"The tiny, spontaneous, human act has enormous power."
--Tom Peters
Act! Just do it now!
Showing posts with label Tom Peters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tom Peters. Show all posts
Friday, October 9, 2009
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Being and Time
At the conclusion of his monumental work, Being in Time, the philosopher, Martin Heidegger, asks this question:
Today's quote answers Heidegger's question succinctly:
Does time itself reveal itself as the horizon of being?In my inbox moments ago I received the "Daily Quote" by Tom Peters, the management guru.
Today's quote answers Heidegger's question succinctly:
All we have is our time. The way we distribute it is our "strategic plan," our "vision," our "values."Time is us. We are time. What are we doing daily?
Friday, May 15, 2009
Being Peaceable
"Peace. It does not mean to be in a place where there is no noise, trouble or hard work. It means to be in the midst of those things and still be calm in your heart."
--Unknown
Peace is gained internally in spite of what's occurring externally. The photo represents this peace.
(Photo: "Peaceable Kingdom" by Tom Peters)
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Being a Winner
"Celebrate failure. Yes, damn it, CELEBRATE. Try and fail and adjust and try and fail and adjust, then try and fail and adjust. Repeat. Forever. At the speed of light. To paraphrase my friend Richard Farson: 'Whoever makes the most mistakes wins.'"
--Tom Peters
This is so incredibly true. Embedded in this statement is also the complete refusal of not giving up. I have tried, oh, so many things since my early adolescence on purpose; I’ve had heartbreaks, some successes too. After writing a very lengthy novel some 12 years ago and after so many rejection letters from agents, I simply filed the work. I then wrote a collection of short stories of my travels which also did not go anywhere. Later I became a content editor of various works from business to self-help to philosophy and served as a ghost writer for another.
Eighteen months or so ago I had an ideal for a book. A friend suggested I begin a blog. I did so that very day and write many posts a month, though I may have to cut back very soon here. I check in with this friend occasionally by phone and email. "Am I still OK?" "Yeah, you're good. But... And... Have you thought of this?" "No, thanks!" I then try something else. I have quite a few people like this in various fields and I too am a sounding board for others.
This week I began writing the first 75 pages of a new work after having been asked to do so by arguably one of the finest agents in New York. I just kept trying stuff. The same can be said for the multiple businesses that I have started where some succeeded and others did not. But there are seeds remaining, however, in each.
What remains, what you keep after having tried, is also the significance of simply trying stuff. I never tire of trying stuff, even when momentarily I'm unsure or fearful. I tell myself courage is not the absence of fear; it is moving forward in spite of it. I press forward, anyway; clarity comes in trying stuff.
I'm winning even when I'm not.
--Tom Peters
This is so incredibly true. Embedded in this statement is also the complete refusal of not giving up. I have tried, oh, so many things since my early adolescence on purpose; I’ve had heartbreaks, some successes too. After writing a very lengthy novel some 12 years ago and after so many rejection letters from agents, I simply filed the work. I then wrote a collection of short stories of my travels which also did not go anywhere. Later I became a content editor of various works from business to self-help to philosophy and served as a ghost writer for another.
Eighteen months or so ago I had an ideal for a book. A friend suggested I begin a blog. I did so that very day and write many posts a month, though I may have to cut back very soon here. I check in with this friend occasionally by phone and email. "Am I still OK?" "Yeah, you're good. But... And... Have you thought of this?" "No, thanks!" I then try something else. I have quite a few people like this in various fields and I too am a sounding board for others.
This week I began writing the first 75 pages of a new work after having been asked to do so by arguably one of the finest agents in New York. I just kept trying stuff. The same can be said for the multiple businesses that I have started where some succeeded and others did not. But there are seeds remaining, however, in each.
What remains, what you keep after having tried, is also the significance of simply trying stuff. I never tire of trying stuff, even when momentarily I'm unsure or fearful. I tell myself courage is not the absence of fear; it is moving forward in spite of it. I press forward, anyway; clarity comes in trying stuff.
I'm winning even when I'm not.
Monday, May 4, 2009
Being a Local Shop Owner
The "Small Guys" Guide to Walloping Wal*Mart: [Be] a community star! ("Sell" local-ness per se. Sell the hell out of it!)
--Tom Peters
This is so very difficult when these big box stores can offer so much for so cheaply when dealing with large quantities, gotten at steep discounts. It seems the only way to combat or compete with a Wal-Mart is to offer excellent service, to bond personally with the members of your communities. But this may not be enough.
About a year ago I was talking with someone that I have known a number of years who owns 15 supermarkets. He was saying that it is becoming increasingly more difficult to do business and this Dutch supermarket chain knows how to bond with the communities that they serve; they have done so for many years.
What now? The competition seems overwhelmingly in the favor of Wal-Mart. But such "walloping" may come in serving underserved communities where community is much tighter simply because there is not a means to get to a Wal-Mart which is typically on the outskirts of towns, not in the centers.
--Tom Peters
This is so very difficult when these big box stores can offer so much for so cheaply when dealing with large quantities, gotten at steep discounts. It seems the only way to combat or compete with a Wal-Mart is to offer excellent service, to bond personally with the members of your communities. But this may not be enough.
