hollanders), then an individual career lasts not very long at all!
How long? All correct answers submitted as comments below will show basic maths. All wrong ones will show lack of calculator skills. The fun will be seeing how many of us need multiple attempts.
Lets go just one step further to make my point. The average employee stays in their job for 4.4 years - meaning around 10 to 12 jobs in a career. For those born around the time I was, getting a job was about status and security. It seems those born between 1980 and 2000 will close to half that tenure and will seek experience in all its forms more than the material comforts my generation seemed to have sought. This behaviour is driven perhaps as much by a realisation that the safety nets once available to parents (health care etc) will not be available to them (so why bother to climb the conventional corporate ladder) as by their enjoying unprecedented access to a world of opportunities presented to them in an internet-enabled world.
Whilst such statistics often need to be taken with care, I have seen myself very different drivers emerging in those I have managed in the last 10 years. This Forbes article argues this is therefore a dangerous time for employers and offers advice to avoid the cliff and proffers some valuable guidance. Of the 3 "must do's" offered the one that resonates is the importance of listening and learning.
Companies locked into a culture may just find in their Generation Y hires the opportunity to break out of old ways. The basics of business seldom change but embracing new ways to do that business is one of the key ways to achieve success. These new ways and the next generation of consumers that provide them were likely born in the last 20 years.
One of the keys for companies is going to be how to make the most of these GenY employees as they "pass through" and that means creating a formalism to make this happen. But there's till some way to go! Enjoy the journey.
The other important thing about half-life is that it is a long time. The numbers are really big. Just to make the point and if we take spent reactor fuel as an example, it will take around 6 million years for it to reach radioactivity levels that are the same as those found in the ambient environment. For the purists, I am using the European method of calculation and not the US one.
Put that into perspective with human history, where "homo - first attempt" has been around less than 3 million years and recorded history is even less than 6 thousand years.
So where do you put an individual on that timeline?
We have all heard of the notion that, if all the time since the origins of the Earth was expressed as a 24 hour clock, mankind would have arrived rather late on. And using that same approach and making a modern career 50 years (just to scare the Generation Y'ers and support the Hollanders), then an individual career lasts not very long at all!
How long? All correct answers submitted as comments below will show basic maths. All wrong ones will show lack of calculator skills. The fun will be seeing how many of us need multiple attempts.
Lets go just one step further to make my point. The average employee stays in their job for 4.4 years - meaning around 10 to 12 jobs in a career. For those born around the time I was, getting a job was about status and security. It seems those born between 1980 and 2000 will close to half that tenure and will seek experience in all its forms more than the material comforts my generation seemed to have sought. This behaviour is driven perhaps as much by a realisation that the safety nets once available to parents (health care etc) will not be available to them (so why bother to climb the conventional corporate ladder) as by their enjoying unprecedented access to a world of opportunities presented to them in an internet-enabled world.
Whilst such statistics often need to be taken with care, I have seen myself very different drivers emerging in those I have managed in the last 10 years. This Forbes article argues this is therefore a dangerous time for employers and offers advice to avoid the cliff and proffers some valuable guidance. Of the 3 "must do's" offered the one that resonates is the importance of listening and learning.
Companies locked into a culture may just find in their Generation Y hires the opportunity to break out of old ways. The basics of business seldom change but embracing new ways to do that business is one of the key ways to achieve success. These new ways and the next generation of consumers that provide them were likely born in the last 20 years.
One of the keys for companies is going to be how to make the most of these GenY employees as they "pass through" and that means creating a formalism to make this happen. But there's till some way to go! Enjoy the journey.
Tuesday, 22 January 2013
Telling Tales - Selling Yourself
One of the great things about being in marketing is getting paid (hopefully) for telling stories. Having the opportunity to imagine then deliver a narrative that helps clients and prospects to understand and support the value of a proposition is a rich career. There is something special about creating a campaign; getting the research done; thinking through the plot; the team; the hooks; the audience; the delivery medium; the measurement. The creative process is often a very satisfying journey.
I have been telling stories all my professional life. I suppose I used to tell tales as a youngster too but I am convinced they were always innocent - even if my wife's retelling of my "you can have two star signs" story has been made wicked by time. Astrology was a richly fertile field for starting new realtionships!
