Frog Design's promised series on “Meaning-Driven Business” is taking shape. After introducing the concept of “Chief Meaning Officer” in the “Power” issue of design mind, we are going to formally launch this new forum in our upcoming special TEDGlobal issue (to be released on Sept. 21, 2009) as well as on a special microsite to be launched in a couple of weeks.
For the first round of essays, we are delighted to have received contributions from three industry and thought leaders: Beth Comstock, chief marketing officer of GE and one of the world's most influential Fortune 50 marketing executives, will take the economic crisis as an opportunity to make the case for marketing-driven innovation. Werner Bauer, Nestle's chief technology officer and head of innovation, will describe his company’s concept of “Shared Value” and how it enables a more socially responsible business. And Dev Patnaik, founder and chief executive of innovation consultancy Jump Associates and author of the book Wired to Care, will illustrate how “high-empathy organizations” of all kinds prosper when they tap into a power each of us already has: the ability to reach outside of ourselves and connect with other people. Stay tuned!
The conversation is continuing in other outlets, too, and some pundits want “meaning” to not only be an abstract concept, but a movement. Economist Umair Haque is one of them. His "Generation M (as in “meaning”) Manifesto" stirred some controversial reactions (just read the comments on his blog)--from unconditional endorsement to accusations of arrogance and naiveté. It is one out of many manifestos that have recently been published on the new “new economy”--this, too, is a sign of the times. Manifestos indicate an increased need for ideological alternatives – and meaning. ... Read more
(Credit:
Noisy Decent Graphics)
Never let a crisis go to waste! Inspired by the transformative impetus of the economic downturn, we’ll soon be starting our series about “Meaning-Driven Business” that invites leading business thinkers as well as C-level executives to discuss alternative ways of doing business and creating value. The series is based on the assumption that the current crisis is also a moral crisis, a fundamental crisis of trust in business leadership. According to the Chicago Booth/Kellogg School Financial Trust Index from April 8, trust in business has reached unprecedented lows, with only 10% of Americans now saying they trust large corporations. The “future of capitalism,” it seems, is at stake.
All this serves as a clarion call for business as unusual, and new ideas and values are in high demand. We believe this is an important conversation, and with “Meaning-Driven Business” we would like to provide a forum in which our guest contributors (some of them our clients) can present their ideas – from different backgrounds, different industries, and different corporate functions. Obviously, we‘re not the only ones exploring new horizons for business, nor are we the first. Some distinguished scholars and thought leaders have staked the claim and produced some great thinking around this topic.
Let’s start with an unlikely expert: the Catholic Church. The New York Times reports that Pope Benedict XVI is worried about global capitalism going awry. In “Charity in Truth,” his first papal encyclical on economic and social matters, he posits that Roman Catholic teachings can help reign in Western economics by encouraging social justice (which always means solidarity with the poorer and weaker) and closely regulating the market. In the same article, the Times cites German archbishop Reinhard Marx, a close advisor to the pope, who has written a best seller titled “Das Kapital” (“The Capital”), in a not so subtle reference to his more famous namesake. Obviously inspired by the success of the German post-war model (and the European welfare state philosophy in general), the archbishop calls for a universal “global social market economy” but is prudent enough to acknowledge its limitations, quoting Jean-Claude Juncker, the prime minister of Luxembourg: “I approve of the notion that Europe sees itself, unpretentiously, as a model for the world, but the consequence of that is that we would have to constantly change that model because we are not the world.”
Like the pope and his archbishop, economist Umar Haique argues that we need to re-boot capitalism. And like Reinhard Marx, he focuses on a re-definition of “capital.” His concept of “constructive capitalism,” however, is more radical than the social market economy solution Marx proposes. Haique demands that 21st century economics fundamentally rethink “what capital isn’t – and what capital really is.” “The value equation of industrial-era capitalism was toxically imbalanced. Why is industrial era business so destructive – why does it slash and burn rainforests, endanger entire species, vaporize culture and community, marginalize the poor and disadvantaged, and erode our health and vitality? Because none of those have value in an industrial economy: none are capitalized. So the bean counters of the world are free to plunder and ruin them – because, economically, they actually don't exist. 20th century capitalism, in other words, marginally valued pure financial capital too highly, while marginally valuing human, natural, social, and cultural capital at zero – or, at the limit, negatively." One example of the “capital deepening” Haique envisions are carbon assets: “Once they're capitalized, they become next-gen assets: assets that can be traded, hedged, remixed, tweaked, open-sourced, or shared. The difference is that they're assets with intrinsic, durable, human value – not the lemons Wall St was in the business of hawking. It is only by capitalizing the things we really value that the spark of value creation can be lit again.” As another example of really valuable capital Haique refers to Rypple, an ad-hoc social network that provides simple, direct, anonymous, and ongoing customer and employee feedback: “Rypple’s economic engine is powered by human and social capital – Rypple taps the connections people have with friends, colleagues, bosses, and mentors, to help them get smarter and more productive.”