About a year ago I was talking with someone that I have known a number of years who owns 15 supermarkets. He was saying that it is becoming increasingly more difficult to do business and this Dutch supermarket chain knows how to bond with the communities that they serve; they have done so for many years.
What now? The competition seems overwhelmingly in the favor of Wal-Mart. But such "walloping" may come in serving underserved communities where community is much tighter simply because there is not a means to get to a Wal-Mart which is typically on the outskirts of towns, not in the centers.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Being Apologetic and Appreciated II
In a recent post, "Being Apologetic and Appreciated", I wrote about the necessity of apologies and how they are appreciated as a means of doing business.
Tom Peters had written an excellent post on apologies and I had conveyed a story of my time as a college student waiting and hoping for that apologetic free Domino's Pizza if the delivery was even a minute late.
This morning I received a note from an Amazon bookseller after having ordered and paid for a book, Liberation Management, by Tom Peters that had not arrived three weeks later.
On late Thursday I wrote a note to the seller via Amazon. On Friday morning he responded with a brief apology, explaining that he would "pull the order and shipping information and email you back all of the specifics."
Today I received this email from the seller which erased any bad feelings I had for having not received the book in a timely fashion:
Tom Peters had written an excellent post on apologies and I had conveyed a story of my time as a college student waiting and hoping for that apologetic free Domino's Pizza if the delivery was even a minute late.
This morning I received a note from an Amazon bookseller after having ordered and paid for a book, Liberation Management, by Tom Peters that had not arrived three weeks later.
On late Thursday I wrote a note to the seller via Amazon. On Friday morning he responded with a brief apology, explaining that he would "pull the order and shipping information and email you back all of the specifics."
Today I received this email from the seller which erased any bad feelings I had for having not received the book in a timely fashion:
Judith - Thank you so much for allowing me to pull all of the information regarding the shipment and order. I will provide you all of the specifics as well as what I have done to rectify the situation for you.An apology, with swift action--along with something a little extra, reverses negative situations which can become a moment of appreciation. Not only will I get the book I ordered but it now comes with the signature of Tom Peters, someone whom I greatly admire. I will order from this seller again.
Your order was placed on Thursday April 9th and was shipped via media mail from my location in south Florida on Monday, April 13th to the following address:
Judith Ellis
00000 Hope St.
City of Love, MI 00000-0000
Based on my estimates the book should have been received the 22nd to the 24th of April at the latest. Please accept my apologies for this.
I went ahead on Thursday and immediately sent you another copy in the same like new condition, except this one is actually autographed by Tom Peters. It was shipped on Thursday, April 30th to the same address above. It was sent with tracking / delivery confirmation. the number is 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000. The progress can be checked at www.usps.gov.
Please accept my apologies for this situation and I hope that my quick action, once I was aware of the situation, will help to rectify this.
Thanks so much.
Evan
Monday, April 27, 2009
Being Apologetic and Appreciated
Tom Peters has an excellent post, Strategic Competence! Dammit! on the strategic relevance of aplogoies in business. A commentator posted a cool video from Church of the Customer where a Domino's franchise posted a video apology; it's not slick or fancy, but it has a nice personalable touch.
The best apology I received from Domino's was in college with the gang praying that after we ordered multiple pizzas that they would be late, even by one minute. The pizzas were then free. Believe me, this was the best apology as broke college students. Apologetic words are necessary and important, but actions are often so much better than words.
Domino's was founded in Michigan by a great entrepreneur and philanthropist, Tom Monaghan. He is the antithesis of the greedy CEO that we have been reading so much about lately. While we prayed for free pizzas as college students there was something intrinsic in the apology that was appreciated.
We were way happy then for the free pizza which got us to exclusively order from Domino's, even though they were more on time than not. But now I understand that this was the basis of Domino's core business, one of appreciation through excellence and apologies when necessary.
Bravo Mr. Monaghan and thank you!
The best apology I received from Domino's was in college with the gang praying that after we ordered multiple pizzas that they would be late, even by one minute. The pizzas were then free. Believe me, this was the best apology as broke college students. Apologetic words are necessary and important, but actions are often so much better than words.
Domino's was founded in Michigan by a great entrepreneur and philanthropist, Tom Monaghan. He is the antithesis of the greedy CEO that we have been reading so much about lately. While we prayed for free pizzas as college students there was something intrinsic in the apology that was appreciated.
We were way happy then for the free pizza which got us to exclusively order from Domino's, even though they were more on time than not. But now I understand that this was the basis of Domino's core business, one of appreciation through excellence and apologies when necessary.
Bravo Mr. Monaghan and thank you!
Friday, April 24, 2009
Being Tom Peters II
"We’re in an age where economic value is created through intellectual capital. Through creativity. Through spunk. Through spark. Through individuality."
--Tom Peters
In my inbox every morning I receive a quote of Tom Peters. The one above appeared earlier this week and I have been thinking of it every since. It's absolutely brilliant and most encouraging. It emphasizes the reality that ideas come from everywhere and that anybody can implement them and add to our economic system.
This is capitalism. This is what millions of entrepreneurs do everyday of the week. There is no business without intellectual stimuli, creativity, spunk, spark and individuality. This age in particular seems to favor these; it's like we've entered a brave new world with regards to innovation and the Internet.