I have been engaged with the "office of the hat-stand" recently on the subject of my own story. Objective: How do I want to portray my new self to the old/new world?
I expected it to be a straightforward exercise. Just like at the old office. The only real difference is that I am positioning myself and not a product or set of ideas. Easy as sliding on ice. Use the same techniques as of old. Get the storyboard together; practice the pitch; refine; practice again and deliver that pitch perfectly.
DISCOVERY - easy as sliding on ice indeed. Fell flat on my face!
Sort of got a little muddled up between the chronology-centric and the skill/achievement based narrative (that's the kind way of putting it). Heck! I'm supposed to be expert at this. Selling something as close-up and personal as myself was tougher than I thought it would be. Tough when you are the delivery medium and that you don't want to seem insincere (for which read narcissistic) or even worse unconnected (for which read blase) to your own story. And it's hardly that it's not important.
It's pretty much under control now but I did want to share a few things that the hat-stand advised and a few others that have come to mind and then got incorporated. In the spirit of the best self-help titles, I have created a one-word mnemonic - R.A.P.P.O.R.T - apt maybe given that rapport is perhaps what we are mostly seeking? Many of these ideas are linked. All seemed important to me.
Relevant - It's not your life story. It's those parts of your story that will get your audience thinking you have something they (or their client) need. This means two things. Firstly, take time to try to find out the hot-buttons you need to press. Secondly, keep it to the point. And - avoid the "pipotron" - thank you Jeff Haden for the wise advice you outline (you can find Jeff here) and thanks to Andre Mechaly for the word "pipotron".
Actionable - It's not just what you've done. It's also how you did it. So many new hires fail because the fit is wrong and not because the skill-set is lacking (Forbes). Finding the right way to sell your style as strongly as your capability is critical. Be honest too. It will save everyone time downstream. Truth will out.
Posture - WOW! This does matter. "Slouching is Ouching". Sit up and be attentive. Show them you want to be there.
Pick up the Signs - We all know the truism that most communication is supposedly non-verbal - so take care to pick up the interest signs positive and negative and adjust your story accordingly. Some signs are easier to see than others but keep your senses tuned, even when in full-flow.
Optimism - Be positive in your story-telling. Who wants to hire a misery?
Remember Me - Be memorable. Work on a couple of facts that will keep you in mind long after you have left. I had considered fire-eating as a hobby but on reflection that would have put up the "key-person insurance" premium in that super start-up I would like to join. Try here, if you would still like to try (DISCLAIMER).
Tease - I think it was P.T Barnum who said you should have an audience leave the Big Top wanting more. Satisfied but wanting more. Timing is everything. Know what you want to say. Say it and then STOP. Nothing worse than bad bagpipe droning, (apologies to my father-in-law who is an excellent piper).
A bit long for me - but perhaps it will be useful - even as an aide-memoire. And if you want more, more Tales from the Cabinet coming soon.
I have been telling stories all my professional life. I suppose I used to tell tales as a youngster too but I am convinced they were always innocent - even if my wife's retelling of my "you can have two star signs" story has been made wicked by time. Astrology was a richly fertile field for starting new realtionships!
I have been engaged with the "office of the hat-stand" recently on the subject of my own story. Objective: How do I want to portray my new self to the old/new world?
I expected it to be a straightforward exercise. Just like at the old office. The only real difference is that I am positioning myself and not a product or set of ideas. Easy as sliding on ice. Use the same techniques as of old. Get the storyboard together; practice the pitch; refine; practice again and deliver that pitch perfectly.
DISCOVERY - easy as sliding on ice indeed. Fell flat on my face!
Sort of got a little muddled up between the chronology-centric and the skill/achievement based narrative (that's the kind way of putting it). Heck! I'm supposed to be expert at this. Selling something as close-up and personal as myself was tougher than I thought it would be. Tough when you are the delivery medium and that you don't want to seem insincere (for which read narcissistic) or even worse unconnected (for which read blase) to your own story. And it's hardly that it's not important.
It's pretty much under control now but I did want to share a few things that the hat-stand advised and a few others that have come to mind and then got incorporated. In the spirit of the best self-help titles, I have created a one-word mnemonic - R.A.P.P.O.R.T - apt maybe given that rapport is perhaps what we are mostly seeking? Many of these ideas are linked. All seemed important to me.