Former Harvard professor Shoshana Zuboff would agree with Haique. She is the author of The Support Economy: Why Corporations Are Failing Individuals and the Next Episode of Capitalism, and in her recent BusinessWeek article “The Old Solutions Have Become the New Problems,” she proposes companies charter what she calls the “i-Space”: “Business is no longer just about the product. Now it’s about solutions for the individual. Economic value is hidden in consumers’ unmet needs and is released by providing people with the means to fulfill those needs. But in order to release new value, you need to get out of organization space and into the subjective space where individuals live. I call it ‘I-Space.’ This means shedding the ‘us-them’ mentality. Now everyone is an insider.” To succeed in i-space, companies “must federate and collaborate to compete:” “You can't do it alone because the needs of individuals don't conform to existing organizational and industry boundaries. This means learning how to manage what you don't control or own. These economies of trust are becoming even more important than economies of scale. (…) Amazon’s marketplace and eBay's webs of buyers and sellers are early prototypes of these federated networks. Apple and Facebook are struggling to understand the rules of engagement that should govern relationships with their applications developers. You can see them climbing a new learning curve through trial and error as they figure out how to build and sustain economies of trust.” Zuboff is wary of the old paradigms still taught in business school and calls all previous “compasses” obsolete: “You're in a new place. The bad news: There are no maps. The good news? You are the mapmaker.”
Similarly, Jeff Jarvis' concept of the "Share Economy” and Chris Anderson’s notion of the “Free Economy" are both based on the assumption that there is no viable business in markets in which information and content are abundant (i.e. the news industry) unless you add the value of aggregation, create artificial scarcity, or give away those abundant assets (i.e. music recordings) that drive attention to assets that are truly scarce (the live concert experience). Or as Kevin Kelly puts it in "Better than Free": "When copies are free, you need to sell things which cannot be copied."
Richard Edelman from Edelman PR believes we are entering a new era of “Mutual Social Responsibility,” in which “people (formerly labeled as ‘consumers’ by marketers!) contribute to society’s sustainability and well-being in partnership with business, government and non-governmental organizations. But they demand a seat at the table and real voice in the discussion.”
Noah Robischon from Fast Company coined the new, chic term “Ethonomics:” “We live in a world that's resource-constrained but ingenuity-rich. So an upstart generation of entrepreneurs – and innovators within the world's biggest companies – are founding businesses that are good for the world as well as the bottom line. They are practicing social change through urban revitalization, sustainable agriculture, green IT, alternative energy and online community-powered investing. Any business that claims to be truly sustainable and innovative should be increasingly efficient with energy and natural resources, transparent and accountable, and good on balance for people and other living things.”
Speaking of social, there are many who would argue that the future of social is indeed the future of business. This trend even extends to the world of finance – arguably the one industry sector that has suffered most from excessive short-term innovation and is in greatest need of real transformation. Social innovation platform Volans calls for a "WeBank" and asks: "Are people replacing institutions?" As an example of alternative micro- and real-time financing models it refers to Zopa, the world’s first online social finance company:”With no middlemen, less overhead, improved rates for lenders and borrowers, and a sense of transactions between ‘real people,' it creates trust and shared interests between lenders and borrowers.”
Peter Kim, together with Jeff Dachis, David Armano, and other partners, has launched “the first social business firm,” Dachis Corporation, and developed a "social business design framework" for "understanding and applying social constructs to business.” Social business design is “a mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive way of considering how a corporation, business unit, or project can create and capture value from today's emerging technologies and evolving operating environment. The social business design framework captures ecosystem (community), hivemind (culture), dynamic signal (collaboration), and metafilter (content). Putting these into play creates improved business outcomes as well as emergent outcomes. Measurement provides the backbone to the entire framework, as driving change requires proof.” The most interesting archetype of Social Business Design to me is the Dynamic Signal, “the concept that every activity and action is recorded and made available, that every piece of data goes from being a database entry and is instead an event. An event which can be managed, shared and collaborated on by all of those in the organization,” as Dachis partner Jevon MacDonald explains. This concept resembles the familiar vision of the “Real Time Enterprise.” Rypple – mentioned before – offers real-time, ongoing customer and peer feedback, acknowledging that “Real-time business is inherently social – there is no real-time without social."
