Maybe it's me?

Something isn't right

2007-07-19T05:41:00.000+12:00

Last week the musician Prince announced that his latest album would be given away free in conjunction with a UK newspaper. You can read an update here on the story.

Now I posted a couples times on the state of play of the music industry ( you can read my early post here and here). I resisted posting about the Prince story because I wanted to see how the side of the record labels would respond. I am dishearten to see that the same defensive posture of the wanning medium of the album still holds.

Why after a decade of decreasing sales have record labels not developed new avenues to generate income. We have music downloads widely available now but record labels didn't invent that as much as try to jump on the band wagon.

When will see the next era of engaging record music ushered in? It looks like the way of the record store is over. I would definitely be trying to get out of the selling businesses and move towards creating value around music inline with a new generation of music lovers who don't even have the context of only having music available through physical objects like CDs.

Not easy at all, but it has to happen and better to be one of the first right

The best movie marketing ever?

2007-07-06T06:24:00.000+12:00

I believe this to be the most intriguing movie promotion to date: 1-18-08

The trailer for this movie was shot as if on a handycam, very amateur and very real, and was shown before Transformers (which I immensely enjoyed by the way).

Its basically a mystery as to what this film is about, and man has it got peoples' attention. The movie is produce by the same dude who brought us the brilliant TV show Lost.

Definitely worth tracking this to see how this evolves. I will be.

Excuse me, there is a white elephant in my way

2007-07-03T19:52:00.000+12:00

I just watchws the Pursuit of Happiness with Will Smith. There is a scene where Will Smith's character, Chris, has an interview for an internship with a brokerage firm. As if it wasn't bad enough that Chris was going into this situation grossly under qualified, but that very night before his interview, he was arrested for not paying parking tickets in the middle of painting his apartment.

After spending a night in jail Chris goes straight into the interview , disheveled, shirtless and covered in paint.

How would you go about addressing this?

Well, Chris reacts by getting straight to it and naming the white elephant.

Sometimes acknowledging the white elephant by coming straight out with the obvious is the only way to make progress. Leaving it as the "the thing we can all clearly see but shall not speak of" is the route to disaster as it will remain the preoccupation usurping other more important things.

Naming the white elephant takes boldness. But it also results in greater trust and honestly once addressed.

How to fix the Music Industry

2007-06-17T11:35:00.000+12:00

The movie industry has bounced back after a dip in the past few years. I think this is largely because studio executives have paid more attention to what people want. This is not a conversation of quality as I think there are still plenty of horrible films being made. But with numerous 80's inspired movies been made recently (think Transformers and comic book adaptations) I think we are seeing a closer parallel to the type film many people want to watch (the biggest movies goers are guys 18 - 35 i.e. which includes people who grew up in the 1980s).

Video piracy, as bad as the media has reported, has in fact not hit the movie industry as hard as suggested. I think this is becuase the theatrical experience of watching film is just that, an experience. Engaging with the event of watching a film, whether a movie theater or at home is an experience - popcorn, getting the best seats, watch trailers. This experience is coupled with a pricing structure that makes sense (most of the time).

The music industry on the other hand has reduced itself to a through-away experience where people place little value on the process on requiring new music. There is so much more new music every week than new films that rallying around just a few big releases is not going to work. Films go from theaters to DVD to TV. There are different windows of opportunity to experiences it. Music on the other hand goes from internet, radio to music stores without the experience fundamentally changing.

There is just way too much choice when its comes to music. I think fixing the music industry comes down to the process of getting music to become as compelling as wanting to listen to the music itself. Until the perceived value of acquiring music increases, piracy will be rampant as there is really very little missed as far as the experience goes from buying a CD to coping music from your friends iTunes.

Your job description

2007-06-09T10:45:00.000+12:00

I believe this should be mandatory in any job description becuase if it were our experiences engaging with others would dramatically improve:

Your job is to make things better

Read Seth here for an illustration

How do you see yourself?

2007-05-06T12:32:00.000+12:00

When I meet someone new I often seek to find out what they do for a living as I hope to build a conversation around understanding who they are and how they see their place in the world (even if just a little). I think I pursue this line of conversation because I have bought into the idea that what we do equivalent to full time work gives us worth and explains who we are.

But according to two independent 2006 surveys conducted both in the US and New Zealand, only 14% and 17% of adults consider that they spend most of their day working out of strengths, respectively. If you work out of your strengths, it means you operate in your zone, you play to the way you are naturally wired, love what you and do it well.

So if the vast majority of us are not:

doing what we love; and,
feel like we are using our strengths to full effect

I would put forward that we are not employed/ doing something that is closely aligned to who we are. It would then seem usually then that in order to understand who someone is we ask what they do for work, when more than likely, they are not doing something that are great at i.e. doing something that tells us what makes them unique and thus setting them apart from others.

If you do a do that you do think completly captures you, here is your challenge. Next time someone asks what you do, only tell them about your passions or what you dream of doing and see where the conversation takes you.

Back by um...popular(?) demand

2007-04-28T11:03:00.000+12:00

I must admit that the my attention to this blog has wanned over the past three months. But my honest belief is that I should on write stuff on here when I have something worthwhile to say.

For the last few days I have been participating in a convergence of leaders from around America and the globe who are have gathered together out a common purpose to influence the world. I would like to expand on something that was put forward this morning in a panel discussion.

It was put forward that "Who can I trust?" is a fundamental question that shapes, in part, the way we in the west approach engaging in society. It was stated that the question is now at the very essence of how many of us see life because of the unfulfilled promises of scientific advancement and the decay of the family unit.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki demonstrated that science was not the new bright hope of a better world and a better life but if fact a treacherous pursuit so poorly pursued that global alienation, (the term once confined to science-fiction) may become the last entry into our history books.

Once a taboo, divorce has sadly become as much of a social institutional experience for many families as the marriage relationship it severs.

It should come to no surprise that children grow into adulthood with persistent question mark hanging over every interaction with a new people or contact we a new organisation. For any of us how have to promote, spread, and communicate ideas and beliefs we are faced with the challenge to not develop a perception of trust worthiness but to actually develop credibility through building relationships based around honest yet tactful presentation of what we are about and to what ends we want to achieve.