Relevant - It's not your life story. It's those parts of your story that will get your audience thinking you have something they (or their client) need. This means two things. Firstly, take time to try to find out the hot-buttons you need to press. Secondly, keep it to the point. And - avoid the "pipotron" - thank you Jeff Haden for the wise advice you outline (you can find Jeff here) and thanks to Andre Mechaly for the word "pipotron".
Actionable - It's not just what you've done. It's also how you did it. So many new hires fail because the fit is wrong and not because the skill-set is lacking (Forbes). Finding the right way to sell your style as strongly as your capability is critical. Be honest too. It will save everyone time downstream. Truth will out.
Posture - WOW! This does matter. "Slouching is Ouching". Sit up and be attentive. Show them you want to be there.
Pick up the Signs - We all know the truism that most communication is supposedly non-verbal - so take care to pick up the interest signs positive and negative and adjust your story accordingly. Some signs are easier to see than others but keep your senses tuned, even when in full-flow.
Optimism - Be positive in your story-telling. Who wants to hire a misery?
Remember Me - Be memorable. Work on a couple of facts that will keep you in mind long after you have left. I had considered fire-eating as a hobby but on reflection that would have put up the "key-person insurance" premium in that super start-up I would like to join. Try here, if you would still like to try (DISCLAIMER).
Tease - I think it was P.T Barnum who said you should have an audience leave the Big Top wanting more. Satisfied but wanting more. Timing is everything. Know what you want to say. Say it and then STOP. Nothing worse than bad bagpipe droning, (apologies to my father-in-law who is an excellent piper).
A bit long for me - but perhaps it will be useful - even as an aide-memoire. And if you want more, more Tales from the Cabinet coming soon.
Tuesday, 15 January 2013
Deep and Crisp and Even Playing Field
Today, we have been blessed with the gift of the first real snows of winter. I use the word blessed because, leaving aside all the inconvenience it can cause to an unprepared neighbourhood (like ours), there is something magical about the effect newly-fallen snow has.
The once-ugly becomes beautiful and the once noisy becomes silent. Our garden is a case in point. A big mound of earth, waiting to be moved when the "time is right, but not just now" (dixit man with red digger since mid-December) has been transformed from a blight to a magical hill or at least a beautiful mound! The digger is silenced.
The school bus that disturbs the quiet has been gently muted, even if the children passengers are obviously disappointed still to have to attend school, with all that snowballing waiting to be tackled.
All in all, a jolly good day. Except, the need to rush to the dentist to have a tooth fixed. But all's well now - even if a bit numb before the soreness kicks in.
Yesterday was a good day too, spent in the company of my furniture. You will recall, I have been given a French cabinet to help with my transition to something new. I have made much in previous posts of the gift I now have of the time to consider whether I want to pitch myself back into much the same as I have done before or embark on a new journey. Understand, what I used to do was great and I did make a contribution to some of the best stuff the tech industry has done in a long while. I am proud of that and the job only remains half done still - so much fun and contribution still to be had.
So where am I, coming into 2013? My sessions yesterday were a true touchstone. I still need to do some refining but I am realising that the reason I stayed in tech so long was the fact it was always new. It never stood still long enough to catch its breath. For every innovation coming from NA, something a little more special escaped from APAC and vice versa. Apple is all we hear of but Samsung still rules.
So I am staying in tech, but I want to do it in a different way. It's a crying shame that Europe lags. It is not acceptable that we can still educate the best, give birth to some of the coolest ideas and yet lose that excellence to others. I am not protectionist. Talent needs to thrive wherever it can. Genius needs to find its home in places where it is cherished not spurned.
It's brilliant to see new funding models emerging - some of the stuff falling from the sky is magical - that weird Pebble watch at CES. Not just the fact it made it, but the fact it was kickstarted (sic) with the "help of humanity". These models will maybe challenge the VC status quo, daring again to venture where Angels once feared to tread.
But all this new money aside, we need more work in establishing ways in which these hatchlings can learn the skills to manage growth, sales, marketing, distribution and that whole process of growing up in business and delivering what everyone from the end customer to the board needs. That stuff can be taught early.
