There are the invincible years zero to thirty, you bungy jump, you drink copious amounts, you party and decisions are controlled by southern parts of the anatomy. There are, the I need that second house and the BMW years thirty to fifty, where the focus changes and decisions are about surviving the crush and everyday distractions. Then there are years of reflection, retracing, consolidation, affirmation and figuring out you are wiser than you ever thought you would be as a pimply fifteen year old. I mention the above as an intro to tonight's graduating class of T.I.M.E., the travel industry mentoring program aiming to bring out the best in the future leaders in tourism. The people who signed up to the program are wise beyond their years, they have figured out my peers and I have something to offer as mentors in knowledge and skills that will aid and abet their careers. They have decided, they are adamant and they are uncompromising in knowing they need to start right now for a head start, for a head start that will see their colleagues wonder at their progress and success, for their future will be bright.
It's that knowing when to start, knowing its time to change and knowing you shouldn't wait another minute to become better, to start your evolution and transform tomorrow, that is the hard part. The hard part because there are always hurdles, always other distractions and consequences if decisions don't turn out the way you thought. Consequently the great majority take up space, fill up the trains and clock on at work, without ever making a difference. Reasons to change needn't be seismic, they can be the simplest admission change is required, for a better day at work, a better relationship with your clients or just to give yourself a chance to succeed. Nonetheless the hurdles, no matter how low, stop most and in the process they become public transport fodder.
A colleague, Terry Hawkins, doing well on the talk show circuit in the US, sums it up best when she says there are "two times in life, now and too late". So is today the day to stop waiting; until you finish school, until you lose five kilos, until you get a break, until you go back to school, until you leave your job, until you have kids, until your kids leave the house, until you retire, until the footy season is over, until you get married, until you get divorced, until Friday night, until Sunday morning, until you get a new car, until you get a new home, until you pay off the mortgage, until you've done the laundry, until you've cleaned the garage, until you find your soul mate, until spring, until summer, until your mother in-law likes you, until autumn, until winter, until you have a million dollars in the bank, until the first of the month, until the thirtieth of the month, until your favourite song comes on the radio, until the sun comes up, until you've had a drink, until you've sobered up, until you die, until you are reincarnated?
The T.I.M.E. graduating class have already figured out the above and they've started. What time is it?
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
You're a good man Charlie Brown.
The email storm that is my work and private inboxes is littered with the philosophical diatribe of chain letters, updated fables, cats doing unspeakable things and happy Monday slogans, entreating me to pass on oft overused quotations to bring me luck. On rare occasions a message will strike a chord and get me thinking on a personal and business context about the content and its worth. One such philosophical enlightenment came my way via the pen of noted cartoon colossus Charles Schultz, enquiring about my memory of high achievers in sport, entertainment, business and other endeavours and why I don't remember them.
He posed questions along the lines of "can you name five recent Oscar winners", as well as 5 Nobel or Pulitzer Prize winners, the 5 wealthiest people on the planet along with a raft of similar high achievers in fields that keep us interested in the front pages while keeping the Twitter universe entranced. I of course couldn't answer the questions, Meryl Streep kept leaping to mind and distracting my train of thought, surely she has won every Oscar. I did get closer with the wealthy people, Warren Buffett is never out of the news, dredging up fears I'm turning into a capitalistic plutocrat, intent on lining my own pockets. That feeling passed quickly with Mr Schultz' follow on questions which became the hook of his philosophical contemplation and gave me pause to deliberate, agree with his view and disperse any fears of becoming Daddy Warbucks.
His second series of questions, like "can you name some teachers who were important to your development", hinged on my memory of people who helped with knowledge, support, mentoring, business acumen, a foot up the ladder and who became my advocates. I of course could remember everyone who made such a difference, who helped in times of trouble and who worked in alignment with my own thinking. His second series of questions, pointed out how quickly the headliners disappear from our memories, for they have no more impact than yesterday's newspaper, no more impact than last year's election winners and no more impact than the acclaimed sports stars soon to fade from memory.
Schultz' philosophical view was all about focusing your attention on who is really important in life. Which isn't the high achievers in entertainment or sport, it isn't who did what the most or even who collected the most treasure. People who make the most difference in your life are not the most credentialed, not the ones with the highest profiles, not the ones with the most money and certainly not the ones with the most awards. As the cartoon philosopher was proud to point out, the lesson learnt is even the best in their fields find the applause dies, the awards tarnish and the accomplishments are forgotten, eventually to be buried with their owners.