The beauty of here is that ideas can be implemented broadly and sustained based on their vigor and ability to meet needs and desires. Also, there need not be an extremely expensive cost to do business initially. These are all beautiful things.
--Tom Peters
In my inbox every morning I receive a quote of Tom Peters. The one above appeared earlier this week and I have been thinking of it every since. It's absolutely brilliant and most encouraging. It emphasizes the reality that ideas come from everywhere and that anybody can implement them and add to our economic system.
This is capitalism. This is what millions of entrepreneurs do everyday of the week. There is no business without intellectual stimuli, creativity, spunk, spark and individuality. This age in particular seems to favor these; it's like we've entered a brave new world with regards to innovation and the Internet.
The beauty of here is that ideas can be implemented broadly and sustained based on their vigor and ability to meet needs and desires. Also, there need not be an extremely expensive cost to do business initially. These are all beautiful things.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Being Innovative
"Encourage the innovative...everywhere...all the time."
--Tom Peters
Innovation begins with a thought. What are you thinking?
--Tom Peters
Innovation begins with a thought. What are you thinking?
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Being Tom Peters
In a recent post Tom Peters includes the new forward for a 2009 edition of his awesome imaginative book, Re-Imagine. I have written of Tom Peters quite often on this blog for his leadership in management and his passion for excellence. The forward, however, sparked me to create a post in appreciation for his many years of service to business and for inspiring so many people worldwide to think and do things differently. Re-Imagine is pure beauty, a creative business book and the new forward is relevant and expansive.
The overall tenet of the forward is so central to what's happening today that it clarifies and sets direction by, nonetheless, returning to the basics of forever beginning anew the fundamentals which will keep us in good stead in 21st Century. Excellence is Tom Peters' mantra. Excellence is and will always be the forever standard, for it is the basis of love. Anything that is done with excellence is done with love. There is nothing that we have ever done that is of significance that lacks love and excellence, no matter how small or large the feat or accomplishment. Thanks for this reminder.
Recently, I have written on this blog and on the Huffington Post using Peters' "managing by wandering around" to explain President Obama's leadership style. Yes, we all know that it will ultimately be the outcomes of his leadership that will matter most, but what we can say for sure is that it resembles Peters' MBWA which is essentially being present.
The President is seen everywhere. He has aimed high, created a plan, assembled a team, and manages by wandering around. Peters presents a series of E's that is also indicative of the President's leadership style: Engaged. Electronic. Encompassing. Emotion. Empathy. Experience. Eliminate. Errorprone. Evenhanded. Expectations. Eudiamonia. Excellence. The President has such high approval ratings for being and doing these things to a lesser or greater degree in his first 50 days. Let's hope he succeeds.
Peters writes of an "open and deliberate fashion, to helping people-e.g. the single mother trying to raise two kids on a receptionist salary-achieve their dreams." I so appreciate the example of the single working mother with children. Sometimes a mere image, as that of that single working mom with kids, breaks through in ways that printed words on a wall-plaque of set core values elude. The image breaks through the staid example of men in the workplace that we are so accustomed to embracing and allows for a greater sensibility to what others are experiencing and perhaps will change the dimension of ethics in the workplace as well as variance. This will affect what and how things are done.
Men, by and large, ran the global financial markets off the cliff. Men largely brought on this financial "Pearl Harbor," spoken of by Warren Buffett. I cannot help but to wonder would such have been the case with the inclusion of more women in decision-making. With or without approval change is coming, nationally and internationally. There is a beautiful necessity of the old-fashioned example of women being a help to men.
I'm sure some women may be railing right now at the above thought and some men perhaps thinking that they don’t need such help. But we are helpers one to another and everything needs to be taken in its context and in the light of everything else. Women may have made the difference. What are we doing in moving forward? Will we continue the same old same old in likeness and structure? How much change occurred after the S&L scandal?
While there are other models out there, when we think of organizational excellence we often think of the Welch model, especially those of a certain era. I have read Mr. Welch's books and have appreciated the principles therein. But it also may not be by coincidence that the large companies that have followed the GE model such as Home Depot and now Chrysler, where the leaders have been groomed in a particular management style and structure, are in such dire straights now. I really dunno. I'm no expert. This is just a mere observation. Maybe it's just the time.
Perhaps GE is in such straights because of GE Financial which seems to have engaged in bogus derivatives like the big Wall Street banks. Producing things seem to have become a side gig for this once great product producer. (Maybe bigger is not always better.) I also wonder about any leadership model that does not focus on small things and whose leaders are essentially cut from the same cloth, following the same model, industry after industry. Excellence is not a model; it's a forever pursuit, though I'm aware that structure is necessary.
Technology is becoming more and more of an intense interest to me for its ability to constantly create and innovate. It does not seem like a model but a constant necessity of change and continuous improvement—science on steroids, in fact. There is a pulse created that evades typical business models, though I'm sure that a structure of such exist in the thick of this culture. But the focus on pure innovation based on the desires and needs of people is most relevant and its impact in ways that Van Jones writes and speaks of is most important. Recently Peters wrote a post about the need for optimisim which included a look at what's happening in Silicon Valley; it was great for its insistence on innovation.