No use in having the best apps platform in the world - cool watch or not - if you can't find a way to get the best in the world wanting to develop for it and finding a way to make it worthwhile for everyone to want to bother. It's not just the money. Kudos, fame and even just a good feeling have their role to play. Great to see a young French company help to lead the way - bravo Aldebaran.
Who's job is this? Do we leave it to Darwinian theory or do we give evolution a helping hand? I'm up for the supportive approach. If Europe wants to keep its finest, it needs to act collectively. And it's not just Europe. It's the job of local politicians, industry and education too.
What seems like a small, random tooth kindness can snowball with unexpected results!
The once-ugly becomes beautiful and the once noisy becomes silent. Our garden is a case in point. A big mound of earth, waiting to be moved when the "time is right, but not just now" (dixit man with red digger since mid-December) has been transformed from a blight to a magical hill or at least a beautiful mound! The digger is silenced.
The school bus that disturbs the quiet has been gently muted, even if the children passengers are obviously disappointed still to have to attend school, with all that snowballing waiting to be tackled.
All in all, a jolly good day. Except, the need to rush to the dentist to have a tooth fixed. But all's well now - even if a bit numb before the soreness kicks in.
Yesterday was a good day too, spent in the company of my furniture. You will recall, I have been given a French cabinet to help with my transition to something new. I have made much in previous posts of the gift I now have of the time to consider whether I want to pitch myself back into much the same as I have done before or embark on a new journey. Understand, what I used to do was great and I did make a contribution to some of the best stuff the tech industry has done in a long while. I am proud of that and the job only remains half done still - so much fun and contribution still to be had.
So where am I, coming into 2013? My sessions yesterday were a true touchstone. I still need to do some refining but I am realising that the reason I stayed in tech so long was the fact it was always new. It never stood still long enough to catch its breath. For every innovation coming from NA, something a little more special escaped from APAC and vice versa. Apple is all we hear of but Samsung still rules.
So I am staying in tech, but I want to do it in a different way. It's a crying shame that Europe lags. It is not acceptable that we can still educate the best, give birth to some of the coolest ideas and yet lose that excellence to others. I am not protectionist. Talent needs to thrive wherever it can. Genius needs to find its home in places where it is cherished not spurned.
It's brilliant to see new funding models emerging - some of the stuff falling from the sky is magical - that weird Pebble watch at CES. Not just the fact it made it, but the fact it was kickstarted (sic) with the "help of humanity". These models will maybe challenge the VC status quo, daring again to venture where Angels once feared to tread.
But all this new money aside, we need more work in establishing ways in which these hatchlings can learn the skills to manage growth, sales, marketing, distribution and that whole process of growing up in business and delivering what everyone from the end customer to the board needs. That stuff can be taught early.
No use in having the best apps platform in the world - cool watch or not - if you can't find a way to get the best in the world wanting to develop for it and finding a way to make it worthwhile for everyone to want to bother. It's not just the money. Kudos, fame and even just a good feeling have their role to play. Great to see a young French company help to lead the way - bravo Aldebaran.
Who's job is this? Do we leave it to Darwinian theory or do we give evolution a helping hand? I'm up for the supportive approach. If Europe wants to keep its finest, it needs to act collectively. And it's not just Europe. It's the job of local politicians, industry and education too.
What seems like a small, random tooth kindness can snowball with unexpected results!
Wednesday, 9 January 2013
Feng Shoot and Dim Son
China piqued my interest yesterday. I love China, having long been busy with Chinese business and even serving on the board of a Chinese company for a while. But it was something, at first glance more light-hearted, that caught my eye.
The BBC featured a story concerning a Chinese father - Mr Feng - who seemingly hired on-line assassins to kill his son's avatar in multi-player games. World of Warcraft was the offending title - perhaps somewhat ironic given the origin of Sun Tzu's Art of War.
At one level, this parental intervention may seem laudable. After all, we want the best for our children and keeping them out of harm's way is a profound duty. All Mr Feng wanted to do was to stop his "dim" son spending endless hours on-line. I know. I have been there.