Yet the accelerated transactions and interaction cycles on the Real-Time Web need to be balanced with sustainable thinking. Quick decisions are easier to make if they’re grounded in a long-term perspective' agility requires stability; and the prerequisite for openness is a strong (and tight) community. It is it ever-more important that companies have a stable foundation, rooted in a set of shared of values and beliefs. At least that’s Charles Handy thinks: “....what enables a corporation to succeed in the longer term is a wish for immortality, or at least a long life; a consistent set of values based on an awareness of the organization's own identity; a willingness to change; and a passionate concern for developing the capability and self-confidence of its core inhabitants, whom the company values more than its physical assets. I suggest that those conditions are best met when organizations live up to the literal meaning of the word company –‘the sharing of bread’ – and regard themselves as communities, not property.....in time, the laws governing corporations will change to reflect (this) new reality." ("Looking Ahead," HBR September 1997).
For former Procter & Gamble chairman and CEO A.G. Lafley “Balancing present and future” is one of the key responsibilities of CEOs: “Don't allow the short-term interests to take precedence over the company's long-term objectives," he warns in a recent article for the Harvard Business Review (“What Only the CEO Can Do”). He describes the CEO as the only person in an organization who can link the external with the internal perspective. “It’s a job that the CEO must do because without the outside there is no inside.” You could argue, of course, that the real-time, hyper-transparent social web has made that distinction obsolete anyway: Inside and outside are congruent; they are one and the same.
There are numerous other thinkers that envision a faster and yet more sustainable, social business as the future of capitalism, and you can browse through articles and blogs post without end. Some recurring themes emerge though the more you read: On the organizational, delivery side, these themes are "social,” “real-time,” and “micro.” And on the cultural, the leadership side, they are “authenticity,” “generosity,” and “empathy.” If you combine the two layers, you get an interesting matrix – let's call it the "Meaning-Driven Business Matrix.” This is the playing-field in which all product, service, and business model innovation will take place from now on – but that’s a topic for a whole series (coming soon).
(Credit:
Jossey-Bass)
A Fine Line offers a step-by-step overview of the innovation process -- from targeting goals to shepherding new products and services to the marketplace -- in order to reveal how to arrive at an authentic human design that connects strongly with consumers. With a unique perspective, rich stories, and a global mindset, Hartmut Esslinger explores business solutions that are environmentally sustainable and contribute to an enduring global economy.
Michael Moritz from Sequoia Capital, in his foreword, said it all: "Hartmut's book contains the ruminations of a man who has devoted his life to the challenge of marrying the aesthetic with the functional while standing firm against the deadening forces of mediocrity. His work shows that taste can triumph, design and production can be soul-mates, and the eye of an individual can shape a product and a company. The idea that finely designed products can change the fate of companies while also becoming our indispensable companions is a message that millions of us owe to Hartmut."
You can find the table of contents, sample chapters, testimonials, and videos on http://www.afinelinebook.com
And here are some excerpts from a video interview with Hartmut:
(Credit:
Travelchinaguide)
I’m nervous, seriously nervous. In a few hours, in the Olympic stadium in Rome, FC Barcelona (or “Barca,” as its supporters call it) will face Manchester United, the other soccer superpower, in the game of all games, the final of the UEFA Champions League, the most important club competition in Europe (and the world, for that matter). Both teams have already won two trophies this season (their national leagues and national cups, respectively), and a victory in Rome would see either one clinch the “treble.” For Barca, it would be a historic accomplishment–no other Spanish soccer team has ever won all three possible titles in one season. That’s not the only superlative in the lead-up to the game: Messi, Eto'o, and Henry–Barca’s offensive trio–have scored more goals together this year than the entire squad of any other European club.