The people who make the most difference in your life are the ones that care. You're a good man Charles Schultz.
He posed questions along the lines of "can you name five recent Oscar winners", as well as 5 Nobel or Pulitzer Prize winners, the 5 wealthiest people on the planet along with a raft of similar high achievers in fields that keep us interested in the front pages while keeping the Twitter universe entranced. I of course couldn't answer the questions, Meryl Streep kept leaping to mind and distracting my train of thought, surely she has won every Oscar. I did get closer with the wealthy people, Warren Buffett is never out of the news, dredging up fears I'm turning into a capitalistic plutocrat, intent on lining my own pockets. That feeling passed quickly with Mr Schultz' follow on questions which became the hook of his philosophical contemplation and gave me pause to deliberate, agree with his view and disperse any fears of becoming Daddy Warbucks.
His second series of questions, like "can you name some teachers who were important to your development", hinged on my memory of people who helped with knowledge, support, mentoring, business acumen, a foot up the ladder and who became my advocates. I of course could remember everyone who made such a difference, who helped in times of trouble and who worked in alignment with my own thinking. His second series of questions, pointed out how quickly the headliners disappear from our memories, for they have no more impact than yesterday's newspaper, no more impact than last year's election winners and no more impact than the acclaimed sports stars soon to fade from memory.
Schultz' philosophical view was all about focusing your attention on who is really important in life. Which isn't the high achievers in entertainment or sport, it isn't who did what the most or even who collected the most treasure. People who make the most difference in your life are not the most credentialed, not the ones with the highest profiles, not the ones with the most money and certainly not the ones with the most awards. As the cartoon philosopher was proud to point out, the lesson learnt is even the best in their fields find the applause dies, the awards tarnish and the accomplishments are forgotten, eventually to be buried with their owners.
The people who make the most difference in your life are the ones that care. You're a good man Charles Schultz.
Friday, November 23, 2012
Trust in technology.
How can you trust someone you have never met? Today that question is more important than ever before with relationships built over the net on social and business channels becoming the norm. In the Stone Age, BF before Facebook and BL before LinkedIn, the onus was on individuals to actually meet face to face, check each other out via conversation, friends, colleagues and the occasional police check. If you want to short cut that process today, there are no shortage of ways to find information on people and what they are involved in along with getting a felling of trust and realism.
So does the net make it easier to trust and what is it worth to have the right profile online for business and social standing? Social economists tell us the economy doesn't run on money, it runs on trust and where that used to take time to develop, it seems the next generation doesn't want to wait that long. So will the net become the new arbiter of trust for a new business landscape and will sites built on credibility become the haven for business deals to be done? These sites will need to create a climate of unreserved trust, for without it people are not motivated or willing to share or open up to relationships which will form the new economic models of the future.
Stefan Molyneux the host of Freedomain Radio produces philosophy podcasts with 4 million net views per year, he charges nothing and makes money. He makes money from the honour system, asking listeners to donate what they think the podcast is worth and has so far kept up the delicate balance of sustaining a high level of quality engendering trust in his listeners to come back every week. He proves where there is trust money will follow, “If I didn’t have trust there would be no downloads, no show, and no business". Molyneux has faith in his model based on trust both ways and it has kept everyone absorbed in his philosophical approach.
Japan, South Korea and the US were involved in a research study on supplier relationships and built empirical evidence of the economic value of trust when they found that transaction costs were five times higher for the least trusted suppliers versus the most trusted suppliers. Low trust resulted in the need to spend more time and resources on communication, procurement compliance and negotiation, while also shortening contract periods. High trust was all about sharing, sacrifice and working in alignment with partners. Trust in those relationships was equivalent to money earned and money saved.
The trend to do business and live on the net comes with caveats around acceptance, authenticity, doing the right thing, principled work ethics, all wrapped up in one word. Trust based businesses increase accountability and security, making processes and procedures easier to implement and manage. Technological innovation applied to Stone Age successful practices opens up a world of opportunity for business but you still need to prove yourself, otherwise I won't trust you.
