Digital Digressions

Making is Connecting

A great talk by Prof. David Gauntlett at the annual LEGO Idea Conference that I wanted to share with you. More thoughts about the conference here.

Great Moments in History Captured in LEGO

Mike Stimpson has been using LEGO to re-create some classic photographs. On the BBC site is a small selection of his work. One of my favourites is this one, Marc Riboud's 1967 photograph of an anti-Vietnam protest in Washington, with a cheeky Star Wars spin to it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/08/in_pictures_inspired_by_classic_photographs/html/1.stm

To see more of Mike Stimpson’s work go to: www.flickr.com/photos/balakov/

Leadership lessons from John Wooden

Something I wanted to share with you that landed in my inbox earlier and in its simplicity captures more about leadership than many books written on the subject. Leadership is not something you are born with, it is something you do to people, either well or abysmally. We all have sour memories of how it felt when someone did it badly and we may be privileged enough to know someone who really inspires us in this regard. After all, its much easier to point to who is a good or bad leader, than it is pinpointing what it is they do or don't do that makes us say that.

However, John Wooden may be able to help us. He is generally regarded as the nation's greatest basketball coach. His UCLA teams during the 1960s and 1970s won 10 NCAA men's basketball national championships and set records for consecutive victories. But since retiring in 1975, the 97-year-old coach has gained fame as a philosopher and motivator.

[From LA Times]

Wooden sat down with The Times and offered up 10 tips -- one for each of the NCAA basketball championships his players won at UCLA -- for how business owners can become better leaders.

1. Listen.

One thing that is often overlooked in leadership is the ability to listen. Listening is so important to those under your supervision.

2. Care.

Another very important part of leadership is to make those under your supervision feel that you care for them -- not just for the job they are doing for you, but you really care for them personally. You just can't tell them you do that, you have to show it.

While some roles aren't as big or in the forefront as others, they are still very important. I used to use this analogy: It is like having a powerful car. Now the engine, like an Alcindor [now called Kareem Abdul-Jabbar], who played for me, that's powerful. Here's another fellow who is just a wheel. And there is another fellow who is just a nut that holds the wheel on. You have to have them all. You must make every person feel that they are needed.

3. Recognize.

When I was teaching in high school in basketball, for example, [I taught that] my players must never score without thanking someone. Don't run over and shake their hand but look at them and give them a little sign or something of appreciation. Everybody likes to have a pat on the back.

4. Prepare.

[Managers should be aware of] preparation for whatever their job is, little or big, preparation is so important. Failure to prepare is preparing to fail. You must not put things off.

5. Be industrious.

Nothing can be accomplished without work. You've got to work hard. If you are looking for the short cut, if you are looking for the easy way, if you are looking for the trick to get things done, you might get them done. But you are not adding strength, you are not building.

6. Have enthusiasm.

If you don't enjoy what you are doing you are not going to be able to give it the industriousness that you should have. You must have that to inspire others to do their best.

7. Be patient.

Good things take time. And that's the way it should be. We don't want it that way but that's the way it is. I think that is a very important thing that a leader must get across to those under his supervision.

8. Have confidence.

You must believe in yourself. If you don't have confidence in yourself you can't expect those under your supervision to act with much confidence.

9. Don't fear failure.

Have initiative but don't be afraid of failure. We are all going to fail at times because we are all imperfect. When I had assistants, I always wanted them never to be afraid to make a suggestion. We don't know a thing we don't learn from somebody else in one way or another. If you do agree [with their suggestion] and use it and it works, be sure that they are the one that gets the credit, not you. Now if it doesn't work, you take the blame because you made that decision to use it.

10. Win respect.

You have to have the respect of those under your supervision. You can't obtain that respect unless you are honest with them and they can depend upon you. Don't try to sell them a bill of goods or you will lose all respect.

Some very good rules to live your life by. Enough said.

LEGO Play - Constructing knowledge and transforming the world

Every now and so often I get these questions  like 'explain the meaning of life on one page', which get your head spinning and are entirely possible to answer, but never without spending a long time meditating on that answer first. For that particular question I have an answer, which you may or may not agree with, which is: Happiness, but I digress.. This particular question though was on the subject of explaining LEGO play, which although simple in some ways: you put a bunch of bricks together in any way you imagine - can actually be pretty complex if you delve into what is actually happening between the lines so to speak.

So if you ever wonder about that question, here's my take on an answer.. and discuss!

Most of us automatically associate childhood with play more than anything else. Children play as often as they can; play is fun. Play also contains in its very foundation all the most important elements that allow us to learn[1], to make sense of our experience and find our place and voice in the world.

 Give the mind a hand, and give the hand a system (or pattern, or language, or logic)

 LEGO play champions a “low floor, high ceiling and wide walls”[2] approach – meaning the threshold to begin play is low, but only the sky is the limit by virtue of literally endless combinations possible with LEGO bricks. The wide walls is about supporting a broad range of open-ended exploration and discovery, yet underpinning it is a shared build system creating an intuitive set of constraints challenging one to think up iterations to an originally conceived idea. It is the familiarity of this System in Play and its capacity to support infinite variation in expression that encourages exploration of the unknown and a mindset open to growth.

From the day we are born, we learn, thrive and grow in relation to others. Vygotsky in particular emphasizes the role of language and other artefacts in mediating human interaction. Children’s extraordinary talent as learners comes largely from their ability to set the stage allowing them to safely project themselves into the unknown through their imagination[3]. In expressing ideas or giving them form through building with LEGO, we make our ideas tangible and shareable with others which, in turn, helps shape and sharpen these ideas further and in that process we build our knowledge and our view of the world through our own personal experience.[4]

Creativity (as opposed to mere novelty) occurs when you think a thought that is outside the space of thought even conceivable to you[5].

Ultimately LEGO play is not just a matter of giving form to ideas, making them tangible and shareable. It is also a matter of bringing ideas and forms to life by making ourselves part of the play by acting out scenarios, events and stories. Treating our creations as if they were the ideas they stand for is what brings them closer to our mind’s reach and enables us to immerse ourselves with the situation at hand and allows us make a creative leap, in effect transforming our view of the world[6].

LEGO play welcomes young and old, experienced builders and novices, but above all it presents everyone with opportunities for creativity that are dynamic and malleable. The experience of flow[7] often associated with LEGO play is the balance between existing skills and the challenge at hand as well as between the anxiety and impatience in realising your idea.

Much like knowledge is an experience to be actively built, both individually and collectively[8], LEGO is a product that isn't finished when it leaves the factory; your imagination makes it complete. It is a creative material, a catalyst in enabling us to influence the world by building and experimenting, pushing our cognitive boundaries and advancing our collective thinking by growing us as individuals.

---

[1] Hans Henrik Knoop, The Danish University of Education

[2] Prof. Mitchel Resnick, MIT

[3] Prof. Edith Ackermann, MIT

[4] Prof. Seymour Papert, MIT

[5] Prof. Margaret Boden, University of Sussex

[6] Prof. Edith Ackermann, MIT

[7] Prof. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Claremont Graduate University

[8] Prof. Seymour Papert, MIT

Think Eco-Systems not just Issues

Take global warming or government regulation as examples - these are all very complex topics, collections of variables where solving the problem cannot be achieved through solving one issue alone, but in fact the solution rests in addressing the eco-system tying together all the inter-linked variables. In fact, seeing things on purely the issue level may in fact be contributing to the problem.