I believe that this in not a vocation relative theory but rather a posture everyone should consider who desires others to know what they know or experience what they experience. The alternative is that it will take so long for someone to trust what the hear or see that nothing positively authentic will be spread.

The power of random generousity

2007-02-24T06:36:00.000+13:00

I came across this story about a random act of kindness: http://alchemic-spot.blogspot.com/2007/02/guerilla-tourism-board.html.
This is an example of how shaping culture towards hospitality and kindness will always be more effective in than leaving that duty to paid "specialists".

Hope you have a good day

Will it spread?

2007-02-12T14:31:00.000+13:00

I believe that each human has an inherent potential set before conception. The word potential in this case means the promise of a level of ability to bring things into existence that are not yet tangible but remain possible if pursued. So this is to say that you and I have a level of creative ability that is not fully realised or put to use without some deliberate effort.

I bring this up because for the almost half a decade I have been developing my comprehension of what it means to be in pursuit of ones potential. In this time I have awoken to a world that has known this idea (in some shape or form) for millennia.

Whether it comes though in a secular or spiritual viewpoint, I think there is a universal truth to who we are; that each person has uniqueness found in the potential they could live flavoured through a limitless combination of DNA, personality, character development, strengths , and choice.

But why doesn't this concept pervade the fabric of society on a conscious level? Why is it that we dynamic and creative human individuals so often settle for mediocre and mundane experiences of life?

It seems to me that the answer to so many of the problems and issues concerning humanity lie just over the horizon of perceived potential (where in my mind realised potential lies) yet seems so far out of reach every time we start to focus our attention on the urgent instead of the important.

Getting the attention of your friend's friend = Priceless

2007-01-23T16:31:00.000+13:00

Seth Godin offers yet another insight for us to ponder.

If you want to promote your brand, organisation, product, service or whatever then you need to get your audience on board with what you’re about before you can really reach them with your information. We do this through a permission marketing based endeavour. But how do you get them to bite in the first place?

Well you have to know your target and what motivates them in the right way. As Seth points out, offering that latest have to have will get people to comply with your “please give us permission to tell you about us” (i.e. permission marketing) request, but its not likely to make converts to your message, that is, people who will then turn around and promote you to their friends and acquaintances. We have to provide an incentive which will encourage and grow the behaviour and loyalty you need to successfully communicate the next message.

If you offer people the chance of a reward or prize for signing up to a newsletter, then you should be offering something which encourages a level of participation with you in the future, i.e. passing on the URL to a friend who is also likely to become a convert. That’s a network connection that costs you nothing and one which can translate into a new follower = Priceless.

Welcome back...

2007-01-23T16:26:00.002+13:00

I have been absent from posting on my blog for sometime. End of year and a lot was happening that diverted my energy elsewhere. I will be doing a fair bit of traveling in 07 (man, 2000 seemed like yesterday) and again my attention may be held elsewhere, but I shall do my best to post as much as I can.

Much respect,

Benn

1%

2006-12-07T21:21:00.000+13:00

Hey, been a while. How have you been? Keeping well I hope.

I haven't posted for a while for two reasons

I have been busy enough that I have been able to occupy myself with others thing besides writing for my blog
I really haven't been inspired to break out of my busyness to write. Nothing was compelling enough to get me to jot my thoughts down here, until now...

I read this post on the 1% of early adopters. This post introduces (for me) and explains the concept of 1% as applied to biker gangs from the late 40s onwards. Very briefly, the term was coined by a supposed quote made after a "riot" where a motorcycle club terrorised a small town in America. The quote stated that 99% of bikers were good people, like you and I, and it was just 1% who were trouble. Apparently this was actually staged (Read the blog post for more info) but it didn't stop bikers gangs taking on the 1% identity and wear it literally as a badge of pride.
The central idea of the 1%ers is this:

the One Percenter clubs are organized around the idea of a community, and their unconventional lives and motorcycle lifestyles are reinforced by the strong-as-steel bonds with other members. They revel, sometimes raucously in beer-soaked pandemonium, in a culture that conventional society frowns on. Forget seeking the approval of conventional governing bodies; the One Percenters revel in their minority status.

They are outlaws of culture.

The Church of the Customer blogging team have translated this 1% mentality to people who voluntarily create content for the web in order to communicate to unknown others, their passion for or dislike of products, services, experiences, media, or whatever.

I think that this term can be applied even wider than that, to those who choose to live as if in the 1%. Who willingly embrace not being accepted by mainstream conventions in order to lead the way, pave the path or whatever for a new paradigm to how we see life.

These are the people would live in a counterculture mindset yet whom look like you or I. I not taking about anarchist, but rather a group of people who believe in equality and do something about, who believe no one should live in poverty and do something about it, who believe that everyone deserves and needs to be connected with other people relationally in order for us as individuals and society as a whole to proposer.

I'm taking about people out there who refuse to live in anything other than optimism and hope the the whole and global society will one day its act together and start to realise the potential we were designed to have. I want to be in the 1% of individuals who though are small in number, a hugely influential in transforming the world, or using the idea diffusion curve, are the people who are capable of taking a radical idea as and early adopter and transitioning it to be palpable for the mainstream first and second majority.

I would like to leave you with some excerpts for the Church of the Customer post. I have tweaked it to suit my angle:

What they do is beyond the norm. Sometimes there is little recognition, but they are dedicated to and protective of their work and the community they're involved in. They excel on the edges of culture even if their percentage as [lifestyle innovators] is little more than a rounding error to some [people]. Numbers-wise, they are not huge, but the impact of their [lives] can be.

I'm the 533,991,092 richest person in the World!

2006-10-27T12:23:00.000+13:00

That's a crazy number right, and probably not that flashy to throw in my CV. But consider this. Even though my position is in the hundreds of millions I'm in the top 8.89% of the richest people in the world! That is absolutely crazy cause I sure don't act like I have an abundance of resources. Get your reality check and find where you stand on the global rich list here

Why WE don't make our own dreams come true

2006-10-26T09:15:00.000+13:00

Marketing guru Seth Godin recently posted that there are two fears that inhibit marketing creativity. I believe that these fears as very truth when it comes to people re-orientating their lives in the pursuit of the thing they want to do most - their life dream. For some this is the dream job, or dream business concept for others it dream for a different and better way to live or a way in which they can express themselves.