So does the net make it easier to trust and what is it worth to have the right profile online for business and social standing? Social economists tell us the economy doesn't run on money, it runs on trust and where that used to take time to develop, it seems the next generation doesn't want to wait that long. So will the net become the new arbiter of trust for a new business landscape and will sites built on credibility become the haven for business deals to be done? These sites will need to create a climate of unreserved trust, for without it people are not motivated or willing to share or open up to relationships which will form the new economic models of the future.
Stefan Molyneux the host of Freedomain Radio produces philosophy podcasts with 4 million net views per year, he charges nothing and makes money. He makes money from the honour system, asking listeners to donate what they think the podcast is worth and has so far kept up the delicate balance of sustaining a high level of quality engendering trust in his listeners to come back every week. He proves where there is trust money will follow, “If I didn’t have trust there would be no downloads, no show, and no business". Molyneux has faith in his model based on trust both ways and it has kept everyone absorbed in his philosophical approach.
Japan, South Korea and the US were involved in a research study on supplier relationships and built empirical evidence of the economic value of trust when they found that transaction costs were five times higher for the least trusted suppliers versus the most trusted suppliers. Low trust resulted in the need to spend more time and resources on communication, procurement compliance and negotiation, while also shortening contract periods. High trust was all about sharing, sacrifice and working in alignment with partners. Trust in those relationships was equivalent to money earned and money saved.
The trend to do business and live on the net comes with caveats around acceptance, authenticity, doing the right thing, principled work ethics, all wrapped up in one word. Trust based businesses increase accountability and security, making processes and procedures easier to implement and manage. Technological innovation applied to Stone Age successful practices opens up a world of opportunity for business but you still need to prove yourself, otherwise I won't trust you.
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Thumbs Up.
Everyone likes to be liked and everyone tries hard to be liked, but do you really need to like everyone you meet? It takes a while to like people, after you get to know them, share some common interests, catch up over a pizza and maybe exchange a Birthday card or two. Today it's all about liking everyone all the time, albeit at a distance with your trusty thumbs up icon, dishing out likes at every opportunity. Facebook has a lot to answer for when they instigated the ubiquitous thumbs up icon as a way to "give positive feedback and connect with things people care about", be they status updates, comments, photos, links posted by friends, along with advertising. By clicking the "Like" button at the bottom of content, 1 billion people have the opportunity to opt out of a conversations, connect invisibly and as far as businesses go, try and collect customers.
Nowadays everyone is looking to be liked without putting any more effort into the relationship than opening a Facebook page or a twitter account. My greengrocer, my butcher, the fish monger and even the dry cleaner guy wants me to like him. They beseech me to like them every time I drop off a shirt or buy a zucchini, they clamour for my thumbs up after buying a steak and they crave for recognition online regardless of the purchase amount. I get the strategy, I get the the enthusiasm for the online market place but regardless of how many times my dry cleaner is liked on Facebook or tweeted about, no one is travelling an extra 10 kilometres to drop off their suit and no amounts of likes will put him on my Christmas card list.
The best way for local retailers to work on future customers is to create conversations around their products, strike up a relationship with their customers and build up recognition, so every time you walk into their store, you feel like you are meeting a friend. Is it to the stage where organisations, companies and the corner store resort to stalking to be successful? The same way parents eventually disregard the tug at the hem for attention, people will disregard the incessant plea for likes and recognition. That desperate cry for recognition by a child is not a good look for businesses to emulate by asking for attention at every opportunity, regardless
Today, old fashion face to face business relationships built on credibility and doing what you say you will do, along with recognition built on excellent service seem anachronistic compared to the wall of social technology so many think are a replacement for the above. Many wonder what the world was like before the net, how businesses and their clients connected and stayed connected? Well the "butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker" all recognised their customers because they served them every day, had conversations every day and their customers liked that a lot, and when they gave a thumbs up, they meant it.
Nowadays everyone is looking to be liked without putting any more effort into the relationship than opening a Facebook page or a twitter account. My greengrocer, my butcher, the fish monger and even the dry cleaner guy wants me to like him. They beseech me to like them every time I drop off a shirt or buy a zucchini, they clamour for my thumbs up after buying a steak and they crave for recognition online regardless of the purchase amount. I get the strategy, I get the the enthusiasm for the online market place but regardless of how many times my dry cleaner is liked on Facebook or tweeted about, no one is travelling an extra 10 kilometres to drop off their suit and no amounts of likes will put him on my Christmas card list.