The model of innovating is invigorating. While technologies are being created, it is people who are doing so and jobs being created for the enjoyment and betterment of people in various industries worldwide, including the health industry. It is also a forever brand new world of seeing things differently. It is essentially one of science, one of discovery. Detroit has lagged behind in this and is now reaping the whirlwind. (Education nationwide is reaping such too! Bob Foster has a great piece about this on his blog, US Falling Behing in Innovation-Part 1". If nothing else, the pulse of the tech industry is needed, not to mention the science needed for its continuous development.
Tom Peters' new forward to an already incredible book is pure beauty and brilliance.
The overall tenet of the forward is so central to what's happening today that it clarifies and sets direction by, nonetheless, returning to the basics of forever beginning anew the fundamentals which will keep us in good stead in 21st Century. Excellence is Tom Peters' mantra. Excellence is and will always be the forever standard, for it is the basis of love. Anything that is done with excellence is done with love. There is nothing that we have ever done that is of significance that lacks love and excellence, no matter how small or large the feat or accomplishment. Thanks for this reminder.
Recently, I have written on this blog and on the Huffington Post using Peters' "managing by wandering around" to explain President Obama's leadership style. Yes, we all know that it will ultimately be the outcomes of his leadership that will matter most, but what we can say for sure is that it resembles Peters' MBWA which is essentially being present.
The President is seen everywhere. He has aimed high, created a plan, assembled a team, and manages by wandering around. Peters presents a series of E's that is also indicative of the President's leadership style: Engaged. Electronic. Encompassing. Emotion. Empathy. Experience. Eliminate. Errorprone. Evenhanded. Expectations. Eudiamonia. Excellence. The President has such high approval ratings for being and doing these things to a lesser or greater degree in his first 50 days. Let's hope he succeeds.
Peters writes of an "open and deliberate fashion, to helping people-e.g. the single mother trying to raise two kids on a receptionist salary-achieve their dreams." I so appreciate the example of the single working mother with children. Sometimes a mere image, as that of that single working mom with kids, breaks through in ways that printed words on a wall-plaque of set core values elude. The image breaks through the staid example of men in the workplace that we are so accustomed to embracing and allows for a greater sensibility to what others are experiencing and perhaps will change the dimension of ethics in the workplace as well as variance. This will affect what and how things are done.
Men, by and large, ran the global financial markets off the cliff. Men largely brought on this financial "Pearl Harbor," spoken of by Warren Buffett. I cannot help but to wonder would such have been the case with the inclusion of more women in decision-making. With or without approval change is coming, nationally and internationally. There is a beautiful necessity of the old-fashioned example of women being a help to men.
I'm sure some women may be railing right now at the above thought and some men perhaps thinking that they don’t need such help. But we are helpers one to another and everything needs to be taken in its context and in the light of everything else. Women may have made the difference. What are we doing in moving forward? Will we continue the same old same old in likeness and structure? How much change occurred after the S&L scandal?
While there are other models out there, when we think of organizational excellence we often think of the Welch model, especially those of a certain era. I have read Mr. Welch's books and have appreciated the principles therein. But it also may not be by coincidence that the large companies that have followed the GE model such as Home Depot and now Chrysler, where the leaders have been groomed in a particular management style and structure, are in such dire straights now. I really dunno. I'm no expert. This is just a mere observation. Maybe it's just the time.
Perhaps GE is in such straights because of GE Financial which seems to have engaged in bogus derivatives like the big Wall Street banks. Producing things seem to have become a side gig for this once great product producer. (Maybe bigger is not always better.) I also wonder about any leadership model that does not focus on small things and whose leaders are essentially cut from the same cloth, following the same model, industry after industry. Excellence is not a model; it's a forever pursuit, though I'm aware that structure is necessary.
Technology is becoming more and more of an intense interest to me for its ability to constantly create and innovate. It does not seem like a model but a constant necessity of change and continuous improvement—science on steroids, in fact. There is a pulse created that evades typical business models, though I'm sure that a structure of such exist in the thick of this culture. But the focus on pure innovation based on the desires and needs of people is most relevant and its impact in ways that Van Jones writes and speaks of is most important. Recently Peters wrote a post about the need for optimisim which included a look at what's happening in Silicon Valley; it was great for its insistence on innovation.
The model of innovating is invigorating. While technologies are being created, it is people who are doing so and jobs being created for the enjoyment and betterment of people in various industries worldwide, including the health industry. It is also a forever brand new world of seeing things differently. It is essentially one of science, one of discovery. Detroit has lagged behind in this and is now reaping the whirlwind. (Education nationwide is reaping such too! Bob Foster has a great piece about this on his blog, US Falling Behing in Innovation-Part 1". If nothing else, the pulse of the tech industry is needed, not to mention the science needed for its continuous development.
Tom Peters' new forward to an already incredible book is pure beauty and brilliance.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Being President Barack Obama V
President Obama is being berated essentially for doing what Tom Peters calls "managing by wandering around." He has been criticized for essentially being too present. But he is doing exactly what he should be doing. As any good president of any country, corporation, university or organization, he or she develops a plan, picks a staff and then leads.
When have we ever seen such an active president? President Obama often holds brief and not so brief press conferences on immediate and long-term plans. He goes to Congress to push legislation. He goes on the road with his plan. He meets Democrats and Republicans for dinner to discuss policy. He visits various administrations regularly. He addresses the country via youtube weekly. He plans and participates in financial and healthcare summits.