Read the fears below and see if they ring true for you:

The first is fear.
The fear that you'll have to implement whatever you dream up.
The fear that you will fail.
The fear that you will do something stupid and be ridiculed by others (for decades).
The fear that you'll lose your job, your friends, your possessions.
The fear that there will be an unanticipated backlash associated with your idea.
The fear of change.
The fear of missing out on the thing you won't be able to do if you do this.

The second is a lack of imagination.

I think that the fear of limiting our opportunities is a powerful dissuader Our culture rewards people for not committing to one thing over another. The level of flexibility we live our lives at means we can pick and chose as we go through without the need to commit one way or another. This is reflected through many facets in society from consumer purchase decisions to divorce rates.
I think this aspect of our culture makes it hard for has to align our lives to the trajectory of realising our dreams or life ambition.

Easy Belief

2006-10-14T22:20:00.000+13:00

Recently I have been coming across some interesting views on life, the place of work in life, and how business should or shouldn't be done.

It comes at no surprise to many who no me, I'm sure, that I have some pretty strong veiws on these matters. For example, if you make work about you your pay check, you will only be happy working as long as your pay check is adequate in your eyes. But if you make work about living out of your beliefs and values of what it means to be human in the world, or you make work a learning objective to find out these beliefs and values, then the statisfication for you work will last longer, plus you will be getting paid!

I am not interested in working for another 30-40 years in environments that are not congruent to my beliefs. Even though people tell me all that time that "its a nice idea in principle Benn, but reality means that is harder said then done" I still retain my opinions that not only can business be done differently then the prevalent profit maximisation model, but it can also be as, if not more, sucessful in the long run (it terms of achieving the core ideologies of business).

It's easier to accept the status quo and justfiy things with disclaimers like "but the pressures in my context means I have to focus on XYZ and can't look to forge new ground". Its esay to believe what the prevailing wind tells you. But if I give up my beliefs in light of the fact that I have no definite time horizon to when they become my new reality, then I pretty much will have to settle to life-ordinary. And frankly, what would be the point of that? It may be acceptable for some that their life will no rise above the great middle class (its certainly comfortable) but for, I want more out of life then that. I'm not talking about rising out of class structures through more personal wealth, but rather I talking about believing that I can have a profound affect of the world. I don't know in my case whether I can make an impact globally, nationally or locally, but I going to die trying to convince others by demonstrating that we can lives beyond average.

I urge you to consider talking up a similar challenge to dare to believe that you could be someone who shows others that anyone can excel and rise beyond what come easy by refusing the circumstances on offer to as the only option for your life.

Music & Leadership

2006-09-22T08:56:00.000+12:00

Part One:

The Music industry baffles me. Record labels bemoan the fact that CD sales are suffering because of pirated internet downloads. The proliferation of CD writers and the MP3 format (/players) has made it too easy for the consumer to get their hands on the music they want, when they want for little effort and minimal cost.

It seems obvious to me that the reason why people don't buy CD's any more is because it is easier to copy music. I believe people justify this by the low value they place on mainstream music. From memory, there are about 100 new singles a week, most are will be average and forgettable. The reality is that as long as record labels churn out mediocre music to make a quick buck, consumers will circumvent the old process of having to buy the music they want in favour of getting this disposable music for free.

Now what does this have to do with leadership? Well a couple of things. One of which I will touch on now. I had a conversation yesterday about developing the leadership skill sets and capacity of a company's senior leadership team. Sadly, there is no plan on the horizon to begin the search, investment and development in the people who could be the future leaders of the company.

I think that people are instinctively cynical about programmes design to boost leadership ability. And like the music industry, employees learn and adopt the ways which circumvent anything that seems to be of superficial value. The question I proposed to the people planning to implement this leadership programme is what gains do they expected from these people who are, in all probably, not placed in their current position because of their leadership prowess but because of their ability to manage people and teams to impact bottom-line results.

Now managing for bottom-line results in necessarily bad, but it isn’t leadership. Corporate leadership - in fact leadership full stop - in New Zealand is suffering because organisations don't make it a priority to focus on the people who have the greatest potential, the great greatest capacity, and the natural gifting and strengths to be level 4 and 5 leaders…

Getting it wrong

2006-09-05T13:23:00.000+12:00

I just read this scathing article about a new MP3/cellphone hybrid called Chocolate. What is amazing about this is not the disappointment of the technology but the fact that somehow through an escalation of commit, through buffalo mentality, through group think, lack of robust testing process and systems or whatever, this terrible device made it though to the consumer market.

I haven't tried a Chocolate for myself (not available in NZ) so it might not be as dreadful as the reviewer makes outs. The problem however is that this journalist works for The New York Times and this article is linked from the papers homepage (this page gets massive traffic), so however valid, this opinion matters by warrant of its reach alone.

I'm sure that the people who work fro LG and Verizon (the makers of the Chocolate) on the whole want to create category killer products (like an iPod, like a Treo), yet they release something to market which is clearly not one. I bet that those who develop product concepts design these products, and develop marketing plans, dream of being involved in the next big consumer electronic craze. Yet most of the stuff that get shovelled out, like the chocolate, is crap. People will buy this, probably, but it won’t be something its makers will retire on.

Why do we allow mediocrity to surface so often?
What is it about people in organisations that cause us to tolerate average (or below average) performance?

I, like many, many others I’m sure, know some of the potential explanations from an organisational behaviour and management perspective. However, it seems what is readily available insight doesn't seem to register with decision makers very often (well at least at LG quality control department).

How can smart people be so dumb so much of the time?

Buffalo Wings

2006-09-04T09:58:00.000+12:00

Now ask most Kiwis if they have seen a buffalo in the flesh and most, I'm guessing, will say no. Yet we experience the buffalo mentality in organisations with which we participate, all the time.