The best way for local retailers to work on future customers is to create conversations around their products, strike up a relationship with their customers and build up recognition, so every time you walk into their store, you feel like you are meeting a friend. Is it to the stage where organisations, companies and the corner store resort to stalking to be successful? The same way parents eventually disregard the tug at the hem for attention, people will disregard the incessant plea for likes and recognition. That desperate cry for recognition by a child is not a good look for businesses to emulate by asking for attention at every opportunity, regardless
Today, old fashion face to face business relationships built on credibility and doing what you say you will do, along with recognition built on excellent service seem anachronistic compared to the wall of social technology so many think are a replacement for the above. Many wonder what the world was like before the net, how businesses and their clients connected and stayed connected? Well the "butcher, the baker and the candle stick maker" all recognised their customers because they served them every day, had conversations every day and their customers liked that a lot, and when they gave a thumbs up, they meant it.
Friday, November 16, 2012
Story Teller.
The return on investment of a good story surrounding brand, product and services, is hard to define and apportion a monetary value. Companies all agree, capturing the consumer's heart can lead to a lifetime of loyalty for their product but they are resistant to the persuasive power of a compelling story because its hard to evaluate the numbers, the dollars and the ROI of the time it takes to craft such a story . How do you show the value of a good brand story, a good experience story, CEOs agree image and brand have a clear business advantage but what do they show the board in return for putting the story teller front and centre? Putting a value on a beautiful sunrise is often quoted as being easier than getting companies to agree on the ROI of a good story.
The website significantobjects.com, put together a compelling case for the value of stories when they decided to evaluate the worth, bottom line, that can be directly attributed to a powerful story. An accumulation of items bought at thrift shops, garage sales and flea markets for no more than a few dollars each, was listed on eBay for significantly more than their original price. A hundred items listed and sold on eBay made an average increase in price of 2,700%, from a medium purchase price of $1.29 to a resale average price of $36.12. This was accomplished by surrounding the various pieces listed, with stories bathing the objects in history and heritage as only a good fictional writer could do. It was a micro example of objectifying the value of a good story with a measurable bottom line increase.
Direct Marketing News forecast 2012 to be the year of the story, while Fast Company, The New York York Times and global 500 companies have all given credence to the power of story tellers. Story telling as communication, has given companies, especially online giants Google and Amazon, a breadth of character not usually associated with bits and bytes, whereas companies like Nike and Apple have used stories for leadership and loyalty, leading to dominant market connections with their customers.
It's no longer a one way dialogue as customers engage with the stories, remember the stories, re tell the stories and most likely make a movie and put it on YouTube. Have a look at "the Lego Story" on YouTube, celebrating 80 years of innovation, family history, quality of design and you'll see the power of story telling giving the next generation of children a start on their own stories. From YouTube to Pinterest, through to Tumblr "Storyboards" and on to Canon's Imagin8ion using Ron Howard as a catalyst to tell stories through pictures, companies are seeing the worth of the story teller.
Yet with all the new technology available to story tellers, the verbal story, the narrative given by a charismatic leader remains one of the most powerful tools and companies recognise the influence and inspiration to be gained. The rarity of such leaders has led many a company to search outside their core competency to look for the more engaging, the more beguiling of individuals who are then brought up to speed on the company product. Where product and service can be taught, telling the story has become an art, hopefully not lost on the world of business.
The website significantobjects.com, put together a compelling case for the value of stories when they decided to evaluate the worth, bottom line, that can be directly attributed to a powerful story. An accumulation of items bought at thrift shops, garage sales and flea markets for no more than a few dollars each, was listed on eBay for significantly more than their original price. A hundred items listed and sold on eBay made an average increase in price of 2,700%, from a medium purchase price of $1.29 to a resale average price of $36.12. This was accomplished by surrounding the various pieces listed, with stories bathing the objects in history and heritage as only a good fictional writer could do. It was a micro example of objectifying the value of a good story with a measurable bottom line increase.
Direct Marketing News forecast 2012 to be the year of the story, while Fast Company, The New York York Times and global 500 companies have all given credence to the power of story tellers. Story telling as communication, has given companies, especially online giants Google and Amazon, a breadth of character not usually associated with bits and bytes, whereas companies like Nike and Apple have used stories for leadership and loyalty, leading to dominant market connections with their customers.