In the book Freakonomics the authors quote numerous examples of cases where seemingly complex phenomena have very simple origins, but often in an entirely different field and the eco-system magnifies the impact through all the inter-related variables and creates an impact on local, sometimes national and international levels. One of the striking examples is their analysis of crime figures in large cities in the US. The numbers were growing at epic proportions year-on year until sometime in the mid-eighties the trend suddenly stopped and began a steady decline. Experts tried to attribute this reversal to anything from an increase in spending on the police, a growth in numbers of staff, prisons, different governments, new laws etc. but the biggest impact came from the legalisation of abortion.

How could this have anything to do with crime figures you may wonder? Here the eco-system comes in: the women most likely to have an abortion back in the 60s where women in low-income households with several children already and who before the legalisation either had to risk their lives to have an abortion by often unqualified people in unsafe conditions and risk prosecution or not have one at all. Many didn't and subsequently struggled to look after their children, who often ended up in crime from a lack of opportunity in life. As abortion became legal in many states, the numbers of these 'unwanted' children dropped and the sheer numbers of disadvantaged youth decreased, thus decreasing the populace likely to commit crime. It's not to say that the other measures had no impact at all, but collectively they helped solve the problem as the eco-system of ideal conditions leading to crime gradually became more untenable.

Biofuels are another example of where eco-system thinking really needs to be applied on a much larger scale than today - touted as the solution to the West's reliance on fossil fuels, the growth of crops destined for biofuels is now accelerating across the world, leading to an increased rate of rain forest destruction (these are our most efficient weapon in clearing CO2 from the atmosphere) as land is being cleared to grow palm oil - a crucial ingredient in biofuels. Much agricultural land previously home to food production is being converted to grow crops for biofuel, putting food production in danger. The biggest irony of all is that the process of producing biofuels has a greater negative impact on global warming than fossil fuel use - proving that there is no simple 'solution' to global warming, in fact simple solutions may in fact be aggravating it further, instead we need to think in eco-systems, not just locally, but nationally and internationally.

Nancy Gibbs of Time, talks in her column about the Vatican reflecting on its mortal sins for the modern age (24th March 2008) of the fact that back in the past sloth, lust, greed, envy and anger accounted for virtually all the crimes of mankind, whereas today the issues that once were the clear culprits behind our follies and misfortunes are far more complex than the 7 deadly sins alone. Causes and consequences come together to form eco-systems, where one problem feeds another and addressing consequences is meaningless without understanding and addressing the causes. Contextualising what was once simple in our now increasingly interlinked world - Quoting Mohandas Gandhi's version of the 7 deadly sins:

• Wealth without work
• Pleasure without conscience
• Science without humanity
• Knowledge without character
• Politics without principle
• Commerce without morality
• Worship without sacrifice

The responsibility rests with the individual, but that includes the duty to take care of others as well as yourself.

Institutional hubris meets the empowered consumer: The Terminal 5 song

A while ago I treated you to the full transcript of my own experience with British Airways on my return journey, which got delayed a full 28 hours. Back last summer that was an epic delay and worthy of headlines, but it pales in comparison to the debacle known as Terminal 5.

Newspapers here in the UK have been full of articles cataloguing the events that transpired when the new Terminal was finally opened to the public, mass-scale computer failures preventing anyone from logging in to check in passengers, an incomprehensible baggage-handling system that failed as soon as it was turned on, an elaborate and beautiful glass-covered building with inadequate signing and logic to handling vast quantities of people needing to move from one floor to the next, the list is endless.

Outraged consumers have filled columns and airwaves venting their spleen about how this kind of behaviour can be tolerated and how come no one has sued the pants off BA and BAA by now - it surely would happen in the States. The most creative expression of consumer-generated discontent is the Terminal 5 song that captures brilliantly some of the madness that this episode in the history of disasters known as BA/BAA ventures and service - it's even catchy! Bring on the empowered consumer!

Hello world... and a new book: Groundswell

No, contrary to popular belief i have not fallen off the edge of the planet (just yet) although my silence recently could have given you that impression. Things have just been bonkers, I have been travelling too much and at times been so tired I have had absolutely nothing to add, which knowing my ability to talk may actually come as a blessing to my colleagues..

Things are looking up though - for those of you who followed my efforts to use this blog to recruit someone to join me, the news is: it worked! Surprisingly social networks and namely Facebook came to my rescue in that a friend came across the blog post and thought of a friend who would be perfect for the job (and he is!) and told me to get in touch (via Facebook). Sounds serendipitous and it was - but it turned out to be the best bit of sideways recruitment I've ever done. Now we both owe him a beer so Alex, when you do stop twittering and feel the onset of a beer, let us know.

Apart from that many things are afoot, which I need to share with you in the coming weeks, but in the meantime I wanted to build on the topic of communities, social networking and the lot and introduce you to a new book, Groundswell where my colleague, Tormod Askildsen, head of community development at LEGO has been interviewed too. read a little here on the topic of AFOLs or Adult Fans of LEGO:

Groundswell on Social Media Today

A Portrait of the Digital Teen

A recent report published by Pew Internet creates a fascinating picture of the on-line media habits of the 12-17 year olds. Some findings at a glance:

• The use of social media – from blogging to on-line social networking to creation of all kinds of digital material – is central to many teenagers’ lives. 
• Girls continue to lead the charge as the teen blogosphere grows; 28% of on-line teens have created a blog, up from 19% in 2004. 
• The growth in blogs tracks with the growth in teens’ use of social networking sites, but they do not completely overlap.
• On-line boys are avid users of video-sharing websites such as You-Tube, and boys are more likely than girls to upload.
• Digital images – stills and videos – have a big role in teen life. Posting images and video often starts a virtual conversation. Most teens receive some feedback on the content they post on-line.
• Most teens restrict access to their posted photos and videos – at least some of the time. Adults restrict access to the same content less often.
• In the midst of the digital media mix, the land-line is still a lifeline for teen social life. Multi-channel teens layer each new communications opportunity on top of pre-existing channels.
• Email continues to lose its luster among teens as texting, instant messaging, and social networking sites facilitate more frequent contact with friends.

Some curious facts about teen blogging
Apparently, girls continue to dominate the teen blogosphere; 35% of all on-line teen girls blog, compared with just 20% of on-line teen boys. The gender gap for blogging has grown larger over time. Virtually all of the growth in teen blogging between 2004 and 2006 is due to the increased activity of girls. Older teen girls are still far more likely to blog when compared with older boys (38% vs. 18%), but younger girl bloggers have grown at such a fast clip that they are now outpacing even the older boys (32% of younger girls blog vs. 18% of older boys). 

Beyond gender and age, two new developments emerged in this survey in the demographics of teens who blog. While there was little or no variation in blogging activity among teens according to household income or family structure in 2004, both variables have become important indicators in the 2006 data. Teens living in households earning less than $50,000 per year are considerably more likely to blog than those living in higher-income households; fully 35% of on-line teens whose parents fall in the lower
income brackets have created an on-line journal or blog, while just 24% of those in the higher income brackets have done so.

An even more pronounced contrast is evident when looking at teens who live with single parents vs. those who live with married parents. On-line teens living in single-parent homes are far more likely to have shared their writing through a blog; 42% of these teens keep a blog compared with 25% of teens living with married parents.

Hmmm.. curiouser and curiouser as Alice would have said. I particularly wonder about the propensity of kids of divorced parents to be blogging, are they just venting their spleen or have they learnt to express their thinking more as a result of the complexity of their family life compared to those with both parents still at home?

For more information visit the Digital native research project.