Buffalo unfailingly rely on the actions of those around them. The beasts' eyes are positioned on the sides of their heads which gives them ability to see exactly what other buffalo are doing.

Some First Nation tribes of America (American Indians to you and me) realised that by taking advantage of buffalo’s heard mentality they could take out a massive amount them. The First Nation people observed that once the leaders of the herd set a direction the rest of herd will follow running with their heads down nullifying the ability to cast their vision into the future and scan for challenges and opportunities on the horizon. Unsurprisingly, it proved rather effective to stampede a herd off a cliff and into a gully.

How could this possibly work? Well by the time the leaders of the herd realised they had reached the precipice of a gully they were unable to stop going over the edge as the momentum of the herd following them pushes them forward plunging them to their deaths. The rest of the animals actually cast themselves over the edge willing as they judge the validity of their bearing by those they are travelling next to.

Many organisations, whether non-for-profits, multinational, family run, franchise or partnership, have driven themselves over the edge propelled by their own herd mentality momentum. Not enough people questioned the organisation’s direction and the leaders never really had control of the rest of the herd.

The burden to great leadership and high performing teams in the work place and in life is on both those forging the way and those following. Not surprising the buffalo population is no where near the extent that it once was; they were such easy targets to manipulate.

What does Life mean to you

2006-07-30T21:32:00.000+12:00

I came across this acronym yesterday by one of my favourite communicators, Erwin McManus. I have never encountered anyone who is as passionate about people realising their true potential and living out of the gifts and talents as Erwin is. L.I.F.E is a code Erwin tries to live by and which suggests to me that it's probably a good idea I recommend it to you (and myself) to consider.

Look forward to the future. When you wake up be excited about what your day may bring. Spend time dreaming how you want your life to be.
Invest your time in things that matter. If you don't love your job the best thing you can do now is to start investing your time in the people you work with. Invest in people and you will never want for challenge and reward in your life.
Focus on the moment. Squeeze every bit of life out of the opportunities you are given. Don't loose the enjoyment of what you are doing now by being distracted by what's coming next.
Expect your life to be significant. Expect to be extraordinary and expect to meet extraordinary people.

If you can apply these thing, I believe that irrespective of what you actually end up doing your life will be rich and meaningful to you and those around you. Be known for Passion, Energy & Determination.

Here's to the start of a new week and month. Enjoy!

The Changing of the Guard

2006-07-18T23:03:00.000+12:00

A colleague sent me an interesting article yesterday. It reports on some research recently undertaken on the state on leadership in New Zealand workplaces and it subsequent affects on employees' satisfaction with their job.

The findings strike a cord with me. Firstly, the art/science of leadership is something close to my heart and something I want to pursue more seriously sometime in the future (one day I hope to be able to share some of the detailed thoughts I have been knocking around).
Secondly, I believe that this article touches on some of the core issues with emerging leaders in our workplaces, or the lack there of. I would like to share two of my observations:

I believe that the 17% of people who are passionate about their jobs and essentially loving what they do are this way not because of a great manager, generous renumeration, great perks or good Feng Shui throughout the office. These things are important but only decrease the amount of dissatisfaction someones has. These people are passionate because they will be working out of their strengths, or in other words, doing the things they are great at which energize them. Most people are happy to do what they are good at and while they will be effective in their roles they won't get the vitalisation that the 17% of us do who constantly work within their niche or zone or whatever you want to call it.
In five years time when the first load of baby boomers hit 65, there is not suddenly going to be a release of the best positions that they hold. I bet you they will fight to hang on to those positions like a Coca-Cola fan would hold on to the last Vanilla Coke once the product leaves the market (I'm not bitter). Those of us a at the beginning end of our careers (first 10 years) will need to be in a position to take those roles. I don't think they will be easily given.

I want to be a future leader of New Zealand. I am convinced that the best thing I can do to achieve this is to continually apply a strategic approach to my development in leadership skill, capability and experience. I encourage you to join me in this pursuit so in five to seven years time we will be on the cusp of an exciting and dynamic era of a new movement of emerging leaders. I think five years is a fair projection. It falls on you and I to make the decision about what the future leadership of organisations in New Zealand will look like. Who do you want to be signing your pay checks off then?

Exploring Leadership (Updated)

2006-07-06T19:56:00.000+12:00

Consider this: The talented musician

you are the leader of a band and have one member who is spoilt for talent. I mean seriously, they can play the guitar, drums, keys, and bass. She can sing, arrange music and construct a complete performance. However this person is stubborn and hard to lead. She passively resists engaging with her full potential.

My question is this.

How do you engage with the most talented (potential and active talent) and the most gifted (unrealised and realised gifts)?

Do you manage by placating her with token solos? Would you allow her to get by on her undisciplined brilliance, all the while accepting uncommitted involvement and undermining your position as group leader every time you defer to her for inspiration and input?

Do you lead by helping her to realise the potential she has and make her a leader through influence herself? Would you spend your time getting to know and understand her enabling you to effectively direct and focus her abilities? Would you be prepared to give her enough autonomy which she could hang you with?

Or would you find a new band member?

Is there another way? What would you do? Tell me...

The Heart of Man

2006-06-15T22:10:00.000+12:00

1. Wealth without work

2. Pleasure without conscience

3. Knowledge without character

4. Commerce without morality

5. Science without humanity

6. Worship without sacrifice

7. Politics without principle
—Mahatma Gandhi

The gloss on life gets rubbed off for me when I'm reminded how humanity is prepetually struggling to adjust to the realilty that the heart of man currupts easily and the accomplice to the crime of corruption is frequently our own indifference (Bess Myerson).

Enjoy your weekend!

Forgotten Silver

2006-06-10T11:43:00.000+12:00

I love film and movies. I love going to the theater to see a blockbuster that I've been anticipating its arrival for some time. I love how the smell of buttered popcorn hits you as near the confectionery stand. I love being able to buy a ridiculously big soft drink and I love to gripe at how expensive it is. When I'm actually in the treater I love watching the trailers and telling my friends inside info about them. When the movie starts, I love being engulfed by the soundtrack. And when the movie ends, I love the feeling of satisfaction I get when the it was just how I imagine it should have been. I always stay to the end of the credits as you never know what parting gift a director may leave.