I’ll be watching the game at a resort near Santa Barbara, and it’ll be the end of journey for me, in many ways: I have been following Barca’s triumphant season leading to today’s final in different cities all over the world on TV. I saw the team struggle against Lyon in an earlier round in a packed sports bar in Amsterdam; I bit my nails in a smelly pub in Austin when Barca remained goalless in the home tie against Chelsea; I took a day off from work in San Francisco to enjoy them trashing Bayern Munich 4-1; I was in Barcelona in a bar without any Euros but a kind bartender (the comfort of strangers) who even accepted a few lousy dollars for a beer that helped me make it through a dramatic away game; I followed games on the Internet live-ticker in Sonoma County in lack of TV; and I celebrated euphorically the decisive 1-1 goal in Chelsea in the semi-final with my best friend in Hamburg. After all these memorable moments, I realize that I am emotionally exhausted. There’s just enough sentiment left for today’s game. I will use it to cheer Barca to victory.
So I am a Barca fan, but you may wonder why in the world would an otherwise level-headed (I hope) German professional, living in San Francisco, be so crazy about a Catalan soccer team? Joan Laporta, FC Barcelona’s president, asked me exactly that question (more diplomatically phrased) when I met him briefly two years ago at an event at Stanford University, and I uttered something like “because Barca is more than a club.” I felt stupid and exposed as succumbing to the marketing formula the club had promoted for years: “Mes que un club.” But then I thought of that one remarkable moment in Bill Maher’s documentary “Religulous” in which he tries to make fun of the actor who plays Jesus in a Christian theme park in Florida. Not a difficult task, it seems, until that very actor asks him back, with great sincerity and earnestness: “So you think this is all made up and crazy talk. I get it. But what if you're wrong?” There’s a short pause, and Maher, the cynic, has just been disarmed. That’s exactly how I feel about my passion for Barca. Not that Barca is like a religion to me, but it is a matter of faith. It is something to believe in–the why doesn’t matter.
And yet, I could cite very good reasons for why Barca ought to be the favorite club of anyone who loves the “beautiful game.” In fact, Albert Schweitzer must have had Barca in mind when he coined his famous aphorism: “Do something wonderful, people may imitate it.” Much has been written about Barca’s aesthical play and its underlying philosophy. Barca’s style is a showcase of sparkling creativity, but what one must not overlook is the enormous tactical discipline and the intelligent organization that serve as the platform for the magic moments of Messi, Eto’o, Henry et al. The Barca superstars wouldn’t be able to shine without the works of Xavi, Iniesta, and Toure in midfield, and what pundits have rightly dubbed an “efficient ballet” is a collective movement of great fluidity and elegance, and a unique series of human-ball, human-human interactions that are a true pleasure to watch. One must also credit the incredible discipline that coach and former Barca player Pep Guardiola has introduced to the club this year. When a few players showed up one(!) minute late to a training session last week after winning the Spanish cup the night before, Guardiola reprimanded them and fined them – a symbolic act, of course, but one that reinforced the high standards of professionalism.
One of the other key elements of Barca’s supremacy is anticipation – the ability to predict the opponents’ moves and be just one crucial tick faster than them. This ability is based on the philosophy of “Total Football” that the Dutchmen Johann Cruyff and Luis van Gaal brought to Barcelona, and that Barca still cherishes. Total Football requires every player on the pitch to master any position at any time and to “read” the whole game from any angle. In this fluid system no player is fixed in their intended outfield role; anyone can be successively an attacker, a midfielder, and a defender. Total Football depends largely on the adaptability of each footballer within the team to succeed.
Barcelona embodies Total Football and is yet so much more than just football. To learn more about the genuine element of drama that no other club embraces in the way Barca does, I recommend you read Javier Marias' “All Our Past Battles,” a wonderful collection of stories around the “el classicos” between Barca and arch rival Real Madrid. You’ll understand the melodramatic quality of Barca’s defeats (and wins!), and the great poetry that surrounds all of its appearances, on the pitch and off. More than just once, Barca squandered opportunities to close in on a victory that was thought secure because the team’s abundantly talented players gave in to a seemingly insatiable quest for inspiration, artistry, and class rather than scoring a simple goal. The simple way is never the easiest for Barca. Barca’s striving for excellence feels nostalgic but at the same time very relevant and timely.
Franklin Foer also dedicates a whole chapter to the “Blaugrana” (Catalan for blue/red) club and its political undercurrents in his excellent “How Soccer Explains the World.” FC Barcelona was one of the first soccer clubs to be founded in Spain, and it became a haven for Catalan sentiment when Catalan self-government and culture were proscribed during Franco’s dictatorship. The club emerged as the playful manifesto of Catalonia’s spiritual independence, and since then, nowhere has soccer been more fundamental to the sense of identity than in Barcelona. Former Barca full back Oleguer even published a book which was about politics as much as his own career. Barca supporters joke that he only played when he was not on a protest march.