Personally, I have never seen such an active president. In less than two months, President Obama has signed the largest bill ever in the history of America in record time to address our most eminent financial crisis. (He has prioritized.) He has outlined a plan to stablize the housing market and end the Iraq war. He signed the Lilly Ledbetter Act. He made his first foreign trip to Canada and hosted a foreign leader, Prime Minister Brown of England. Should I mention that President Obama also hosted both Earth, Wind and Fire and Stevie Wonder?
President Obama's confidence that he can do many things effectively seems to stem from his confidence in himself first and then the confidence in the administration he has assembled. He leads and manages the internal (administration) and external (us) staff by walking around.
When have we ever seen such an active president? President Obama often holds brief and not so brief press conferences on immediate and long-term plans. He goes to Congress to push legislation. He goes on the road with his plan. He meets Democrats and Republicans for dinner to discuss policy. He visits various administrations regularly. He addresses the country via youtube weekly. He plans and participates in financial and healthcare summits.
Personally, I have never seen such an active president. In less than two months, President Obama has signed the largest bill ever in the history of America in record time to address our most eminent financial crisis. (He has prioritized.) He has outlined a plan to stablize the housing market and end the Iraq war. He signed the Lilly Ledbetter Act. He made his first foreign trip to Canada and hosted a foreign leader, Prime Minister Brown of England. Should I mention that President Obama also hosted both Earth, Wind and Fire and Stevie Wonder?
President Obama's confidence that he can do many things effectively seems to stem from his confidence in himself first and then the confidence in the administration he has assembled. He leads and manages the internal (administration) and external (us) staff by walking around.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Being Disruptive II
John O'Leary wrote an excellent post recently on "creative disruption" where he uses The Beatles as an example. I have written here on being disruptive a few times. As brilliant as they are, disrupters are often marginalized and isolated.
While often being maligned, disrupters, in fact, are those who make the difference in business, painting, music, science, education, medicine, poetry, fashion, communities, novels, religion, community philosophy, etc.
Who are these disrupters?
Jesus Christ
Martin Luther
Joan of Arc
Toni Morrison
Nassim Nicholas Taleb
Jean Paul Gautier
Emily Dickinson
Friedrich Nietzsche
Chuck Berry
Tom Peters
Oscar Wilde
Leonardo Da Vinci
Gianni Versace
Muhammad Yunnus
Bela Bartok
Copernicus
Henry Miller
Malcolm X
Jean Paul Sartre
Marie Currier
Anita Roddick
Georgia O'Keefe
Nelson Mandela
Virgina Woolf
Igor Stravinsky
Vincent Van Gogh
Anais Nin
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Galileo
Nat Turner
History is replete which such ones, yet we seek to allow disruption to be. Perhaps without the struggle it would not find a place or consistency. Perhaps resistance is at the heart of disruption a necessity.
While often being maligned, disrupters, in fact, are those who make the difference in business, painting, music, science, education, medicine, poetry, fashion, communities, novels, religion, community philosophy, etc.
Who are these disrupters?
Jesus Christ
Martin Luther
Joan of Arc
Toni Morrison
Nassim Nicholas Taleb
Jean Paul Gautier
Emily Dickinson
Friedrich Nietzsche
Chuck Berry
Tom Peters
Oscar Wilde
Leonardo Da Vinci
Gianni Versace
Muhammad Yunnus
Bela Bartok
Copernicus
Henry Miller
Malcolm X
Jean Paul Sartre
Marie Currier
Anita Roddick
Georgia O'Keefe
Nelson Mandela
Virgina Woolf
Igor Stravinsky
Vincent Van Gogh
Anais Nin
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Galileo
Nat Turner
History is replete which such ones, yet we seek to allow disruption to be. Perhaps without the struggle it would not find a place or consistency. Perhaps resistance is at the heart of disruption a necessity.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Being Peggy Noonan V
An article by Peggy Noonan addresses our current financial crisis with aplomb and direction. It's incredibly relevant, wonderfully written, and hopeful. The article ends with this:
I end with a hunch that is not an unhappy one. Dynamism has been leached from our system for now, but not from the human brain or heart. Just as our political regeneration will happen locally, in counties and states that learn how to control themselves and demonstrate how to govern effectively in a time of limits, so will our economic regeneration. That will begin in someone's garage, somebody's kitchen, as it did in the case of Messrs. Jobs and Wozniak. The comeback will be from the ground up and will start with innovation. No one trusts big anymore. In the future everything will be local. That's where the magic will be. And no amount of pessimism will stop it once it starts.This morning I was just thinking along these same lines. Tom Peters' post this afternoon affirmed what's needed in moving forward. Innovation begins with us at the local level, as does a host of other things including love, responsibility, accountability and trust.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Being for the Stimulus Package III
Some who are against the stimulus package are so because of an ill-conceived ideology that the poor will be living large on their hard earned dollar. There are a few business blogs that I follow and contribute to; Tom Peters' blog is on of these. Recently there in a discussion regarding President Obama's support of the $500,000 cap on CEOs whose companies receive a bailout, I told a commentator that the joke was on him for not supporting this initiative. He responded, "Judith you are correct to say that the joke's on me. Taking my money, at the point of a gun, and then turning around and handing it to people that haven't earned it is sad. Oh wait, they call that welfare and we have been that for a very long time. So instead of sending a millions dollars to 10,000 lazy people, we send it to one."