For me, a great movie experience is timeless. If I hear a particular soundtrack, I'm flooded with the feelings I had when I watched the movie. And, you might see the trend emerging, I love those feelings.

But there's a lot that informs my perceptions and expectations of films. One major influence is following the movie industry and the dynamics and idiosyncrasies of viewing audiences. I am intrigued and fascinated by how different films are marketed and the tension and compromises made between the art form and the money machine. Just the other night I sat down with my brother and we worked out that only 46 of the top 100 grossing films are original ideas, that is, not an adaptation, remake or prequel/sequel. Most of these originals make up the bottom half of the list.

These various info-streams feed my opinions on a particular film. And this is what struck me the other day. No one is going to think or feel the exact same way about a film as I do. We will interpret metaphors differently, we may not even look for them. We will appreciate the cinematography, directing, script, plot and score on numerous levels different form one another. The filters and background information I have will differ to yours and therefore a different results will come out once the same film has been viewed.

But do you know what, it really doesn't matter that we have nuances and peculiarities because that is what makes dialogging about opinions so interesting. It adds a level of unpredictability to life. It adds colour and flavour. Even though I wish people would just see things my way, in reality I know that their insights and perspectives make my life richer.

I'm aware that this might not seem a revelation for some, but for me, I now really get it. It actually reflects something that has been surfacing in my life for sometime. A life truth trying to brake through my stubborn head maybe.

In order to truly maximise our experience of life and to discover and realise our potential, we need to be living in many different worlds of opinions and spheres of culture. We need to dialogue and communicate the differences in order to see new things, things we wound have never seen before had we not had our eyes opened by someone else.

I want to make the best decisions I can. Its important to me that I get things right with the least amount of tries at it as necessary. I now appreciate in a new way how other people help me to do this, and that my friends, is a beautiful thing.

What's in a name?

2006-06-06T14:42:00.000+12:00

Seth Godin points to a blogger who stated that "Podcasting" is a bad name on the account that it is not immediately evident what it means.

I know few people under the age of 25 who would have not at least heard of Podcasting been bandied about by a friend. I would also guess that I would know virtually no one who, upon being explained Podcasting in reference to an iPod and iTunes, would not intuitively make the connection.

Podcasting is a next generation media. A new generation requires a new set of words and terms; a new language by which it will use to carve out a new iteration of culture.

As with medium, language should be made appropriate to the audience, and in this case a new word had to be made up.

The Day After Yesterday

2006-06-05T21:39:00.000+12:00

I watched Sideways finally today. It impresses the point that the medium and mode of a message completely matters when communicating something that people either:

Hear frequently and grow indifferent to receiving it one more time; or,
Subconsciously know it but don't want to hear it.

In my mind, the movie portrays two a-type personalities of today's age, you know the people who have a pretty good grasp of their life and the lifestyle they lead and are throughly depressed by the meaninglessness and insignificance that they have created for themselves. And then the one who strip away meaning from the very things that define and give life meaning in the pursuit of striking the formula for a happy life.

What does this have to do with anything? Well that movie won two Golden Globes and earned five Academy nominations in light of the fact it told the story of people who I believe are in an abundances in our society, a coy self examination stark-naked in the mirror.

Change is hard for people to accept, except for those instigating the change and maybe those who saw the change coming (though that doesn't always help). Even the worst things can be accepted and even celebrated when pitch perfect medium and mode are selected.

How much pain would we save if we really applied attention to delivery that an important message needs?

Time Traveling

2006-05-24T19:33:00.000+12:00

Too much space since my last post.

Of late I have been noticing the great divide between what is really important to one group of people and another. It astonishes me how one group, team, organisation, culture and so on, can prioritise so differently and still work within the wider societal context. I guess the determining factor of this is how affective they can be with their different priorities and succeed playing with the same conventions as the rest of us, i.e. the desire to do what you do better and the fear of failing at this. This manifests itself differently for various groups, but I believe its a common rule which everyone working together (whether successfully or not) abides by.

I hope that I can my life is about being involved in groups and organisations that focus on being extraordinary at something and not fearing to really go for it be that we might fail along the way.

Ideas, Imagination and Innovation.

2006-05-16T09:13:00.000+12:00

What would your organisation be like if it had consistent input from stakeholders? - your "customers" tell you how you could improve the things you produce and the services you offer aka the end user’s going from a receiver to an essential ingredient of your development process.

There is a significant element of society that really wants to participate in something that for them makes a difference.

Now stop imagining and starting doing. One of the gateways to the Global Brain is the Internet - low barriers to entry and flexible.

My point in its essence - if our focus is not on attracting Innovators and Early adopters to partner with us in designing improvements for how people can interface and connect with our organisations and what we offer, someone else will and we'll be the last ones left at the party asked to turn the lights off without an invitation to the next gathering.

Can I smell Cheese?

2006-05-04T10:27:00.000+12:00

It's interesting how people grow accustomed to things being in the same place, events occurring in same way with similar outcomes, and can hold a belief that people's behaviour is a constant that can be relied upon.

Now before some of you switch off, this isn’t a geek piece.

I read some interesting comments about how Web 2.0 will not get traction from the people hold the most relevant knowledge in organisations; the people from which the organisation will derive the most benefit from them using them. (What is Web 2.0?).

It's sometime hard to keep perspective when talking about the Internet. We have only a quarter century of experience using the tool. In terms of history, it’s an incredibility short time. There are few things in life about people's behaviour that can be said to true at all times. Though I believe there are some, the way people incorporate the use of IM, emailing etc, hasn't really been around long enough to say that it so entrenched in human behaviour that new web tools emerging won’t last. The extreme Internet users who are naturally attracted to the dynamic and ever evolving Internet find it easy to adopt new tools/functionality. These people are the teenagers and young adults of today who will be the workers and business leaders of tomorrow.