Why Some of Us Give Up and Others Try Harder

How you react to adversity is really telling - some of us throw in the towel and simply give up, and others, facing almost insurmountable obstacles, don't think twice about continuing. What makes us strong on and how do people find the strength within themselves to carry on in the hardest of times?

As an avid cyclist, reading Lance Armstrong's 'It's Not About the Bike' is of course an amazing illustration of how he turned his life around, being diagnosed with cancer, battled four cycles of agonising chemotherapy enough to make the best of us curl up in agony and came back to win a total of 7 Tour de France victories. As he puts it in his consecutive book 'Every Second Counts'

"The experience of suffering is like the experience of exploring, of finding something unexpected and revelatory. When you  find the outermost thresholds of pain, of fear, or uncertainty, what you experience afterwards is an expansive feeling, a widening of your capabilities.

Pain is good because it teaches your body and your soul to improve. It's almost as though your unconscious says "I'm going to remember this, remember how it hurt and I'll increase my capacities so that next time, it doesn't hurt as much". The body literally builds on your experiences and a physique and temperament that have gone through a Tour de France one year will be better the next year, because it has the memory to build upon. Maybe the same is true for living too.

If you lead a largely unexamined life, you will eventually hit a wall. Some barriers can be invisible until you smack into them. The key then is to investigate the wall inside yourself, so you can go beyond it. The only way to do that is to ask yourself painful questions - just as you try to stretch yourself physically."

Professor Carol Dweck at Stanford examines exactly this. Through more than three decades of systematic research, she has been figuring out answers to why some people achieve their potential while equally talented others don’t—why some become Muhammad Ali and others Mike Tyson. The key, she found, isn’t ability; it’s whether you look at ability as something inherent that needs to be demonstrated or as something that can be developed.

[from Stanford Magazine] "Students for whom performance is paramount want to look smart even if it means not learning a thing in the process. For them, each task is a challenge to their self-image, and each setback becomes a personal threat. So they pursue only activities at which they’re sure to shine—and avoid the sorts of experiences necessary to grow and flourish in any endeavor. Students with learning goals, on the other hand, take necessary risks and don’t worry about failure because each mistake becomes a chance to learn. Dweck’s insight launched a new field of educational psychology—achievement goal theory.

Dweck’s next question: what makes students focus on different goals in the first place? During a sabbatical at Harvard, she was discussing this with doctoral student Mary Bandura (daughter of legendary Stanford psychologist Albert Bandura), and the answer hit them: if some students want to show off their ability, while others want to increase their ability, “ability” means different things to the two groups. “If you want to demonstrate something over and over, it feels like something static that lives inside of you—whereas if you want to increase your ability, it feels dynamic and malleable,” Dweck explains. People with performance goals, she reasoned, think intelligence is fixed from birth. People with learning goals have a growth mind-set about intelligence, believing it can be developed. (Among themselves, psychologists call the growth mind-set an “incremental theory,” and use the term “entity theory” for the fixed mind-set.) The model was nearly complete (see diagram).

To me this approach is really interesting, because not only can it influence the way we approach life, career and learning, but through the quote from Lance Armstrong - it can also be applied to physical performance. And to great result, as proven. So what does this all mean? Milton Chen talks about how children can be taught to "feed their own brains" through understanding that their brains and intelligence can be grown and how this mind-set actually improves their academic performance.

As Chen explains: "I asked Dweck about the implications of her research -- what teachers and parents should do, for instance. In an email interview, she recommended the following strategies:

 

• Teach students to think of their brain as a muscle that strengthens with use, and have them visualize the brain forming new connections every time they learn.
• When they teach study skills, convey to students that using these methods will help their brains learn better.
• Discourage use of labels ("smart," "dumb," and so on) that convey intelligence as a fixed entity.
• Praise students' effort, strategies, and progress, not their intelligence. Praising intelligence leads to students to fear challenges and makes them feel stupid and discouraged when they have difficulty.
• Give students challenging work. Teach them that challenging activities are fun and that mistakes help them learn."

Funnily enough - my own voracious appetite for reading anything and everything is very much in line with the same thinking. I believe we can learn anything we set our minds to and it is those moments that feel a little like vertigo, when new horizons of discovery open up in front of your mind's eye, that keeps me going and motivated. A full life isn't one without a continous expansion of our mind, abilities and  wisdom.

Lecture of a Lifetime

Many thanks to Tim Kirchmann for making my day today by passing this great article to me, which I simply have to share with you all (it's too good not to!).

Having just completed my lecture notes for the upcoming conference on Social Media and User-generated Content I was thinking about this only too recently. Should I concentrate purely on the topic, or should I impart wisdom of things I've learned along the way instead? The latter being far more tempting, I nevertheless decided to stick to my topic, assuming my audience will want to know more about this rather than hear my musings about the meaning of life. I could be wrong. In any case - here's something to inspire your day:

Randy Pausch's Last Lecture - UPDATE | ETC Global News

September 20, 2007 Wall Street Journal Online
MOVING ON By JEFF ZASLOW

A Beloved Professor Delivers The Lecture of a Lifetime

Randy Pausch, a Carnegie Mellon University computer-science professor, was about to give a lecture Tuesday afternoon, but before he said a word, he received a standing ovation from 400 students and colleagues.

He motioned to them to sit down. "Make me earn it," he said.

They had come to see him give what was billed as his "last lecture." This is a common title for talks on college campuses today. Schools such as Stanford and the University of Alabama have mounted "Last Lecture Series," in which top professors are asked to think deeply about what matters to them and to give hypothetical final talks. For the audience, the question to be mulled is this: What wisdom would we impart to the world if we knew it was our last chance?

It can be an intriguing hour, watching healthy professors consider their demise and ruminate over subjects dear to them. At the University of Northern Iowa, instructor Penny O'Connor recently titled her lecture "Get Over Yourself." At Cornell, Ellis Hanson, who teaches a course titled "Desire," spoke about sex and technology.

At Carnegie Mellon, however, Dr. Pausch's speech was more than just an academic exercise. The 46-year-old father of three has pancreatic cancer and expects to live for just a few months. His lecture, using images on a giant screen, turned out to be a rollicking and riveting journey through the lessons of his life.

He began by showing his CT scans, revealing 10 tumors on his liver. But after that, he talked about living. If anyone expected him to be morose, he said, "I'm sorry to disappoint you." He then dropped to the floor and did one-handed pushups.

Clicking through photos of himself as a boy, he talked about his childhood dreams: to win giant stuffed animals at carnivals, to walk in zero gravity, to design Disney rides, to write a World Book entry. By adulthood, he had achieved each goal. As proof, he had students carry out all the huge stuffed animals he'd won in his life, which he gave to audience members. After all, he doesn't need them anymore.

He paid tribute to his techie background. "I've experienced a deathbed conversion," he said, smiling. "I just bought a Macintosh." Flashing his rejection letters on the screen, he talked about setbacks in his career, repeating: "Brick walls are there for a reason. They let us prove how badly we want things." He encouraged us to be patient with others. "Wait long enough, and people will surprise and impress you." After showing photos of his childhood bedroom, decorated with mathematical notations he'd drawn on the walls, he said: "If your kids want to paint their bedrooms, as a favor to me, let 'em do it."

While displaying photos of his bosses and students over the years, he said that helping others fulfill their dreams is even more fun than achieving your own. He talked of requiring his students to create videogames without sex and violence. "You'd be surprised how many 19-year-old boys run out of ideas when you take those possibilities away," he said, but they all rose to the challenge.