The commentator appears to be one of those dittoheads living in a fantasy land of the far Right who is tettering on a kind of poor folks and racist ideology that blankets welfare recipients as lazy when, in fact, many who receive some form of welfare are the working poor who pay taxes; the biggest flaw in your argument is your blinders which produce a kind of insipid ideology which does nothing to correct the problem but inflame it indeed. His comment is lame for its one-sidedness and handicap for its inability to embrace the whole. It's a shameful stupid comment.
Although living in England, he seems to have been listening to Limbaugh and other extreme right comedic pseudo politicians who inflame instead of inviting, who blame instead of understanding, who are full of themselves who actually berate average guys, doping them into believing that he is speaking for them as they find relief in fantasy while being barely able to pay their gas bills. As they struggle to pay their bills, Limbaugh laughs all the way to the bank. (It's sort of like the new leader of the Republican Party, Joe the Plumber, speaking out against policies that he himself would benefit from. But in his mind he and Limbaugh are on the same level. Right! He too is a joke.) We do not need more of that inane ideology.
This is, in part, the fantasy about which I speak. Yes, we can spend billions upon billions on Wall Street banks and no money for the little guy, even that ideological one who is just at the poverty line, listening and laughing to the likes of Limbaugh. Well, I guess, at least, they can laugh. But many of them need to be crying. Escapism is a serious drug. Yes, we should strip away wasteful spending but tax cuts alone have not helped the working poor and neither have the trickled down laissez-faire economics without corporate responsibility.
These are extremely difficult times. I hope that he will not find himself on the dole after a while. During the Depression a great many very wealthy prosperous people found themselves without and needing the support of the government. (Nassim Nicholas Taleb says that the very wealthy have been hurt the most by this crisis.) Many stood in soup lines; many jumped out of buildings to their deaths. One bad investment could ruin a great many people in these difficult times. It is no time for stupid insipid ideological comments. This stuff is for real. Yes, we need to get things right, but let's not overlook the real problem that America and the whole world faces right now. Let's focus long-term and short-term stimuli, such as infrastructure, green technologies, education, and welfare reform. But we need a shot of some form of stimulus right now.
By the way, the commentator has done right to call what we are doing welfare; I have written of this repeatedly on this blog and on the Huffington Post. It is not called welfare when big corporations are in need of assistance. But when the single mother needs assistance to care for her children, even when she is working, it is despairingly labeled as welfare. No amount of welfare already received by the thousand and thousands of mothers across this great country will add up to the many billions that we have already spent on bailouts for private industries. I'm not complaining. But tax cuts alone will not do it. We've been there and done that. Look at where we now are after 25 years.
If he said anything of value it is his proper labeling of what we are actually doing here. These companies are receiving welfare. I know that some might say that the difference is that we will be paid back with interest. This is our hope. We also hope that the single mother would be able to make things right and be able to one day pay taxes. We also hope that her children will also rise up and call her blessed and seek ways out of the hills of Tennessee or the ghetto of urban America and be contributing citizens to this great country that we all love. Now, if someone can only open his head and pour therein a touch of sensitivity and reality that would be good. Good luck to the one who seeks to do this.
As Warren Buffett, Donald Trump, Paul Krugman and many other economists on the Right and Left, I am in support of the stimulus package.
The commentator appears to be one of those dittoheads living in a fantasy land of the far Right who is tettering on a kind of poor folks and racist ideology that blankets welfare recipients as lazy when, in fact, many who receive some form of welfare are the working poor who pay taxes; the biggest flaw in your argument is your blinders which produce a kind of insipid ideology which does nothing to correct the problem but inflame it indeed. His comment is lame for its one-sidedness and handicap for its inability to embrace the whole. It's a shameful stupid comment.
Although living in England, he seems to have been listening to Limbaugh and other extreme right comedic pseudo politicians who inflame instead of inviting, who blame instead of understanding, who are full of themselves who actually berate average guys, doping them into believing that he is speaking for them as they find relief in fantasy while being barely able to pay their gas bills. As they struggle to pay their bills, Limbaugh laughs all the way to the bank. (It's sort of like the new leader of the Republican Party, Joe the Plumber, speaking out against policies that he himself would benefit from. But in his mind he and Limbaugh are on the same level. Right! He too is a joke.) We do not need more of that inane ideology.
This is, in part, the fantasy about which I speak. Yes, we can spend billions upon billions on Wall Street banks and no money for the little guy, even that ideological one who is just at the poverty line, listening and laughing to the likes of Limbaugh. Well, I guess, at least, they can laugh. But many of them need to be crying. Escapism is a serious drug. Yes, we should strip away wasteful spending but tax cuts alone have not helped the working poor and neither have the trickled down laissez-faire economics without corporate responsibility.
These are extremely difficult times. I hope that he will not find himself on the dole after a while. During the Depression a great many very wealthy prosperous people found themselves without and needing the support of the government. (Nassim Nicholas Taleb says that the very wealthy have been hurt the most by this crisis.) Many stood in soup lines; many jumped out of buildings to their deaths. One bad investment could ruin a great many people in these difficult times. It is no time for stupid insipid ideological comments. This stuff is for real. Yes, we need to get things right, but let's not overlook the real problem that America and the whole world faces right now. Let's focus long-term and short-term stimuli, such as infrastructure, green technologies, education, and welfare reform. But we need a shot of some form of stimulus right now.