Like any advancement in a certain aspect of society, the lasting impact is almost always different to its initial introduction. Web 2.0 will change enterprises and organisations. It must because it's changing how a significant and influential demographic of web users are socially connecting. Whether we talk about businesses, not-for-profits, community groups, churches or whatever, they are made up of people who are relational by nature. If Web 2.0 helps to connect enough people effectively (which I believe it is beginning to doand will increasingly do as the tech behind things like wikis evolves) then that will be enough to cause a shift.

The reality is people are never, not busy. We will never have anymore time then we have now to do more stuff. Once priorities change, people will find the time to do what they value.

What are you doing today...

2006-05-02T13:03:00.000+12:00

helping to end a 20 year war perhaps?

A little while back I wrote that there have been no significant social actions (significant in the context of the Internets reach to over 1 billion uses) empowered by the use of the Internet. I may have been wrong. Invisible Children is an organisation with an amazing mission –to end a 20 year war. Three young guys have made a documentary chronicling the Ugandan civil war and the stories of the children who have to flee their villages every night and walk to safe compounds in the city to escape being made into child soldiers or sex slaves. They, and a group of impassioned volunteers, have harnessed the reach of MySpace, Youtube and other youth-centric sites to attract and inspire American youth to believe that they can have a real and lasting affect in changing the world. As clichéd as this may unfortunately have become saving the world is not just for beauty queens.

Please do me the favour of checking out their site. This is an inspirational example of how utilising the Internet in conjunction with old fashioned telephone and footpath-bashing campaigning can effect change. I don’t know what the outcome of this cause will be, but my hope is that instances like this will herald a new wave of effective social action.

How will you be spending May 1st?

2006-04-27T11:32:00.000+12:00

Did you know that on Monday, May 1st, it will be the 25th anniversary of the first Frequent Flyer programmes? An article in the New York Times looks back at the 25 years. Who cares right? Well there is an interesting human behaviour that this article touches on. We (you and I) will do some pretty irrational things for the promise of something free; for the illusion of something gained and nothing given in return.

There is something very curious about why we, as consumers, buy into these loyalty schemes from businesses. The article points to research that finds American travellers will spend an average of USD$170 more the cheapest fare to fly with the airline they get miles from. Do they not realise that if they went with the cheapest airline every time, they would have more money in the pocket which could be spent on an array of options not just travel (or even that quaint idea called savings)?

It just doesn’t make sense (to me). Yet, I think of how this applies to other areas of life. How many of the people we relate to are simply connections based on getting something from them for nothing? We always buy coffee when a certain barista is working at our local café because she gives us a free coffee every now and again. We associate ourselves with certain people because being able to say we know them gives us status, even though their character is less than what we would look for in other friends (and this may be particularly relevant if you belong to online social networks - personal, business, or otherwise).

While this post is a slight divergence from what I normally blog about, I feel there is merit in taking this opportunity to reflect on why we associate ourselves with certain businesses and people.

And remember, (and I remind people of all the time) the price structure of products and services is designed to cover the cost of loyalty programmes and give-aways etc. They are getting something for free, not us. Our Loyalty. Scratch that, we are actually paying them to have it.

The Thoroughly Modern Man

2006-04-26T09:49:00.000+12:00

I am applauded even rewarded for being a flat-broke perverted pack rat with a bad marriage and no self-control - Robert Bruce

Why is it that poetry can sometimes capture complex truths about human reality that would take an age to extrapolate any other way?

Read the rest - knifegunpen

Best Sellers List

2006-04-21T11:44:00.000+12:00

Ever wondered where God is in this world? Try the New York Best Sellers List

Brave New World

2006-04-21T09:25:00.000+12:00

A friend was telling me about a book were society has been transformed to a utopia where humans live in a perpetual state of happiness. But as the story advances the protagonist begins to realise that maybe being happy does not mean you are content.

So why do I bring this up you ask? Well, over the last week I have come across a number of statements on the web that proclaim the Internet as the medium to lead the world to a place where individuals are more empowered, more knowledgeable and more connected then ever before. My conclusion from such statements is that this inevitability means people can live more enriched and ultimately more happy lives. Two such sources that point to this are Seth Godin and a recent Trendwatching briefing.

An article in the New York Times quotes the new head of operations for Google in China, Kai-Fu Lee, who said on his website just prior to his appointment

"youth + freedom + equality + bottom-up innovation + user focus + don't be evil
= The Miracle of Google."

Now don't get me wrong, I am all for the Intranet becoming a tool and resource that gives a person access to information, other people, and products/services faster and more efficiently than if they did not have an Internet connection. I am for the Internet being used as a platform to change how companies operate, how business is conducted, how mainstream media presents "truth" and I am for Internet being used as vehicle to pressure governments to have greater transparency and be more socially responsible/accountable.

But I have some growing reservations about the user culture developing and the affects of some well intended people who are driving the evolution of Internet from web2.0 and beyond. Now that more people have the ability to reach others with their opinions and now that creating a web presence is far more achievable for the masses, why haven't we seen any major social actions transpire. There are really basic needs still not being met and I worry that the Internet may become to insular and disconnected from the world we must live in.

The Miracle of Google? The Google story is amazing. Without Google, the Internet may well have been dominated by a evil global organisation out to bleed dry every user by charging them subscriptions for search and advertising them to death, or worst, it could have been Microsoft. But seriously, I think that my children (if I ever have any) will naturally assume that the Google homepage is actually the front end of the Internet to which every site is attached to. But until the majority of global Internet users throw their weight behind movements like Make Poverty History and help to see these sorts of visions realised, we will not see a real miracle nor a higher function to which the Internet could elevate to.

Reason or not

2006-04-13T09:17:00.000+12:00

In a recent New Yorker article, Malcolm Gladwell looks at a new book by Charles Tilly called "Why?" which explores "our reasons for giving reasons."

The idea is that we have four different reasoning approaches

Convention (social formulae -"its not you, it me")
Stories (common sense narratives - "I'm really sorry, I've been having a bad day")
Code (legal formulae - "Company policy dictates that must comply with the standard”)
Technical accounts (specialised stories - "Because of the way our PBX system routes calls it caused the delay")

Understanding why we explain things they way we do, helps us to learn when certain approaches are beneficial and when others are inappropriate. This in turn makes our ability to relate to other people more effective and will determine the quality of our relationships to family, friends and colleagues.