It is ironic that a club rooted deeply in Catalan nationalism has such an international following. But Barca’s appeal is so global precisely because its roots are so local. Barca represents the Catalan people while at the same time creating a sense of \belonging to “beauty and quality.” The meaning of Barca transcends the boundaries of sports and nations, and embodies the universal values of sportsmanship and integrity.
Every brand can take a page from Barca’s “magic ingredients”:
Aspiration: Barca has always set itself and its members daunting challenges to strive for and rally around. The latest one is “The Great Challenge” campaign which aims at growing the membership, fostering Barca as the biggest and greatest club in world soccer. Before the beginning of this season Barca also declared that its goal was to win all three competitions it participated in. Some may call this arrogance, but for Barca it's a brand driver. The “Big Hairy Audacious Goals” set by excellent teams always need to exceed the past ones. Motivation originates in the belief and opportunity to achieve the extraordinary–no matter what it takes. Underpromise and overdeliver is just good execution. Overpromise and overdeliver are the signs of a class act.
Only the best: Barca’s management and members are never satisfied with average, and they despise mediocrity. They understand top quality, tactically advanced soccer as a moral obligation. Only the best players make it to Barca where the competition is brutal. Analogous to GE's famous 10 percent rule, the lowest performing players in the team usually have to leave the club.
Social responsibility: Barca is fully owned by its members, unlike most other big soccer clubs--which are either in the hands of large corporations or American (Manchester United) and Russian (FC Chelsea) billionaires--and they possess significant voting power. This “power to the people” tradition reflects a distinct social conscience that is expressed in many ways. Sure, other clubs are using the power of their brands as well to do good, but no other club’s social responsibility is so deeply engrained in its DNA as Barca’s. Based on its spirit of independence, the club has always taken on broader social issues and played a pivotal role in promoting diversity, tolerance, and peace worldwide. Barca’s partnership with UNICEF is a statement of the club's continuing efforts to be at the forefront of solidarity projects with a global reach. Under the agreement, which bears the slogan “Barcelona, more than a club, a new global hope for vulnerable children,” Barca contributes to the financing of UNICEF humanitarian projects and endorses UNICEF on its shirts–as the only major European team not to wear an advertisement. Club president Joan Laporta rules out any type of commercial shirt sponsorship and instead seeks to promote a humanitarian message: "FC Barcelona is not only a football club, but a club with a soul.”
The real thing: To a European soccer fan living in the US who has grown accustomed to hyper-commercialized sports events, it is reassuring to see how purist the soccer experience still is in Barca’s stadium, the Camp Nou – a few pre-game commercials, no half-time show whatsoever, and all attention on the players, even during their warm-up exercises before the game. In Camp Nou, it is all about the “beautiful game.”
Charismatic reference point: Messi, arguably the world's best soccer player, serves as a reference point for team mates and fans alike. There is no one else like him, and he outshines all other soccer superstars with his playfulness.
Disruption: Powerful brands need an element of surprise. They should always take the freedom to ignore the quest for consistency and do what they want--irrationally, passionately, and with no regrets. Every three years or so, when a cycle ends, Barca’s management disrupts the existing team structure and builds a new squad. The rule is: Always change a winning team! By all standards of modern business, Barca is a professionally managed club but yet there is a sense that anything could happen anytime – almost like in a soccer match.
The Champions League final today will be another milestone in the saga of the Barca brand, regardless of who wins (2-1 for Barca, my prediction). Humility and hard work have been the traits of Barca's season so far, and in the end, dignity will matter more than titles and trophies at a club that is “more than a club.” And that exactly is the hallmark of a great brand: “Keep yourself clean and bright. You are the windows through which you must view the world,” the ancient proverb goes.
(Credit:
Marty Sohl / Courtesy of Alonzo King's LINES Ballet of San Francisco)
The new issue of our design mind magazine is out. The theme is "Motion," and it features a great interview with famed ballet choreographer Alonzo King, who discusses the risks and rewards of collaboration with San Francisco Chronicle dance columnist Rachel Howard:
"Collaboration is always risky. You don't have total control. Also, with choreography you have such a short amount of time to do it. If you're writing a book you've got years; a film, you can shop it around; Broadway, take it out six weeks for previews. With most choreographers, you've got to create the thing now. So I like to pretend I have absolutely no deadline. So we can play [with] every possibility of stupid mistakes, which are fertile, before you close the box and say, 'This is how it has to be.' There has to be a floating balance. And that's the reality of life.