By the way, the commentator has done right to call what we are doing welfare; I have written of this repeatedly on this blog and on the Huffington Post. It is not called welfare when big corporations are in need of assistance. But when the single mother needs assistance to care for her children, even when she is working, it is despairingly labeled as welfare. No amount of welfare already received by the thousand and thousands of mothers across this great country will add up to the many billions that we have already spent on bailouts for private industries. I'm not complaining. But tax cuts alone will not do it. We've been there and done that. Look at where we now are after 25 years.
If he said anything of value it is his proper labeling of what we are actually doing here. These companies are receiving welfare. I know that some might say that the difference is that we will be paid back with interest. This is our hope. We also hope that the single mother would be able to make things right and be able to one day pay taxes. We also hope that her children will also rise up and call her blessed and seek ways out of the hills of Tennessee or the ghetto of urban America and be contributing citizens to this great country that we all love. Now, if someone can only open his head and pour therein a touch of sensitivity and reality that would be good. Good luck to the one who seeks to do this.
As Warren Buffett, Donald Trump, Paul Krugman and many other economists on the Right and Left, I am in support of the stimulus package.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Being for a Design CEO
Every morning in my inbox I get a business quote:
"[W]hy not have a cDo? Chief Design Officer? The best reason to do so is that it Vaults the Notion to a Higher Level! Points out that it's of Paramount Importance."
--Tom Peters
In thinking of the power of design, I thought of something I noticed during the Olympics in China over the summer. We are first attracted by a product's design and then the necessity of smart efficient technology follow. But we recognize the product by its design first and we need not see a logo to identify it.
When athletes of every nationality during the Olympics were "relaxing" during down times, they wore little white earplugs attached to white wire that undoubtedly led to little sleek beautiful white devices unlike the usual black electronic ones. Could these be iPods? Did I see that apple? It didn't matter; I thought Apple.
This was unlike the headphones that the coaches wore during Super Bowl XLIII. Although the headphones prominently displayed the Motorola logo on the mic protruding from the ear, it was not attractive. The headphones were not particularly sleek or cool, but one could not help but notice the brand.
For me, the obvious did not have an incredible impact, though the Motorola logo was very much prominently placed. It almost had the reverse affect on me. I began to look at the mic negatively, though it was a basic black headset. But we don't just want basic. We want fine. There was nothing particularly cool about the headsets in color or design.
Design rules!
"[W]hy not have a cDo? Chief Design Officer? The best reason to do so is that it Vaults the Notion to a Higher Level! Points out that it's of Paramount Importance."
--Tom Peters
In thinking of the power of design, I thought of something I noticed during the Olympics in China over the summer. We are first attracted by a product's design and then the necessity of smart efficient technology follow. But we recognize the product by its design first and we need not see a logo to identify it.
When athletes of every nationality during the Olympics were "relaxing" during down times, they wore little white earplugs attached to white wire that undoubtedly led to little sleek beautiful white devices unlike the usual black electronic ones. Could these be iPods? Did I see that apple? It didn't matter; I thought Apple.
This was unlike the headphones that the coaches wore during Super Bowl XLIII. Although the headphones prominently displayed the Motorola logo on the mic protruding from the ear, it was not attractive. The headphones were not particularly sleek or cool, but one could not help but notice the brand.
For me, the obvious did not have an incredible impact, though the Motorola logo was very much prominently placed. It almost had the reverse affect on me. I began to look at the mic negatively, though it was a basic black headset. But we don't just want basic. We want fine. There was nothing particularly cool about the headsets in color or design.
Design rules!
Monday, February 2, 2009
Being Decent
"The decent thing to do is the smart thing to do."
--Tom Peters
Can there be a better business motto?
--Tom Peters
Can there be a better business motto?
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Being Healthy in Recession
A few weeks back a discussion raged on Tom Peter's blog about obesity and health. In thinking about our current economic situation, where McDonald's has simply been recession-free, I wondered about the length of the recession and the health of our kids. Wal-Mart is another company that has done pretty well in this economy, but it is debatable whether shopping at Wal-Mart for healthier foods can compare to the dollar item menu at McDonald's.
Will the recession affect the health of Americans? It's not like the obesity level is not at an all-time high. We were probably the healthiest 12 kids on the block, living on the likes of beans with smoked turkey, baked chicken, rice, oatmeal, greens, and vegetables. But these days kids seem to dictate to their parents what they will eat being inidated with non-stop television marketing. What to do?
Will the recession affect the health of Americans? It's not like the obesity level is not at an all-time high. We were probably the healthiest 12 kids on the block, living on the likes of beans with smoked turkey, baked chicken, rice, oatmeal, greens, and vegetables. But these days kids seem to dictate to their parents what they will eat being inidated with non-stop television marketing. What to do?
Friday, January 16, 2009
Being Fully Engaged
How do we best create results? How do we best train? Do we do so by observation or action, gazing or stillness? These question arose for me in a discussion just beginning on Tom Peters' blog where the question arose if young people, fully engaged in the digital age, are gazing less out of windows, enaging instead in continous actions.