He also saluted his parents, who let him make his childhood bedroom his domain, even if his wall etchings hurt the home's resale value. He knew his mom was proud of him when he got his Ph.D, he said, despite how she'd introduce him: "This is my son. He's a doctor, but not the kind who helps people."

He then spoke about his legacy. Considered one of the nation's foremost teachers of videogame and virtual-reality technology, he helped develop "Alice," a Carnegie Mellon software project that allows people to easily create 3-D animations. It had one million downloads in the past year, and usage is expected to soar.

"Like Moses, I get to see the Promised Land, but I don't get to step foot in it," Dr. Pausch said. "That's OK. I will live on in Alice."

Dr. Pausch's lecture, in the same way, became a call to his colleagues and students to go on without him and do great things. But he was also addressing those closer to his heart.

Near the end of his talk, he had a cake brought out for his wife, whose birthday was the day before. As she cried and they embraced on stage, the audience sang "Happy Birthday," many wiping away their own tears.

Dr. Pausch's speech was taped so his children, ages 5, 2 and 1, can watch it when they're older. His last words in his last lecture were simple: "This was for my kids." Then those of us in the audience rose for one last standing ovation.

How to Justify Something You Really Want

Now, if there ever was one line that epitomised the Western consumer culture it has to be the title to this post. It's not that we just consume mindlessly anything and everything that will make us look/seem/feel faster, smarter, sexier, thinner, happier, more fashionable, richer (whatever your aspiration: insert here) it is how brilliant we have become at justifying the expense to others and thus ourselves.

The marketing and advertising industry is largely to thank here in the way that they so ingeniously operate a two-pronged attack: first: highlight inadequacy in your target, second: propose to solve the problem with an attractive product/solution - you are doing them a favour, really! In the olden days, people were of course more gullible in some respects, but at least consumption hadn't become the entire raison d'etre of society back then. We still worried about God, wars, famine, death at childbirth, dangerous diseases and so on. Not to say these things don't occur nowadays, but as a society we have transplanted these collective worries with individual worries about success, keeping up with the Joneses, wealth and so on. The idea that some environmental catastrophe out of our control or event on a global scale could instantly render us completely powerless and deprive us of all the things we have worked so hard to achieve is frankly, beyond most of us. We can't really imagine what life is like for those who have just lost their life possessions in a Tsunami or Hurricane - or suddenly been bombed out of our homes by some mighty power, claiming to be fighting to 'free' us from something.

So having been experts in survival (we must be as this can be a hostile planet!) we have become experts in consumption as that is now the goal of much of our lives here - in fact we are told our entire societies depend on it. Politicians ponder about the economy and when there is a slow-down in high-street sales apparently the whole country is going to hell in a hand-basket and the only way to 'save' the life we hold so dear is to go out and buy, buy, buy to make the money (and thus the world) go around. Isn't it marvellous? No longer is it about being a good, ethical, god-fearing citizen that will earn you praise - it is how much you are doing to keep the economy afloat at large. Thus some parts of society argue about the damages to the environment done by too much car use and big SUVs and others argue over the economic impact of all those jobs being lost if we suddenly all decided to take up cycling and do away with all cars everywhere. The truth is that jobs and dependencies will build up around both sustainable and unsustainable business practises - but how much do we really care about the long term to be willing to face the pain in the short term when we adjust things?

So to conclude my ranting today I wanted to share with you a hilarious example of how to justify the purchase of something expensive or yet another example of something you already have (but better!) - in this example we are talking about bicycles, but it could just as easily be a new car, a motorcycle, another computer, game console whatever rocks your boat really (just tweak the justifications!). Here goes:

How to justify your next bike

By Elden "The Fat Cyclist" Nelson

A shiny new bike, yesterday (BikeRadar)

We cyclists are simple folk. We don't need much to keep us happy. Really, all we need are clear skies and a road or trail to make us happy.

And a helmet, of course. And gloves. And shorts with a special antimicrobial chamois insert. And form-fitting shirts. And very stiff-soled shoes, preferably Italian-made. And specialty sports drinks, with an incomprehensible combination of carbohydrates, proteins, electrolytes, and a lemon-lime flavoring that for some reason makes one think of furniture polish.

Oh, and we need bikes. More specifically, we need another bike. Always. And that means we need to pay for another bike.

Now, it's not the paying per se that's difficult. We can always find a way to get the money we need for bike stuff — take a second job, sell a kidney, money laundering, whatever.

What's difficult is justifying the expense of yet another bicycle, whether it be to our wives, our parents, or to our own nagging conscience.

Sometimes we fail in our justification, and then where are we? We're in the Purgatory of No New Bikes, that's where we are. That's a bad place. A bad, bad place. We should never have to be in that place.

And if you will follow these techniques, you will never be in that place again.

It will save money on gas

This may surprise you, but bikes can actually be used as transportation, and there are some people who — oddly enough — actually use their bikes to get around from place to place, instead of driving. Explain that with this new bike you will be saving serious transportation costs and doing your part for the environment.

Caveat: Do not explain that the new bike you're considering costs approximately the same as three years' worth of fuel, and most especially do not explain that any of the bikes you already have would work as transportation, too. If brought up as a counterargument, explain — dismissively — that your other bikes aren't really for that kind of thing.

It's less expensive than a humongous HDTV

This will take a little bit of preparation, but is well worth it. For about three weeks, don't mention the new bike you want. At all. Instead, with increasing intensity and frequency, begin talking about how you're thinking about getting a giant high-def television. And a Blu-Ray DVD player. And a subscription to high-def cable/satellite (or both!). And a serious sound system to go with it. Be very, very open about how much this will cost — about three times as much as the bike you want.

Argue convincingly (not too convincingly, though) and loudly about why you ought to get this massive entertainment system.

About the time your boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse/parent is at wit's end, capitulate. Right in the middle of an argument, act like a light's just come on in your head. "You know, you're right!" you say, catching them off-guard. "It's outrageously expensive and it would just rot my brain, especially when a new bike would cost me less than half as much!"

They'll be so relieved — not to mention pleased at having clearly won an argument with you — they'll just let that remark go. Next day, you come home with the new bike, as the two of you agreed.

Bonus: It's possible this technique will backfire on you and your significant other will really get into the idea of buying a home theatre system. That's the beauty of this technique: even if you lose, you win!

You Will Easily Recoup the Cost of This Bike in Prize Money

Did you know there's big money in bike racing? There is! Just ask Lance Armstrong; he's made a very comfortable living by racing his bicycle.

Do you think Lance Armstrong won the Tour de France seven times riding a piece of crap like the one you ride? No, he most certainly did not.

If you're going to start winning races and making millions of dollars like Lance, you're going to need a better bike.

The prize money will follow naturally.

This bike will hardly cost anything after the trade-in

Thinking of trading in an old bike for the new one? Excellent. You'll want to get out your soft math skills for this technique.

First, find out the suggested retail for the new bike you want. Reduce that figure by 25%, because nobody pays MSRP for anything these days. Then take another 10% off because you're friends with a guy at the shop. Take another 5% off because you're a sharp negotiator. Tell your significant other that's how much your new bike will cost.

Next, estimate how much your current bike is actually worth. Add 10% to that, because I can tell you've taken really good care of your bike. Add 5% because I think you're just being too modest. Then add 15% to that figure because you want some negotiating room. Tell your significant other that's how much you'll be selling your old bike for.

If you're any good at all with creative math, you should actually be able to make a case that you may well be pocketing some money when all is said and done.