Thin-Slicing the Internet

2006-04-12T14:36:00.000+12:00

Want a piece of the action but don't have the inclination or time to invest in honing your Internet surfing skills? Webaroo has the solution for you.

In partnership with Acer, Webaroo is putting out laptops with 40 gig Internet cache packages that update when connected to the Net but can be accessed and read offline.

Its certainly amazing the path global connections to global information has put us on considering it's been less than 15 years since the first Web Site went live to the public

Worlds Collide

2006-04-12T12:14:00.000+12:00

It’s going to be interesting to see how intervention by US lawyer makers and public-do-gooder groups in the operation of MySpace will affect the social networking environment.

If you have not been tracking what happening, here is a brief summation. There are bad people in the world who are intent on revelling in their evil ways. Ok, so you know this right? Well recently much media attention has been given to the potential (and illustrated) opportunities for ‘predators’ and online pornographers to take advantage of social networks, like MySpace, and exploit the young audience that they attract.

This is a clear and present danger in the online environment and I believe every online organisation has a social duty to protect their users and prevent people abusing their tools, whether it is spammers, malware creators, or sexual deviants.

But the approach to this social issue is, yet again, what I would consider a Band-Aid solution to a problem which is actually systemic of a wider issue facing humanity not just western internet users.

(Yes, the appropriative government bodies/agencies should be involved to ensure that standardisation of regulation endeavours by social networking providers are achieved. But no, new and exhaustive laws are not the answers to prevent malefactors from using site for sinister aims.)

Much the same as with gun use, laws curb problems but don’t stop them. Even though gun laws in the US have become stricter, they still have unparallel violent crimes rates involving firearms and handguns.

The issue here as with potential Internet anti-paedophile laws is that society must change in order for people to be safe. The type of people who make children and teenagers their victims will have no hesitation in developing ways to circumvent any legal restrictions emplaced on the social networking environment.

Switzerland have what can only be described as ‘open’ laws around gun ownership; a country where carrying firearms in the open is common place, yet the has very low crime rates let-alone ones where firearms are used. The United Kingdom on the other had has progressively increase its restrictions on firearms and handguns yet violent crimes committed with guns is increasing.

My point is that legislation around what online organisation (particularly social networks and search engines like Google) must do to remove the threat of paedophiles and other sexual predators will not change the very fact that these people exist in our society.

The US laws will make it a harder for them to gain access to potential victims. The laws will inevitability have global consequences on they way aspects of the web environment is run, but there is no evidence that they will correlate to there being less people living in our communities with depraved agendas waiting for the right opportunity.

This is an issue that nations must confront on a broader level than the mechanism where people interact like the Internet. We must find solutions that redeem humanity if we want the world to be a safe place for children to grow up in and become adults who make positive contributions to society.

Social Norms?

2006-04-11T08:44:00.000+12:00

In a presentation I gave the other day, I spoke about how social norms dictate a users behaviour in a computer based collaborative environment and therefore there wasn't the need for traditional management practices as governance by social norms had proved to be very effective.

But I wonder if there is a deeper driver other than social norms. I think that given the opportunity, most people want to do the right things rather than having pressure placed on them to do so; even if it’s as subtle as some social norms can be. To work harmoniously with other people and collectively produce work or ideas that are worth being proud of is a powerful motivation to participate. It feels great when you succeed and can share the success.

Also, and maybe it's me, but I think that this is where (most) people want to be -an environment where people want things to work, where people work at making things work, where people feed off team/shared triumphs and where there is communal understanding that this is the way we ought to do things, whether it be in the workplace, schools, social or community groups.

The Viral Spread of Information

2006-04-07T09:22:00.000+12:00

You may already know that suppressed information pertaining to Louise Nicholas rape case has been spreading throughout the country via bulk emailing, you may have even received it. A DominionPost article posted on Stuff claims this is part of a “sophisticated mass e-mail system”. This implies that the chain distribution through people’s social networks is orchestrated by some Internet Mastermind. There is nothing sophisticated about it. A quarter of the NZ population has access to the Internet at home, and then there are all those who use the Internet at work or Internet cafes or a friends place. Most of these people would have an email account.

It takes one of these people possess the information to set up an account on Gmail (creating a “bogus address” as the DominionPost calls it) and then send out to their personal contact list. The controversy and sensationalism of the message takes care of the rest.

The spreading of this email then becomes a simple mathematical equation. One Person sends it to 50. Of those 50, 30 send it on to a new group collectively totalling say 80 people. Of these 80, 50 people send it off to 5 new people. Now 351 people have the message. The 51st person is what Malcolm Gladwell would call a connector. This person has a diverse social network that spans many different professions, industries and communities. This person sends it to 63 people all with separate social connections to the first wave. The message now can spread in multiple new directions all at once. This is viral spread.

I heard on National Radio this morning that of the 30 people they polled in Wellington half had received information about the suppressed information, mostly through email at work.

This is not a sophisticated process. This is the strength (and a potentially weakness depending on how you look at it) of the Internet. The originator of the message obviously knew that this information had currency and would be passed on by most of the people who received it. I believe there are two reasons for this

they weren’t supposed to have it which makes it exciting and makes them feel like they are in a selected group of people; and,
for some it may be a case of dealing out social justice.

I have not received the email, and if I did I would not pass it on. It is illegal to spread this information and it has serious ethical implications. Right or wrong it’s undermining our legal system which I might have to rely on one day. Because you and I have the ability to choose to pass it on, we hold the “power” and therefore carry responsibilities as to how we participate in the web environment. We make it what it is; think carefully about what kind of place we want to be spending our time in.

Pushing Internet Interface and Design

2006-04-06T22:26:00.000+12:00

What makes blogs so damn cool is the trackback. Following a trackback, or an instance where one blog quotes another, opens up (unleashing might be more appropriate) the blogsphere (or the blogging community).
Following a link from Seth Godin's blog I came across Viaspire - Strategy.Method.Experience. From here I went to this amazing site which will no doubt impress you also. This process is a way of thin slicing the Internet to find the most interesting material (to you) the easiest way possible.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the age of the blog is upon us.