In design, you'll hear people say, 'Yes, I'm going to do a series of chairs and they're going to be Shaker-inspired.' You'll hear people talking about appearances. But Shaker came out of what? A belief system. When Shakers are talking about efficiency, they're talking about a lean life with no fat, you know? When they're talking about economy of craft, they're talking about humility. This is a belief system. And true stuff has to come from inside out. That's where real design comes from. It has to be based on truth. Has to have a sense of wonder. You must bring something to it that no one else has because of who you are. What's interesting about you is you. Now, do people get rewarded for being someone else? Yes. Do people pay for a good knockoff or copy? Yes. But each one of us is an enigma. And we've got to figure out that enigma of our own lives before we close our eyes to the world."
2009 will be a year of major uncertainty. The doom and gloom of the economic downturn, the deterioration of mass markets, the pervasiveness of the digital lifestyle, a host of explosive political conflicts, and the fragmentation of traditional societal institutions are causing anxiety and propel a new search for simplicity and non-economic value systems.
Consumption-driven wealth and status are being replaced by identity, belonging, and a strong desire to contribute and do something "meaningful" rather than just acquire things. Trust and reputation are no longer enablers for the exchange of goods, services, and information, they are replacing them. Values are the new value. Meaning is succeeding experience and customer satisfaction. "The job of leadership today is not just to make money. It's to make meaning," writes management consultant John Hagel. Out: Bottom-line-pragmatists and financial wizards. In: philosophers and ethicists.
This new cultural climate presents a historic opportunity for brands to transform themselves into arbiters of meaning. Becoming Chief Meaning Officers, business leaders must move beyond simply connecting products and customers with the goal to facilitate transactions - they must now create "meaning" through actions and interactions. When your brand is a vector, your base becomes a movement - that's what we learned from Barack Obama's campaign.
In 2009, we will see more examples of "meaningful marketing" and businesses generating value that goes beyond just meeting consumers' needs. This will imply several profound paradigm shifts: essence instead of luxury, free sharing instead of monetized scarcity, radical transparency instead of brand control, authenticity instead of image, empathy instead of focus groups, conversations instead of messaging, collaboration instead of dissemination. A "meaning surplus" will become imperative: Only brands that give more than they take will be able to create sustained brand loyalty.
(Credit:
Wldcup.com)
If you're a frequent reader of this blog, you might have noticed that I'm an avid soccer fan who doesn't let an opportunity pass to draw analogies between the "beautiful game" and the other big game: business. As such I was riveted by Clive Thompson's "Goalkeeper Science" piece in last week's New York Times Magazine's "Year in Ideas" issue. Based on research examining the behavior of soccer goalkeepers facing penalty kicks, Thompson concludes that "inaction may be the biggest form of action" (Jerry Brown).
The study, published by a team of Israeli scientists in the Journal of Economic Psychology earlier this year, analyzed 286 penalty kicks and found that 94 percent of the time the goalies dived to the right or the left, even though the chances of stopping the ball were highest when the goalie stayed in the center. "If that's true, why do goalies almost always dive off to one side?," Thompson wonders and provides the answer himself: "Because () the goalies are afraid of looking as if they're doing nothing and then missing the ball. Diving to one side, even if it decreases the chance of them catching the ball, makes them appear decisive."
At first sight, this finding seems to present an interesting lesson for business leaders who are confronted with the urge to make decisions amidst ambiguity and an overwhelming amount of (often contradictory) information. "Not moving" or sticking to the principles and the plan in place may be interpreted as indecision and thus drive them into an "action bias" that causes more harm than good. Thompson: "The same goes, of course, for presidents and politicians, who face enormous pressure to 'fix' the economy even if they haven't got a clue what to do. Perhaps our current economic crisis has been driven by precisely this dynamic: a global financial system that jumped the wrong way for the ball."
So far, so convincing. But then I read Brian Phillips' rebuttal in which he cites numerous methodological shortcomings to back his claim that the economists' theory may be "more Malcolm Gladwell-ish than originally thought." And that, just to be clear, is not meant as a compliment. Aside from the valid doubt over anything economists, of all people, assert these days (after being so dreadfully wrong on, well, the economy), Malcom Gladwell, the author of the bestselling Tipping Point, Blink, and most recently Outliers, is a delightful master of over-simplification, a populist who masters the art of translating science into a reader's digest franchise of easy "how to's" for business class readers. Not that that is despicable by any means, it may just be wrong. I saw Gladwell present the main thesis of his new book at this year's Pop!Tech conference. I left with the dizzying feeling of a lot of hot air in my stomach and the thought that explaining science via pop may be as dissatisfying as explaining pop via science.