At another level - actually at most levels - it's very concerning. I am not sure there can ever be a clear dividing line when parental caring oversteps to become something more sinister. But this does cross that line, wherever you draw it. An old boss told me once that, whilst some situations might be hard to call, bad stuff always looks like bad stuff, because it is bad stuff!
This story came hot on the heals of another talking of a New Year censorship dispute at the Chinese Southern Weekly. How can you ever reconcile freedom of expression as a human right with the emergence of a nation, still struggling with the balancing act of those freedoms and stability?
These stories are linked. One is micro. The other macro. Both address the issues of the challenge of change.
I have seen China become the new world power it is over the last 20 years. I remember joining missions in and out of China introducing Chinese business people and leaders to what happened in faraway kingdoms. Those small successes and failures are best kept to boardrooms and dinner tables. One thing that I did learn though was that it is unwise ever to jump to conclusions where China is concerned. It is seldom as it seems.
The good news is that a compromise is seemingly close that allows face to be maintained - warm porridge is coming from the Beijing News. According to The Global Times things might be settling down but there is a recognition that it's difficult to achieve the balance - referring to "walking a difficult tightrope". Indeed.
Freedoms need to be non-negotiable and China has a long journey ahead still but I do recall, from some of those shows all visiting dignitaries once had to witness, that the Chinese are gifted as acrobats. Let's hope so.
And as for Mr Feng - he needs to eat an harmonious bowl of warm congee porridge of reconciliation with his son.
The BBC featured a story concerning a Chinese father - Mr Feng - who seemingly hired on-line assassins to kill his son's avatar in multi-player games. World of Warcraft was the offending title - perhaps somewhat ironic given the origin of Sun Tzu's Art of War.
At one level, this parental intervention may seem laudable. After all, we want the best for our children and keeping them out of harm's way is a profound duty. All Mr Feng wanted to do was to stop his "dim" son spending endless hours on-line. I know. I have been there.
At another level - actually at most levels - it's very concerning. I am not sure there can ever be a clear dividing line when parental caring oversteps to become something more sinister. But this does cross that line, wherever you draw it. An old boss told me once that, whilst some situations might be hard to call, bad stuff always looks like bad stuff, because it is bad stuff!
This story came hot on the heals of another talking of a New Year censorship dispute at the Chinese Southern Weekly. How can you ever reconcile freedom of expression as a human right with the emergence of a nation, still struggling with the balancing act of those freedoms and stability?
These stories are linked. One is micro. The other macro. Both address the issues of the challenge of change.
I have seen China become the new world power it is over the last 20 years. I remember joining missions in and out of China introducing Chinese business people and leaders to what happened in faraway kingdoms. Those small successes and failures are best kept to boardrooms and dinner tables. One thing that I did learn though was that it is unwise ever to jump to conclusions where China is concerned. It is seldom as it seems.
The good news is that a compromise is seemingly close that allows face to be maintained - warm porridge is coming from the Beijing News. According to The Global Times things might be settling down but there is a recognition that it's difficult to achieve the balance - referring to "walking a difficult tightrope". Indeed.
Freedoms need to be non-negotiable and China has a long journey ahead still but I do recall, from some of those shows all visiting dignitaries once had to witness, that the Chinese are gifted as acrobats. Let's hope so.
And as for Mr Feng - he needs to eat an harmonious bowl of warm congee porridge of reconciliation with his son.
Sunday, 6 January 2013
New (World) Year - Old W(h)ines
My son invited me to a wine tasting just before Christmas. It was a typical student thing - pay 5 pounds at the door, drink all you can and, if you do buy something, the 5 pounds is taken off your order. I should have known better but it was Christmas and I might well have found something I liked.
Well, I did; tasting in moderation and spending around a hundred pounds on half a dozen bottles of an Italian Valpolicella (am I the only one who remembers this once as a cheap tipple?) and a boutique gin by a company more famed for its potato crisps. I left poorer - sober and happy.
The happiness lasted a day; that is until I passed through the Channel Tunnel store in Folkestone. That same gin on offer at 35% less. A scandal. My misery continued when I checked out the price of the wine online. This time a slightly less annoying 30%. I attend a few tastings a year, not expecting to find many real bargains but certainly not expecting to be taken advantage of. My son offered little sympathy reminding me someone had to subsidise the many students who attended. Fair point.