Note: When it turns out that the actual cost of the new bike is much higher — and the amount you sell the old bike for is lower — than you expect, I highly recommend shrugging and blaming taxes, shipping, and the fees the online site charged. "Man, everyone wants a slice," you can say, resignedly.

This bike is the bike to end all bikes

I fully admit that this approach is dangerous, but desperate times call for desperate measures, as I think all of us who have ever had a carbon fiber jones can attest.

"I know I have a lot of bikes already," you should say (it's good to start with a true statement, because that fools people into thinking other things you say may also be true). "This one, though, is different. It fits me unlike any bike ever made. It will never break. It is both beautiful and functional. It weighs 2.3Kg, fully loaded."

Continue with, "This is the ultimate expression of a bicycle. I shall never need another."

Look her/him right in the eyes as you conclude, "Hey, it's not like I'm talking about buying a Ferrari here, but how often in my life will I have a chance to own something that is truly perfect?" (Note: Do not say this if you own a Ferrari.) Try to mist up a little as you say this. It adds impact.

Warning: Do not use this technique more than twice per year.

Elden Nelson blogs most weekdays as The Fat Cyclist, where he posts fake news, fake ideas, and delicious ways you can combine bananas, peanut butter, and mayonnaise.

This article found at Bikeradar

Upcoming Conference on Social Media & User-generated Content

You guessed it - a bit of shameless self-promotion as I will be speaking at this conference, but to be fair - it's on a topic I'm passionate about (as you know!) and am actually really looking forward to hearing about what others in completely different industries are doing to involve users in not just creating content, but in shaping their businesses.

Here's the official marketing blurb: Attending this premier Marcus Evans conference will enable you to:

• Gain a clear understanding on the difference between real changes in consumer behaviour and simple passing trends
• Discover how your organisation can truly engage consumers in the digital world and allow them to experience your brand in innovative ways
• Develop innovative initiatives to generate a higher response rate to your marketing campaign to run over the social networking communities
• Engage your target audience in the conversation
• Deal with the 'dark side' of social media and successfully turn it into an opportunity

Benefit from Case Study Presentations by:

• Coca Cola harnessing the power of the consumers to be the brand stewards of the future
• CNN presenting the value of incorporating user-generated content and social media into a mainstream media brand
• 3 Scandinavia exploring the future of on-line advertising
• Honda sharing the key success factors of a well built marketing campaign
• Sulake Corporation Oy (the provider of Habbo Hotel virtual community) engaging consumers in a more creative way
• Dow Jones looking into the future of on-line PR and reputation management
• LEGO integrating consumers in the business practise

So there you have it. A chance to supercharge your brain with tons of ideas and meet some interesting people, how about it? Here's the brochure for the conference with registration details

Download gm109_marketing.pdf

Happiness is a skill you need to practise

Money can't buy you love sang the Beatles already a long time ago, yet these days we are finally beginning to understand the meaning of this yet, interestingly, various research around seems to be far more pre-occupied with who the happiest people on the planet are, rather than trying to understand what makes us happy.

Just back from my holiday in Finland I'm greeted with yet another piece of research (This time from Euromonitor) focusing on happiness and how it is beginning to increasingly pre-occupy both discussions, articles in the media and how, for some reason, the Scandinavians seem to be the happiest people ever. Considering these people live in pretty cold climates with plenty of rain, some snow and darkness for large parts of the day during winter months, we must conclude that at least you can't blame it on the weather. These are also countries that are relatively rich, have high literacy and work pretty long hours so you can't put it down to all play and no work either. Moreover, all Scandinavian countries also have high taxes, often the booze is expensive too and they all spend far too much time on the Internet - all supposedly things that  make us depressed, but not the Scandies. What could be their secret? I'll return to this later.

First to some facts about this emerging research field of happiness levels on a global basis - In June this year, experts gathered at the OECD forum in Istanbul concluded that economic-focused indices of the past, usually based around GDP levels, are no longer sufficient in measurements of social development around the world.

Various approaches have been introduced to try to address this, the most famous perhaps is the United Nation's Human Development Index. This has been used for many years to calculate a standardised, comparable indicator of social progress, based around the key social components of economics, health and educational opportunity. This itself was an advance on the earlier focus simply on GDP levels. The key statistics are GDP per capita, life expectancy and education (a weighted composite of adult literacy and school enrolments). Many other studies of human well-being around the world are also based on this work.

However, experts in this field have in recent decades confirmed that the key criteria behind happiness change as an economy and society evolve, and that the link in particular between economic success and happiness changes. The latter connection typically wanes as a country becomes wealthier – creating an income-happiness paradox that is frequently linked to aspiration and comparison, i.e.:

• The consumers' ongoing increase in income and material success fails to match the wider growth in their expectations as their wealth rises;
• Consumers feel that their own achievements fall short of the successes of others in their society (and with today's mass media, comparisons are also perhaps being made internationally).

Another way to approach the tricky subject of happiness is the World Values Survey. This academic-based survey looks into values across world societies, including social, cultural, religious and political aspects. It was launched in Europe in 1981 and its success led to its subsequent expansion into a regular global survey. Individual national surveys are conducted by a network of academics worldwide, each funded locally.

Press reports on the top-line results into “happiness” tend to vary, largely due to the fact that the survey asks two related questions:

• Taking all things together, would you say you are Very Happy… Not at All Happy" (graded response options);
• “All things being considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole these days.” (graded response options).

The latter “satisfaction” questions also relate to a definition known as “subjective well-being,” which some researchers believe is a better indicator of overall happiness than happiness-only questions. Incidentally, another newer survey seeks to build on this approach by adding in an environmental impact element. This is the Happy Planet Index (HPI), launched in July 2006 by the New Economics Foundation. Another body of work is the World Happiness Database by Ruut Veenhoven at the University of Rotterdam, and furthermore the map of subjective well-being by Adrian White at University of Leicester.

Comparing happiness in societies around the world in such different states of development and with such differing priorities clearly has limitations, but the principal is now gaining credibility amongst even the most fiscally-focused analysts. In very broad terms, work to date demonstrates that national happiness and well-being levels are generally related to health, income and education, and honest, tolerant government, offering people the opportunity to pursue a way of life of their choice. It is widely agreed, for example, that Denmark and other Scandinavian markets score well on all of these points. Denmark has also incidentally shown good rises in its happiness levels over the past few decades.

Economic improvement is a factor in less developed economies, but once a minimum standard is reached (probably around the level of the poorest Western European markets) it has a fast diminishing effect; The criteria behind happiness vary by market and over time as aspirations change. Many developing markets are still in the basic material upgrading phase. As is well-known, however, in advanced economies materialism has waned, and in these markets has even been described as a “happiness suppressant”; A just, open government and society show as key factors behind social contentment. Some fast-improving economies generating rapid financial gain for their citizens appear to have happiness levels limited by such issues.

All this research is missing a crucial point though - a human being's ability to take active charge of your own happiness. Rather than being told that the Danes are the happiest in the world, I would like to know which societies or people are best at coping with adversities.

Invariably we cannot control the things that fate will throw in our way, but I'm always astonished to hear about the stories of how people cope with seemingly impossible situations, how when told they only have a year left to live people emerge from initial depression to extol how much more they enjoy their life now than before. Some attribute it to a realisation of what is important in life and prioritising that, others talk about a self-discipline in terms of not succumbing to anger, jealousy and hatred and instead finding happiness in helping others - these are invariably individual stories with a great capacity to inspire and reminding us how much we ourselves are in charge of our own happiness and how the way we look at the world has an enormous impact in how happy we are. In that respect, the level of material wealth and how fair or just a society is become external factors providing an added bonus, but not the factors explaining happiness as a whole.