In the case of the goalkeeping study, Phillips contends that "there's some basis for hypothesizing that the aim here is to concoct a metaphor that can be franchised out across a variety of media topics rather than to advance our understanding of soccer or the human mind. Maybe that's too cynical, but that's such a common move in the sciences these days that I thought I'd jump at it, even if I'd be better off staying still." Kudos to Phillips. Action - and no goal!
The conference wants to attract academics and professionals interested in learning and discussing ways in which user-centric and affordable technology can improve the world around us. It will bring together such far-ranging fields as social entrepreneurship, engineering, design, economics, development, and environmental studies in search of new opportunities for the private and voluntary sectors.
The organizers expect 300 attendees. Confirmed speakers include Bernard Amadei (Engineers Without Borders), Ken Banks (Kiwanja), Cameron Sinclair (Architecture for Humanity and Open Architecture Network), Denise DeLuca (Biomimicry Institute), Steve Glenn (LivingHomes), Erik Hersman (Afrigadget, White African, and Ushahidi), Paul Polak (International Development Enterprises and D-Rev), and others.
(Credit:
Wilmanet)
It's been a lackluster soccer season so far, especially in my favorite league, the Spanish Primera Division. The performances of the two top teams, Real Madrid and FC Barcelona (Barca), have been inconsistent, and while both have displayed some exceptional skills in their best matches, the passion, the surprise, and the big drama, all of which crucial elements of soccer's unique appeal, have been largely missing.
There is hope that this will change on Sunday when the two archrivals battle each other for the first time this season, in the derby of derbies, "El Clįsico," which is historically loaded with enourmous psychological, cultural, and political significance. This edition is a special of specials: Madrid is leading the table with four points ahead of second-placed Barca, and the upcoming clash, the last game of the first half of the season, can potentially give Real a comfortable seven point cushion over Barca during the winter break.
Innovation is rare
Looking back to the past Clįsicos and looking forward to the encounter on Sunday, I have been wondering what can make the difference when two equally star-studded teams compete. I think I have found the answer: innovation. The more innovative team won the past games, and the more innovative team will win this time. This hypothesis is as simple as it is challenging. Soccer is often used as a metaphor to describe innovation in a business context ("meaningful innovation is like scoring a goal in soccer -- it doesn't happen often, but is always a hallmark that differentiates the winning team"). But what does innovation actually mean in soccer?
First of all, if you examine the history of soccer for groundbreaking, "game-changing" innovations, you realize they have been scarce; by and large the game hasn't changed much. Some innovations resulted from a changing of the rules (on the macro-innovation level, if you will). Most of them, however, were truly driven by either organizational or individual excellence: for example, the position of the "Libero," the "sweeper" before the goal-keeper, who, freed from marking a direct opponent, was mandated with opening a team's game from deep in its own territory (German legend Franz Beckenbauer perfected this role in the 70s); the allure of the "playmaker" (personified by the French Michel Platini in the 80s); the introduction of a three-man defense row in the 90s; the "Sweeper-Keeper" performing the defensive actions of a libero; the increased importance of the "6," the central defensive midfielder; and the Dutch "Total Football" concept with its fluid, attacking 4-5-1 and 3-2-5 formations.
Total Football
As in business and academia, innovation takes place in soccer on both the collective and individual levels. And it is deeply rooted in culture. Starting in their youth education, great teams establish a distinct style which sets them apart from mediocre ones. Almost always, these styles have been shaped by a city's, a region's, or a nation's history. Ajax Amsterdam and the Dutch school of "Total Football," considered by many to be the most sophisticated and most influential soccer philosophy in recent times, can be traced back to historical, geographical, and socio-cultural factors, as can the Dutch refusal to win the "big one" (the Netherlands' national team never won a final at any of the international championships). Total Football was the first multi-disciplinary approach to playing soccer and implied that all players can play in all positions and have comparable levels of fitness, technical ability, and awareness. It is focused on the creation of space on offense and the destruction of space on defense. The result is maximum flexibility, a strong element of surprise, and the ability to exert pressure on any of the opponent's moves, at any time during the game. Besides Ajax, a number of British clubs including Arsenal London and Manchester United have embraced and refined Total Football, and so has FC Barcelona, with its strong tradition of Dutch coaches and players.
