Intelligence, talent, and genius

Almost anyone with intelligence and some talent is able to complicate matters; arrive at a solution that is bigger, more complex than the problem. There is, however, a world of difference between intelligence, talent and genius. Some portion of genius is required to solve problems in ways that simplify, rather than complicate, the outcome.

Posted by: William W. (Woody) Williams

Subscribe

For most business endeavors, too much success is just as disastrous as complete failure.

Posted by: William W. (Woody) Williams

Subscribe

And Then What?

It is often said that change is inevitable. A friend in the door64 and LinkedIn communities recently posed this question:

"As you know, the real problem is once there are structural changes in an economy or economic system, the "return to normal" never really gets to "normal." Job displacement, under employment, unemployment, regardless of how you say it means that skills are lost to an economy or a region. Then what?"

"Then what" is a really good question in any situation dealing with change -- personal, project, or huge macro shifts in social and governmental areas. Truth of the matter is we cannot forecast all potential outcomes from change -- negative or positive.

This (below) is the response given.

---

Then What: Change

At risk of seeming both specious and simplistic, the answer to "then what" is "change." And, change comes with both positive and negative effects; unintended consequences as well as known and unknown outcomes.

Disclaimer: The term "change" is used here without political implications. It is simply "change" in the dictionary sense.

The one central fact around change at the macro level is that we humans lack the ability to fully understand or forecast its result. And, that's not from lack of effort or rhetoric. We see change in an historical context with 20/20 hindsight but our vision is blurred as we turn our attention to the future.

Lessons Learned

One lesson from history is that becoming locked in a paradigm while faced with a sea change leads to disaster.

• The naval defeat of Carthage
• The British defeat in the American Revolution
• The antebellum South
• A lot more

The lesson is that when groups of people -- nations and states as well -- believe with the fierce faith of fanatics and depend entirely for their survival only on solutions or paradigms that worked well in the past, doom is certain; now or later. Change is inevitable and it tramples us unless we face it, learn from it, and move ahead with fresh solutions.

Electric lights put people out of work and changed lives. The steam engine, cotton gin, assembly line, radio and TV, movies, and the PC did as well. Refrigerators, central air and heat, and countless other things - at their inception - put people out of work and disrupted stable lives build on a belief that what worked in the past is "good," will always work, and will always remain "good."

And, that's just not true.

Good and Evil

Change is inevitable but neither all good nor all evil. Change comes fully loaded with both positives and negatives.

"Job displacement, under employment, unemployment...skills lost to an economy or a region" are short-term negative affects of economic change. To the extent that people hold on to the the past and believe the only answer is more of that past, the short-term negative becomes a long-term death sentence.

To the extent that we as a people, we as managers, or we as a government continue to support people affected by change in a manner that continues their reliance on the broken past instead of offering solutions for the new future, we are enablers of continued failure.

It is probably not about "getting those jobs back," or "keeping those skills" as much as it is about creating new jobs, innovation, entrepreneurship, training / retraining in new skills, starting fresh... Telling people the truth about their future including the fact that some of that future is unknown. It takes credibility and transparency in leadership. This is an axiom -- almost a rule -- for anyone managing change.

The invention and use of automobiles shut down equine related businesses. What would have happened if government stepped in as a manager to "control" that situation?

• Subsidies to blacksmiths, carriage makers, and horse trainers
• Outlawing auto manufacturing
• Putting tariffs on the import of automobiles
• High taxes on the sale and use of automobiles
  
• Laws against driving "horseless carriages" down Main Street

Truth and Transition

None of those things stopped the automotive revolution any more than similar measures will stop or "control" the current change cycle -- or any change at any level. If it is inevitable, it can't be stopped but we can sure make the transition easier.

We're better off in the long run telling people the truth about the change especially when jobs and financial futures are at stake. As managers or enablers, we help people accept the fact that change is necessary, celebrate and make possible "fresh starts," give those affected by change the tools and information to handle it well, and move it forward quickly.

Wrap It Up

Another saying is that "People don't resist change, they resist being changed." That means it's personal. The failure of managers at all levels to recognize, and manage to that most personal and instinctual level leads to the most negative of outcomes. It's not that people "take it personally" creating a problem... It is personal and that's part of the solution.

---

Posted by: William W. (Woody) Williams

Subscribe

Innovation: Alive and Well

Posted by: William W. (Woody) Williams

A lot of gnashers (as in the "wailing and gnashing of teeth" bunch) have worked the death of innovation angle over the past few years. We won't dig around in that morass for examples but readers may, if they so choose, Google those swampy waters and find plenty of slimy opinion on the subject.

Some dis-innovation gnashers are on the stump simply because, in the world of 24/7 instant media, "if it bleeds, it leads." The birth of innovation or the continued health of innovation doesn't have the appropriate air of crisis and impending doom necessary for a lead story.

Some seem to be conspiracy theorists with a faulty GPS. They are temporarily lost in the woods but will return again to greener conspiracy pastures as soon as they re-establish contact with the mother ship.

Others are obviously looking for quick, easy excuses to answer questions like "why my business failed," "why my career fell off a cliff," and "why life isn't as good/easy as I thought it would be."

Then again, to put the best face on it, perhaps gnashers are looking at it from the wrong perspective.

• What if the place where innovation comes from today is radically different than where it came from yesterday... or decades ago?
  
• What if the very definition of innovation -- what it looks like, how we recognize it, how it's done -- is undergoing a radical change in the twenty-first century?
• What if, from the perspective of the 19th or 20th century, innovation as it exists now is unrecognizable?
  
• Is it possible dis-innovation gnashers are digging for grubs under the wrong rock?

Maybe; maybe not... But there are other opinions, facts we haven't heard, and even a breath of fresh air for those consumed by the noxious fumes of the morass.

Enter: Marc Andreesson. Marc is probably best known -- or made his first splash -- as co-founder and the technical mind behind Netscape: the creator of the Netscape browser. There is a lot more to his bio, he's done a lot more since, and Marc is re-framing the discussion around innovation with a very positive voice.

Marc interviewed this week on Charlie Rose. It's in the must-see category for anyone interested in innovation, the next big thing, or gaining a rational perspective on the current crop of technological start-ups. It's a paradigm-shifting interview if not life-changing for those who only get the negative side of the innovation conversation.

Marc has a lot to say and we should listen closely -- either to the video or by reading the transcript here: Charlie Rose interview with Marc Andreessen.

Be sure to click the "Watch full episode" link: Do it.

Subscribe