Status Anxiety by Alain de Botton is a good introduction to this topic, pointing to the fact that our likelihood of feeling happy or depressed has a lot to do with the values we aspire to, and how learning associated to growth as individuals, altruism and helping others as well as creative expression have an infinitely greater capacity to provide a foundation to happiness than material wealth or celebrity. So with all this talk about happiness I would like to know how these happiest people on the planet look at these topics, not just the fact whether they are happy or not. I would argue that Scandinavians are great fans of self-actualisation through all these means and it is the wide access to, and opportunities within these areas that drives a great sense of satisfaction, rather than merely economic wealth and a fair justice system although they are very important. So much like any other talent or skill you have - happiness is a skill that needs to be practiced, not only in your outlook on life (refraining from seeing the bad side in everything and always striving to be positive and counting your blessings), but also in your investement in growing yourself as a human being through learning, creative expression and helping others, as well as looking after yourself physically. It's a balancing act, that only you can master.

Designers as Facilitators of Collective Creativity

Back in the day when I went to design school, the greatest aspiration uniting all my fellow students was to become the next Philippe Starck. The idea of the lone genius, the one people always called upon to create beauty and join form with function, the duck that consistently always laid golden eggs for his clients - this was, and in some circles still is, the ideal for designers.

Creativity and why designers are not artists
What's the difference you may ask. A good question to ask as both rely heavily on their creative skill to create solutions. According to Arthur Koestler, the most-cited authority on creativity, every creative act involves bisociation, a process that brings together and combines previously unrelated ideas. He contrasts bisociation with association, saying that association refers to previously established connections among ideas but that isociation involves making entirely new connections among ideas. Koestler’s definition addresses all forms of creativity, whether in art, science or humor.

So designers, artists, scientists, you name it all rely on creativity for coming up with solutions, but the difference between designers and artists is ego. Designers (at least good ones anyway) divorce their egos from a project early on to immerse themselves in research, ethnographic studies, insights of various sorts to come up with solutions that best serve the needs identified by users. Artists on the other hand delve in much greater luxury, not necessarily materially speaking, but in terms of accountability. Their works of art are born out personal briefs, passions and ideas - not a common need or problem and are specifically bought, because of their personal interpretation of the reality we all live in. It is their synthesis of subjects in to visual, interactive or 3 dimensional form that evokes an emotional and intellectual reaction in an audience. You can argue here that the above is similarly the reason why we buy certain products, because the name of the designer has become synonymous with compelling design that we appreciate. That is entirely correct, in some areas the roles are particularly blurred as is the case with fashion design for instance, where the designers behave more like artists (some more than others), but who are still commonly referred to as designers.

The Advent of Collective Creativity
Fast-forward to 2007 and our CEO at LEGO, Jorgen Vig Knudstorp, speaking about collective creativity and its power to create stunning products and solutions; 'Why have 100 designers, when you can have a 100.000?', he poignantly asks. And I think: absolutely! Why not indeed - whereas I can in my mind's eye hear all those designers gasp quietly in the background, this is the sound of their dreams vanishing before them.

What does he mean? Knudstorp is referring to the power of collective creativity. Collective creativity occurs when bisociation is shared by two or more people. We are beginning to see that collective creativity can be very powerful and can lead to more culturally relevant results than individual creativity does. This is what happens with really good collaboration based on teamwork.

Liz Sanders from SonicRim articulates this very well her article on the subject. All people who touch and are touched by the “product” that is being designed should play a role in collective creativity. (By “product” I mean products, interfaces, spaces, etc.) These people fall into two main groups: “makers” and “users.” “Makers” include all the members of development teams from disciplines such as marketing, engineering and design. “Users” include people who shop for, buy and end up using the product.

Collective creativity is already being practiced in industry today by “makers.” In fact, most design firms sell their interdisciplinary product development experience. The biggest opportunity for improving the quality of products that we design today is to practice collective creativity with "users." Others agree. Design critic Rick Poynor has argued that "since design is something fundamental to being human, it can’t be left solely in the hands of designated practitioners."

Architect  Christopher Alexander writes “People need and have a right to determine and shape their own environment. . . . They are the only ones who know in a profound way what they need . . . .Good architecture can only come from wholehearted involvement of the users in the shaping of their buildings and streets.”   

Why is collective creativity important?
To quote Liz Sanders here: Collective creativity, when practiced with "users" in the design development process, can result in useful and relevant innovation. This is important because useful and relevant innovation can be commercially successful at the same time as it is culturally beneficial. The shift from individual to collective levels in thinking and doing is occurring today in many domains. We see this shift taking place especially today in the world of business. Design education needs to keep up with the shift to meet the challenges created by new levels of thought and action.

The changing role of the designer
The days of the super-star designer are numbered. The skills needed to facilitate collective creativity are very different from what the lone genius does in his corner. First there is humility and the profound appreciation of the role ordinary people should have in shaping and creating the project of their dreams. It is no longer the designer who tells the world what the solution should look like, it is the designer who uses his/her expertise in unlocking creativity to enable others, who perhaps habitually are less confident in the creative realm, to unlock their thoughts, ideas and creativity.

At LEGO work continues to expand the ability of ordinary people to create the product of their dreams. An approach pioneered by the Mindstorms NXT development process of involving the Mindstorms community in designing the hardware, software, the toy and pieces for the new robot, has rapidly continued into completely user-designed products sold through the company's LEGO Factory channel, where users can indeed create their very own LEGO model and buy exactly that model as well as be inspired by and buy the creations of others. This of course in parallel with existing product development of LEGO toys, still handled by designers themselves - but even here community interaction is becoming more and more commonplace as the insight and ideas coming from LEGO users are simply too valuable to ignore. Long gone are the days of the lone genius - instead here we are at the advent of collective creativity where the power of many creates far better products and experiences than any one of us could have dreamt up on our own.

What Makes Us Wise?

Recent quiet time on this blog induced by excessive cycling, the surrender to Facebook and a workload that simply refuses to diminish are my excuses for depriving you of my musings, hopefully some of you still haven't given up on me and will return to read this post... if so, Welcome back!

The autumn is almost upon us and if you live in the UK, it has been since about June. A lot of time for reflection in all this rain and a great quote by Yoko Ono I saw recently got me thinking about age, wisdom - why some grow wise and others just grow old.

Yoko Ono was asked recently whether age matters in her opinion, to which she answered: "The advancing of age matters when it gives you experience - the kind that adds wisdom, power and self-confidence to you - and thereby makes you a more attractive individual for the satisfaction and joy of you, your family, your friends and the world."

This captures the sensation I woke up with today - a dream of two racing cars, one symbolising the left brain and the other symbolising the right brain. These two cars were in a very close competition, side by side, each in turn inching away in front of the other only to be caught up and challenged again. The dream ended with a strong realisation about bridge-building, how wisdom is really about bridging the two halves of how we function.

On one hand we are emotional beings and emotions sometimes take control of us completely and experiences create many connections in the part of our brain which deals with emotion. Many religions, even psychoanalysis, tries to temper the emotions and make us think about the consequences of irrational, emotional behaviour - whether it is through ethics, thinking about treating others the way you wish to be treated and so on.