In stark contrast, the so-called "catenaccio" (literally translated, "door-bolt"), a rather static, defensive-minded tactic, is the hallmark of most Italian clubs. Some contend this goes all the way back to the Roman Empire and its poise to defend its borders, but I'm not sure if I buy into this explanation: even the Roman Empire, in order to become an empire, had to conquer territory first, no? In any case, the point is that soccer tactics and styles, and herein lies one parallel to business innovation, are inexorably linked to culture (to learn more about the cultural -- and religious -- underpinnings of soccer, read "How Soccer Explains the World" by Franklin Foer).
Wanted: Entrepreneurs
And yet, only a few soccer pundits would dispute that the most critical innovation in soccer occurs on the individual level. While some herald the "star is the team" philosophy and praise the power of the collective, it is more plausible to uphold the "whole is more than the sum of its parts" argument precisely because some of the parts, that is, certain individuals, are better than others. Although there are attempts underway to "crowd-source" soccer, the difference between win and loss is still marked by the quality of individuals -- players, coaches, and, not to forget, referees.
Players and coaches are chased with tons of cash not merely because they are stars who are able to turn the game into a spectacle and thus add invaluable charisma and entertainment to a club's brand, but also because their individual decisions, be they strategic (coach) or opportunistic (player), decide over fortune and misfortune. Both coach and player are risk-taking entrepreneurs, and the more creativity they exhibit, the more freedom they're typically given. Ironically, buying risk-takers is a measure for clubs to minimize risk and manage the inherent volatility of their success. The impact of coach and player is significant but their tools of influence are somewhat different. In the long-term, the coach can create a competitive culture that propels creativity and innovation, build confidence and team spirit; on the immediate match level, he can alter the formation and line-up, and make adjustments and substitutions during the game. But can his genius or lucky hand re-invent a team or truly innovate the game?
Ultimately, the most visible and arguably most impactful innovation lies in the feet of the players. Notwithstanding the team's culture, strategic formation, and tactical fitness, innovation on a micro-level is still the biggest competitive advantage, and it is engrained in soccer's DNA: Paul B. Paulus and Bernard Arjan Nijstad argue in their book "Group Creativity: Innovation Through Collaboration" that soccer offers more opportunities for creativity and innovation than baseball and other U.S. sports because the team's task is more "hierarchical, less sequential, and less cyclical." Furthermore, soccer players can innovate their game in every game. Here's what Barcelona's Ronaldinho, FIFA World Player of the Year in 2004 and 2005 and the most marketable player in the world, generating $57.8m annually, says: "The important thing is to keep on innovating and finding a way to surprise. You always look to surprise, with dribbling, a new move, a new pass. (...) As long as I believe I have the creativity for that, that's what I'll try and do. I'm never going to lose my characteristics because that's what I know how to do. I want to mix everything that is innovative with the same things as always. Perhaps the fans expect me to do all the tricks, the opponents as well. If you don't innovate, they all take the ball away from you. I believe it's important to innovate in order to avoid repetition."
Playtime
When El Clįsico kicks off, keep all that in mind. Admire the poetic and sometimes melancholic Total Football of Barca, and respect the prosaic, rather efficient style of Real Madrid. And watch how a few players will decide the game. Soccer can be researched, carefully planned, and strategically devised -- however, the most beautiful thing about this "beautiful game" is the fact that there is no lag between idea and implementation. Creativity can be immediately applied and has to be found on the pitch again and again. Every match is a blank slate. There is no history, only anticipation. Nothing is ever the same. This is what business leaders can learn from soccer: Innovation is, literally, a "play," and the best players will win.
769 CEOs from 40 countries were asked to rate their greatest concerns from among 121 challenges. The polled CEOs selected "excellence of execution" as the top challenge and "keeping consistent execution of strategy by top management" as the third-greatest concern. Sustained and steady top-line growth, which led the list last year, now ranks second, with profit growth fourth and finding qualified managerial talent fifth.
The survey responses reveal some remarkable regional differences. CEOs from Europe expressed greater concern with getting new, more responsive ideas out sooner, which may be why execution--in terms of speed, flexibility and adaptability to change--is a more dominant theme in Europe (third place) than in Asia (tied for eighth) and in the United States (10th place).