The premise is that perhaps young people engagd in the digital age are lacking in some essential skill. But what is gazing? Is the process of gazing akin to reading where moving images evolve out of gazing, creating the aha moment--action that evolve from stillness? (Philosopher types whose gazing result in writing - an action. How do we know what we are gazing at? Does gazing require a focus?) Is the reverse possible, stillness evolving from action? (Scientist types whose experiments result in theory – a non action.)
Window gazing for some young people fully engaged in the digital age just may be different. My guess is they are reading less and this requires gazing (Reading may largely make gazing possible, evolving out of thoughts.) But then again, this action of reading, a movement line by line, requires a kind of gazing. Does action require gazing? Action and gazing may be possible simultaneously. These are just thoughts that evolved from writing which came from a kind of gazing.
The gaze seems always present in action or stillness. For example, young people fully engaged in the digital age, looking at a moving screen, may perhaps be gazing differently. These thoughts for me also focus on how we lead others; the processes by which we allow others to create and innovate, without stifling thereby not insisting upon a certain way of thinking or doing a thing just so long as the essential elements of both action and stillness are present. (This is determined by results.) Action and stillness seem essential in any age.
This is being fully engaged. Can we ask for anything more of anyone?
The premise is that perhaps young people engagd in the digital age are lacking in some essential skill. But what is gazing? Is the process of gazing akin to reading where moving images evolve out of gazing, creating the aha moment--action that evolve from stillness? (Philosopher types whose gazing result in writing - an action. How do we know what we are gazing at? Does gazing require a focus?) Is the reverse possible, stillness evolving from action? (Scientist types whose experiments result in theory – a non action.)
Window gazing for some young people fully engaged in the digital age just may be different. My guess is they are reading less and this requires gazing (Reading may largely make gazing possible, evolving out of thoughts.) But then again, this action of reading, a movement line by line, requires a kind of gazing. Does action require gazing? Action and gazing may be possible simultaneously. These are just thoughts that evolved from writing which came from a kind of gazing.
The gaze seems always present in action or stillness. For example, young people fully engaged in the digital age, looking at a moving screen, may perhaps be gazing differently. These thoughts for me also focus on how we lead others; the processes by which we allow others to create and innovate, without stifling thereby not insisting upon a certain way of thinking or doing a thing just so long as the essential elements of both action and stillness are present. (This is determined by results.) Action and stillness seem essential in any age.
This is being fully engaged. Can we ask for anything more of anyone?
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Being Charming
President-elect Obama is getting some flack about being charming. I have even heard pundits tell us what he thinks of himself, as if they have had personal conversations with them.
Some pundits have said, "Obama thinks that his charm can get him anywhere." They have also said, "What he relies on most is his charm." Excuse me please, but how hell do they know such things? They don't! Furthermore, being charming is not a negative.
Tom Peters points out, the greatest among us have been charming especially in the midst of incredible odds and great feats. In a post, Ike Got It! and And Now for Something Completely the Same, Peters writes of the importance of charm as seen in General Dwight Eisenhower. He quotes from the book, Armchair General:
"Armchair General (May 2008) traces the origins of this mystical Eisenhower trait: 'Perhaps his most outstanding ability [at West Point] was the ease with which he made friends and earned the trust of fellow cadets who came from widely varied backgrounds; it was a quality that would pay great dividends during his future coalition command.'"
Peters continues quoting from the above:
"Ike somehow inspired people: civilians and ordinary soldiers of both nations, even cynical political figures and the always troublesome French. Something about his big grin; his long-limbed, loose American way of walking (the Kansas farm boy grown to a man); his easy, familiar way of speaking to everybody from King George VI down to privates in both armies; his lack of pretension; his evident sincerity ..."
Being charming is an asset, especially when you are brilliant, principled, and kind. President-elect Obama is in good company indeed.
Some pundits have said, "Obama thinks that his charm can get him anywhere." They have also said, "What he relies on most is his charm." Excuse me please, but how hell do they know such things? They don't! Furthermore, being charming is not a negative.
Tom Peters points out, the greatest among us have been charming especially in the midst of incredible odds and great feats. In a post, Ike Got It! and And Now for Something Completely the Same, Peters writes of the importance of charm as seen in General Dwight Eisenhower. He quotes from the book, Armchair General:
"Armchair General (May 2008) traces the origins of this mystical Eisenhower trait: 'Perhaps his most outstanding ability [at West Point] was the ease with which he made friends and earned the trust of fellow cadets who came from widely varied backgrounds; it was a quality that would pay great dividends during his future coalition command.'"
Peters continues quoting from the above:
"Ike somehow inspired people: civilians and ordinary soldiers of both nations, even cynical political figures and the always troublesome French. Something about his big grin; his long-limbed, loose American way of walking (the Kansas farm boy grown to a man); his easy, familiar way of speaking to everybody from King George VI down to privates in both armies; his lack of pretension; his evident sincerity ..."
Being charming is an asset, especially when you are brilliant, principled, and kind. President-elect Obama is in good company indeed.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Being an Innovative Organization
"If your organization chart ‘makes sense,’ then you probably don’t have an innovative enterprise. Adhocracy requires letting go of linearity assumptions."
--Tom Peters
--Tom Peters
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)