However, someone also recently pointed out that radicalisation is about emotions devoid of reason and why radicalism is so infectious particularly among younger people is that many don't have a clear understanding of the rational implications of radicalism, nor a strong ingrained will to prevent human suffering in all its forms. This expert continued to point out that the reason Islamic radicalism is so dangerous is because emotions have been infused with Islamic rationalisation, apparently lending legitimacy to otherwise irrational emotional desires of hurting fellow human beings. And the most depressing of all, whether we are talking about politicians, Islamic radicals or society at large is that the desire to eliminate human suffering, today and in the future is still not the top priority of our actions - we think human suffering can be justified in the name of the right cause.

On the other hand pure reason and rationalisation without the emotional dimension is no good either. I once read that the reason why Nazism was so destructive during WWII was through its ability to institutionalise and rationalise the process of elimination of those less desirable in Hitler's Germany. The cold rationalisation and institutionalising of the most horrific human atrocities somehow made it easier for people in all parts of the Nazi bureaucracy not to think of the human (emotional) consequences of their actions - how many lives were lost, families torn apart, contributions is science, literature, art, medicine etc. never realised as nascent careers or even young lives were snuffed out through an effective process of elimination, logistically perfect and emotionally completely sterile, revealing the horror of pure rationalisation unrestrained from emotional considerations.

How does one navigate this minefield of emotion and reason. How does one make sure in every case we ensure the consequences of our actions are always on the top of our minds and that we methodically strive to eliminate destructive thoughts and behaviour from ourselves and focus on nurturing the good in each of us? Is that was true wisdom is? The ability understand others and an ability to consistently choose a self-less path where we refrain from greed, jealousy, anger, hatred, aggression and so on. Is it that wisdom really gives us a distance to things, a weariness to react to soon, judge too quickly, but instead to be determined in looking for and seeing the big picture, understanding how many things are really interconnected and attacking one may indeed simply worsen the other thing we'd rather keep. Is wisdom the ability to understand cause and consequence, the capacity to judge emotion and reason side by side, not favouring either on the expense of the other - but indeed seeing the world as a whole and bigger than the sum of its parts?

Flight BA 349: A study in chaos theory and the importance of managing expectations

A technical problem compounded by lack of leadership among ground staff; a flight delayed 28 hours; a riot on-board - what does it all mean and how it could have been avoided?

Here's the story of how my weekend away turned into a nightmare.

As mentioned in the previous post - here was I really looking forward to a weekend away, in South of France of all places, but a safe bet this time of year in terms of sunshine, good food and in this case, also nice company - all factors conspired to create a most wonderful break and memorable party away from the rain and cold of Britain during Wimbledon and it would all have been perfect if it wasn't for the flight back. So what happened?

T - 2 1/2 hours:
We arrive at Nice airport, a smooth journey from Cannes - expect to check in; nobody at the desk so we check in using machines and sit ourselves down to wait.

T - 1 hour:
1 1/2 hours later BA staff appear at desk so we drop our bags off and head for the restaurant.

T - 1/2 hour:
We are called to gate; proceed to board and sit ourselves down onboard plane.

T + 1/2 hour:
We are still sat on-board and get informed by pilot that there is a technical problem with the hydraulics and we need to check this before departing.

T + 1 hour:
We are told a hydraulic pump has failed and it cannot be fixed. BA is trying to source one in France along with an engineer to come install it.

T + 1 1/2 hours:
We are told there is neither a pump nor an engineer to fit it in entire France; so both of these need to be flown down from Heathrow in the morning. We are advised to exit the plane (it is now 9 pm) and go find the BA desk in the terminal where the staff will advise us on hotel accommodation and give us drinks/food vouchers.

T + 2 hours:
We are waiting in front of BA desk along with 200 odd passengers; having to queue up individually to the desk to state our names and receive information about our accomodation. To ease congestion some are told to leave now and claim back their hotel expenses from BA customer relations. Some take this advice and leave; others stay. General pandemonium exists as people are conviced there is no space for them on flights scheduled for the next day so there is a scramble for getting wait-listed; buying places on other flights etc.

T + 3 hours:
It turns out the queue we have been standing in (there are 6) is for people trying to reschedule themselves onto flights tomorrow and not for accomodation at all, so we shift ourselves over to the queues for accomodation.

T + 4 hours:
We finally receive information about which hotel we need to go to. Turns out it is only 200 m from the airport and this could have been announced to us collectively 4 hours ago. We are told to make sure we are back at the check-in no later than 11 o'clock the following morning in order not to miss the flight, now rescheduled for 12.30. At this point it is finally explained to us that there will be an extra flight scheduled that day - our famous flight 349 will appear again, to take all original flight 349 passengers back. This eases some of the fears people had about getting back, yet some speculate whether this will really happen and how free BA are to schedule extra flights in excess of their allotted slots.

T + 4 1/2 hours:
We arrive at hotel, discover it is a 2 star hotel, the kitchen has closed and there is no minibar in the room. We dump our stuff and decide to go find food.

T + 5 hours:
We, along with 50 other people, decend upon the local Novotel whose kitchen is still open and virtually scramble to order the last food they have.

T + 6 hours:
Exhausted, but full we make our way back to the hotel and fall into bed.

Interview: Where Does the LEGO Lady Go to Unwind?

A fair question and although this interview explains all about one of my favourite places on Earth; little Pietra Santa in Tuscany, Italy read the Interview - although it is not where I'm headed this weekend. A holiday is certainly something I need right now, it's been a wildly busy year and I'm getting to that stage right now that although I love my job and have a blast doing it, people could be handing me the greatest gift on the planet and I would struggle to summon my trademark enthusiasm for it.

I simply need a rest. And to stop thinking about all the things I have to think about as part of my job just for long enough so that thinking about them will feel like 'I'm thinking about them after having had some time to think about something else' rather than 'I'm thinking about this again and by the way I haven't had time to think about anything else in the meantime'. You know what I mean. Fortunately a break is looming on the horizon and I'm truly madly deeply looking forward to it, much like someone crossing the desert must be feeling when they finally come across an oasis. So on that note - over and out and back again next week!

The Web and the Illusion of Anonymity

I had a strange experience the other day. Someone I met for the first time told me they had 'Googled' me before our meeting and were intrigued to find all this stuff about me, including this blog. Now forgive me folks, but on one hand here I am, with a blog being seemingly progressive and 'out there', in with the times and all that and the fact is that most of my friends don't read my blog, at least not regularly anyway, because they prefer to talk to me in person about the topics I blog about and many more things, rather than read about them on my blog.

Can't blame them really, but this has also caused a certain disconnect for me, where usually I would meet people and it would be me making the first impression and eventually this person would discover I had a blog, which would be more of a curious 'aha' moment for them, rather than something they would use to form an opinion about me even before meeting me. However, this, as I mentioned, was all turned on its head just the other day. The insecure person in me immediately wondered 'what do they think... do they like what I write or do they think I'm a total nutcase??' Anonymity on the web at least (most of the time) means you will never get to meet the people in person who think your blog is a bunch of ramblings and that you are truly nuts.. but it may all change!

Fortunately this individual was very complementary, or perhaps just a supremely a nice person who couldn't bring themselves to tell me just how bad they thought my writing was, but fortunately at least saved me the embarrassment of telling it to my face. Of course you will all rush to tell me that I should have thought of that when starting a blog and to this I reply: I did! Initially I was very much in two minds about whether I should blog under my real name or anonymously, and initially I did blog completely anonymously as I was experimenting with content and style and so on.