P.S.
If you don't have StumbleUpon - get it now.

Good Advice

2006-04-06T09:46:00.000+12:00

If you're unaware of the blogsphere, where have you been? Blogging is the new black of communication. Blogs provide opinion, not fact, but its opinion that’s tempered by being in the environment of public review. Two things can happen to a blogger:

if they are full of it, everyone will tell everyone to ignore the blog; or,
people acknowledge the honesty of the blog, and whether they agree or not, they respond by: a)commenting or trackbacks on their on blog b)subscribing to a RSS feed or making the site a favorite (del.icio.us etc) c) letting others know about the blog

Blogs are about being a discussion forum, but more than that they are about giving anyone with access to the Internet, and something to say, a web presence.

Seth Godin's gives this advice about marketing but I think it applies to anyone who needs to communicate and be heard by others.

"The worst
thing you can do is be boring and vague.

The second worst thing you can do is be boring and
verbose and obvious."

Blogs are not meant for mass communication, but they are about being able to connect to the masses. Blogs are personal as they give readers the right to directly connect and respond to the blogger.

There is so much more to say... I'll be back

Your help is required Directory

2006-04-04T14:13:00.000+12:00

I'm trying to create a list of the current most effective/user-driven in the social networking/software space:

del.icio.us - social bookmarking site
Frappr -
Friendster - dating site
Flickr -photo posting/sharing site
Stumbleupon - web site ranking
MySpace - friend networking
LinkedIn - business networking

Meetro - radius and proximity based networking
Artboom artist networking
Ryze -business networking
Passado - friend networking (Europe based)
Open BC - businesses networking
Tribe.Net -friend networking
Xanga - friend networking
Facebook - friend networking through schools
Ecademy - business networking
Orkut – friend networking (currently mostly Brazilian users)

It has just occured to me...

2006-04-03T13:39:00.000+12:00

With cell phones quickly becoming portable entertainment centers, how long will it be before video advertising is broadcasted to people phones? It’s really not that far away in terms of technology. The Telco companies will be the first, sending their subscribers video ads about the latest deals and products. It already happens by txt, and when video cell phones reach critical mass expect the bombardment to begin.

Think about it, direct marketing based on demographic information they already have about their customers. People carry their phones everywhere most of the time. No doubt if this happens, legislation will be developed to regulate or prohibit this, and the cycle continues.

Hasta la Vista

2006-03-22T16:13:00.000+12:00

So Microsoft has pushed back it realise of Vista in the interests of no un-stabilising the market. What they really mean is that they're not as far a long as they hoped they would be, they have the usual bounty of bugs that all Microsoft software releases have and have given themselves quite enough time to iron them out for the initial deadline.

On the back of Sony Corp. pushing back its release of the PS3, I'm claiming that 2006 is the year of the Missed Deadline.

Commonwealth Games Defunct?

2006-03-17T11:03:00.000+13:00

Why do we have the Commonwealth Games?

Australia (who is the big dog behind a little fence in this situation) want to become a republic, England hasn’t made any meaningful steps to reinforce the Commonwealth in 30+ years and countries like New Zealand and it Pacific neighbors have very little significant connections with the Motherland other than carrying the Union Jack and abiding by ceremonial traditions. Oh and there is the legal system bit as well but we'll exclude that for the sake of this blog.

Attendance at the Games is not flash hot especially in early stages of heats etc. Would there be any benefit from finishing the Commonwealth Games to let Athletes and the world audience focus solely on the Olympic Games? I think there would as it would make the Olympics that much more elite and special.

That a look at this forum from the Australian newspaper the Age. The Commonwealth Games Forum

Oscar the Grouch

2006-03-08T09:36:00.000+13:00

Hello World!

My first blog post. So this is what it looks like from the other side. Hmm, nice window treatment.

I must admit that I'm a little disappointed with myself that I choose to begin my bloggers life with a critical post, however as I am intent on using this tool to express my authentic self I wont bother entertaining any compulsion to be positive or upbeat simply because I don't want to be seen as overly opinionated or critical. I aim to represent my opinion as succinctly as possible and will pursue short postings until I have found this nirvana.

So, what’s with Hollywood? For the last three years (or at least from what I remember) there have been grumbles with the disappointment that is Oscar’s night. "It's too long", "It's too predictable" “The judges are so conservative" "It’s boring!".

So if this is the case, 1 - why do people still feel compelled (obliged?) to watch; 2 - If there is truth to these criticisms, why don’t those responsible for the biggest night in western entertainment do something about; and 3 (which is really point 2b) - is the Academy made up of real breathing people?

On the first point, I think the lure of the bright stars of American celebrity, who for many are the representation of what they profoundly desire to be, gets the best of people’s curiosity. And much the same as reality TV programmes, the chance that something sensational and/or controversial might happen will always draw the closest voyeurs.

The second and third points are more interesting and the reasoning for them is more complex. I think tradition certainly creates a burden of obligation to which fires the ceremony. Like many elements of the boarder American entertainment industry, the Superbowl, music festivals like Ozfest, and telecasts of important dates e.g. New Years at time square etc, an ingrained sense of belonging to a history of occasions is an important driver it would seem.

With the observation of traditions comes the sense of belonging to/beginning apart of something bigger than oneself and this is worked out in an entertainment event by establishing a history to the occasion which gives the perception of some creditability to what is being observed.

It just seems that this desire for marking achievement in film is buckling under the weight of an out-moded tradition. It’s either large blockbuster which critics are indifferent to at best or small independent style films which sadly few people seem to want to watch (especially those who ought to be watching them).

As far as the Academy being human, they must be a sadistic bunch. In the land of programming excellence, it seems odd that the expertise that give us incredible tension in an episode of 24 can't be transferred for one night to the Oscars. The selection of Jon Stewart as host shows that the Academy realises that audiences will not keep tuning in to this behemoth year after year unless drastic changes take place.

Or maybe, just maybe, it’s me.