My last tasting with that company. The end of a relationship before it had begun.
2012 dawned with a new lexicon in customer relationship management. Intimacy and Experience now prefaced Management as our new lingua franca. That Relationship word seemed to have lost its lustre. We saw Service Providers across the spectrum scramble to recruit leaders from other industries who seemingly knew how to manage intimacy and experience better than they did. Every second Linked-In Banner or pushed job advertisement seemed to scream out for these rare people. Impact analysis anyone?
It's been a little quieter lately. I have even heard of some of these new hires who have headed back to more familiar industries. What went wrong? Is it that the Service Provider industry is still "too hard to fix"? I think not. Is it unwilling or unable to raise its game? Again, a solid NO. Were these new gurus just emperors in new clothes? Perhaps, some were but many were not.
Making a company Truly Client Aware (TCA a new candidate TLA) is a transformational journey. It takes inspirational leadership but so much more. A company that is TCA just knows, in all that it does, how to work with and delight its clients. It takes hard work and an alignment of core systems and behaviours with stakeholder ambitions. It takes time and there is no quick fix. Any action can have a strong and unpredictable reaction. It's not only in Chaos Theory that we need to be always on our guard. Amazonian butterflies have much to answer for!
I have served my apprenticeship in the CRM solutions' business and, especially in the lightening age of social media, where brands can live and die frighteningly quickly, becoming TCA is what it's now all about. Smart companies will maintain their focus, even when the going gets tough.
I marked the New Year with a Martini made with that special Gin. Shaken by being gouged but stirred into wanting to work with others on how to manage the journey, and that is likely to begin with claiming back the Relationship word. After all, relationships grow with moments of sharing, listening and occasionally surprising. Thank You, Mr Bond.
Happy New Year.
Well, I did; tasting in moderation and spending around a hundred pounds on half a dozen bottles of an Italian Valpolicella (am I the only one who remembers this once as a cheap tipple?) and a boutique gin by a company more famed for its potato crisps. I left poorer - sober and happy.
The happiness lasted a day; that is until I passed through the Channel Tunnel store in Folkestone. That same gin on offer at 35% less. A scandal. My misery continued when I checked out the price of the wine online. This time a slightly less annoying 30%. I attend a few tastings a year, not expecting to find many real bargains but certainly not expecting to be taken advantage of. My son offered little sympathy reminding me someone had to subsidise the many students who attended. Fair point.
My last tasting with that company. The end of a relationship before it had begun.
2012 dawned with a new lexicon in customer relationship management. Intimacy and Experience now prefaced Management as our new lingua franca. That Relationship word seemed to have lost its lustre. We saw Service Providers across the spectrum scramble to recruit leaders from other industries who seemingly knew how to manage intimacy and experience better than they did. Every second Linked-In Banner or pushed job advertisement seemed to scream out for these rare people. Impact analysis anyone?
It's been a little quieter lately. I have even heard of some of these new hires who have headed back to more familiar industries. What went wrong? Is it that the Service Provider industry is still "too hard to fix"? I think not. Is it unwilling or unable to raise its game? Again, a solid NO. Were these new gurus just emperors in new clothes? Perhaps, some were but many were not.
Making a company Truly Client Aware (TCA a new candidate TLA) is a transformational journey. It takes inspirational leadership but so much more. A company that is TCA just knows, in all that it does, how to work with and delight its clients. It takes hard work and an alignment of core systems and behaviours with stakeholder ambitions. It takes time and there is no quick fix. Any action can have a strong and unpredictable reaction. It's not only in Chaos Theory that we need to be always on our guard. Amazonian butterflies have much to answer for!
I have served my apprenticeship in the CRM solutions' business and, especially in the lightening age of social media, where brands can live and die frighteningly quickly, becoming TCA is what it's now all about. Smart companies will maintain their focus, even when the going gets tough.
I marked the New Year with a Martini made with that special Gin. Shaken by being gouged but stirred into wanting to work with others on how to manage the journey, and that is likely to begin with claiming back the Relationship word. After all, relationships grow with moments of sharing, listening and occasionally surprising. Thank You, Mr Bond.
Happy New Year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)