Eventually I settled for the 'a little bit about everything' approach that you find on this blog - stuff I think about and find that writing it down into a post helps me structure my thoughts and move on and think about new stuff... clearing my mind if you like. So my blog has now become a bit of a scratch book of thoughts and sometimes pretty personal too - in the same breath I have abandoned anonymity and even sport a button to my Linked-in profile now for all those who wonder who I am and why I'm interested in all these diverse topics (hopefully my profile goes some way to explain this..here's me hoping anyway!)

The scary thing is though that the more I have become 'exposed' through this blog, the more people, prospective employers, clients, you name it all use Google to check up on people they are about to make contact to. On one hand we are seeing extremely personal confessions on blogs and various social networking sites and on the other hand we are seeing more and more people having to pay the price for that as it seems that there are still employers out there who are looking for people who are literally the 'blank' canvasses - with no clearly defined and perhaps 'jarring' personal identities to try to mold into an organisation where individualism is a fault, not an asset.

Some are talking about how young people in particular should be much more careful about what they do reveal on-line as that digital trail will follow them forever - there are even companies devoted to destroying information about you on the net these days - service comes at a pretty price though. The one place not even they can reach are the news archives of various papers - once you end up there you are on the net forever. So where does that leave us? It seems that the arena is wide open for the debate on a set of 'net ethics' of sorts - what is acceptable to take into account about a person in terms of background checks on the net, versus what is advisable for individuals to reveal on-line?

Ultimately some things are personal and although revealed on-line on say a social networking site, they should remain as such or be considered as such by a company seeking to employ that person. Also those who devote countless hours to blogging and so on are in fact industrious minds to whom a blog is one outlet, but give the person a challenge to chew on that same industrious mind can be put to service for the benefit of a company, as opposed to being seen as an overtly extrovert destroyer of 'the way we have always done things in this company'. What do you think?

It takes a (global, connected) village to raise a child

No I'm not referring to Hillary Clinton's book, nor her speech on the topic of children - but I am borrowing the same (origin unknown) African proverb that claims it takes a village to raise a child. In fact, I'm building on it to refer to the Internet, the global connected village it has made the world, we are all connected, not necessarily by six degrees of separation from Kevin Bacon but in fact by 3rd degree via LinkedIn (or Myspace, Bebo, Facebook or whatever takes your fancy).

For me it has been a revelation that by humbly starting to publish this blog here in my corner of London, UK, there are people as far as Kiribati who magically stumble on this site and moreover, can be bothered to read what I have to say. Truly humbling. Big up to Kiribati I say! This global village of ours has also taught me some very valuable lessons, some of which I agonise over in a previous post about the pain of trying to come up with consistently good quality material. Not sure I succeed consistently, but mainly due to the kindness and patience of my readers, I still have an audience..

I recently came across a brilliant study from Forrester research by a guy called Jaap Favier, Dutch perhaps I endeavour to guess? Anyway he has managed to pull together some great insights about how group dynamics are driving social media on the net and how this connectivity means companies need to change in order to stay relevant for their consumers. Sounds complicated, but on a larger scale I feel companies need to learn what the village has raised me to believe over the years:

Content is king -> CONTACT is king
It's not about the stuff, it's about whether you care to listen what people have to say, whether you can help put them in touch with each other and provide them with ways they can not only help each other, but create things together with you. Are you a good citizen and do people even want to know you? If you are evil, chances are they don't. Often only when you go look for friends do you discover what people really think about you. Don't let it get that far.

The Medium is the Message -> The RESPONSE is the message
Can you get people to care enough to get involved, can they respond to you, to others, do things change based on their response? You get what you give, if you are rude and deceitful, chances are you also foster that behaviour in people around you.

We call the shots -> THEY call the shots
Don't think you know it all. Don't even attempt. There are people out there who know your company, product, service you name it better than you do. They do call the shots whether you like it or not. A smart thing would be to learn from what they have to say and be humble.

KEEP IT REAL
Only if you are honest, true to what you promise and deliver it as good as you say it is, people trust you. To be trusted you have to keep it real, always. No lies, no cheating, no screwing people over - they find out soon enough and others even sooner, so be good and the world is good to you back. Most of the time anyway!

It's funny - yesterday we had the last episode of the Apprentice, (for now) where our pet magnate Sir Alan Sugar got himself a fresh faced new apprentice, Simon, willing to work 'his cotton socks off' as he bluntly put it when asked why he should be hired. Sugar, true to his name, subsequently presented Simon with some unsightly pairs of cotton socks that he could 'work off' in due course. Although not the most experienced of contestants, Simon's happy-go-lucky attitude and kindness got him quite far and moreover made him a master at dealing with some of the more prickly contestants in the show.

The complete opposite was Katie, fired from the show last week. It seems that in her case, common decency took a left-turn and avoided her altogether. Certainly, courtesy of having a blog you learn first-hand how quickly the Internet bites back and let's you know faster, sooner, and more sharply how much you suck, even when your best-friends stay silent. It felt almost sadistic and certainly voyeuristic to sit there watching Katie spouting her horrific comments about her fellow contestants to the camera and then select comments being revealed to the fellow contestants by programme directors.. pausing to focus on the furious candidate, squirming in their seat, rolling their eyes. It just amazes me that no one from the real or virtual village has played their part, taking Katie to one side, giving her a really good hiding and reminding her just what it means to be a citizen in the global village. Sir Alan Sugar did it sort of, a little yesterday - but all she did was smile. Knowingly. Thinking she still calls the shots. Think again.

Why the Desire to Simplify Can Inhibit Innovation

A friend recently postulated that having budget constraints can encourage better innovation than those with lots of money to burn as this provides a framework where automatically many things are out of bounds, because you can't afford them. He proceeded to point to many start-ups often don't have a lot of money, but make up for it in energy and determination and thus often end up coming up with solutions better, smarter and more relevant than their heavy-weight rivals. Stops you re-inventing the wheel I suppose.

Coming from a product design background I must agree that an essential component to innovation is first figuring out your constraints, the framework within which you intend to innovate. Before you know that, it is virtually impossible to determine, which of your million ideas is the best solution to a given problem.

Having smaller budgets certainly creates some immediate restraints on what the solution should be - i.e it can't cost more than X. That has a remarkable ability to focus a team. The trouble with this approach is often the desire to simplify too soon, which means that many important factors, which will in the end determine the success of the solution, are discarded too early from the process, and thus the solution ends up being more of the same, rather than truly groundbreaking.

One of my favourite quotes ever is that of F. Scott Fitzgerald, that for him 'the sign of a truly intelligent individual is one who has the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function'. Innovation is often just that, how to balance the constraints one has from an organisational, technical and financial point of view against the desires and demands of one's consumers. Often it is not a matter of either-or, but both, and the innovation is the process of coming up with just how that will be done.

Here the key is to be able to seek less obvious, but potentially relevant factors (that will give differentiation in the long run, although to start with will seem like they are adding more complexity to the topic), secondly it is the ability to consider multi-directional, non-linear relationships between these variables and seeing problems as a whole, examining how the parts fit together and how decisions affect one another, and then lastly: creatively resolve those conflicts between seemingly opposing ideas to generate innovative outcomes.

That sounds very complicated and at times, it is - and it is pivotal not to fear the complexity to start with and simplify too soon, thus ending up creating a solution which will only partially address the problem (and potentially give birth to an entirely new problem!), but to persist and strive to integrate, not divide. So constraints are good - but do you know all your constraints or have you simply settled for the most obvious ones?