It's no longer a one way dialogue as customers engage with the stories, remember the stories, re tell the stories and most likely make a movie and put it on YouTube. Have a look at "the Lego Story" on YouTube, celebrating 80 years of innovation, family history, quality of design and you'll see the power of story telling giving the next generation of children a start on their own stories. From YouTube to Pinterest, through to Tumblr "Storyboards" and on to Canon's Imagin8ion using Ron Howard as a catalyst to tell stories through pictures, companies are seeing the worth of the story teller.
Yet with all the new technology available to story tellers, the verbal story, the narrative given by a charismatic leader remains one of the most powerful tools and companies recognise the influence and inspiration to be gained. The rarity of such leaders has led many a company to search outside their core competency to look for the more engaging, the more beguiling of individuals who are then brought up to speed on the company product. Where product and service can be taught, telling the story has become an art, hopefully not lost on the world of business.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
From little things ...
Big things grow according to Paul Kelly, and in the world of business that has never been more important when talking about big companies blamed for the evils of the world. Is every big company aberrant? Is every big company looking to take over the world? Is every big company to blame for the economy, the lack of good television and the Australian Rugby Union team? Seems today it's difficult to pick up a newspaper, read a blog or listen to economic pundits and not feel big business is to blame for everything wrong in society today. From banks making too much money, to mining companies turning the outback into a scene from Mad Max, it's hard to see past the facade, past the share price and notice every business, no matter how big is only made up of people.
Every company from Apple to Walmart started out as a small company. Every CEO from Steve Jobs to The Walton family started out with just a few trusted friends. Apple as the most valuable company in the world, along with Walmart, the world's biggest private employer and the world's largest retailer didn't just just appear over night. They started small, they started as an idea, they started not knowing if they were going to accomplish what they set out to do or even survive the first year. They all began looking to improve on something, they all started out thinking they had the better widget, the better service, that would put them on a path to success. Big steel, big oil, big retail and big technology didn't start out that way, they started small, with people who's motivational genes were ratcheted to the upper limits and who often started out in a garage or as the mail boy with bigger dreams than anyone around them.
No one, Rupert Murdoch excepted, started out with thoughts of world domination, instead they were all about making a difference via a product, service and their employees. They accomplished this with the help of people they trusted, people they hired and people who made a difference within the corporations. The media view that large corporations are giant entities with insatiable appetites for profit negates the power of the individuals that join the dots between the CEO and the consumer. Large companies are built on the extraordinary ability of people to manage their way through daily complexities, be amazing, go home, have dinner, go to sleep and do it all over again the next day.
It's often said to be more difficult to make a difference in a big company but if you can make a difference one person at a time, before you know it, culture, processes, business acumen and bottom line improvements are taken care of. It's easy to make a dollar, it's a lot harder to make a difference, has been the mantra for many of today's leaders looking to change, to disrupt and to innovate. If the people part is done well, some companies grow, to local, regional and global entities on the backs and shoulders of the most important part of any business.
Next time you rage against the machine, against the company, consider who is standing on the other side of the door. Could be someone you know.
Every company from Apple to Walmart started out as a small company. Every CEO from Steve Jobs to The Walton family started out with just a few trusted friends. Apple as the most valuable company in the world, along with Walmart, the world's biggest private employer and the world's largest retailer didn't just just appear over night. They started small, they started as an idea, they started not knowing if they were going to accomplish what they set out to do or even survive the first year. They all began looking to improve on something, they all started out thinking they had the better widget, the better service, that would put them on a path to success. Big steel, big oil, big retail and big technology didn't start out that way, they started small, with people who's motivational genes were ratcheted to the upper limits and who often started out in a garage or as the mail boy with bigger dreams than anyone around them.
No one, Rupert Murdoch excepted, started out with thoughts of world domination, instead they were all about making a difference via a product, service and their employees. They accomplished this with the help of people they trusted, people they hired and people who made a difference within the corporations. The media view that large corporations are giant entities with insatiable appetites for profit negates the power of the individuals that join the dots between the CEO and the consumer. Large companies are built on the extraordinary ability of people to manage their way through daily complexities, be amazing, go home, have dinner, go to sleep and do it all over again the next day.
It's often said to be more difficult to make a difference in a big company but if you can make a difference one person at a time, before you know it, culture, processes, business acumen and bottom line improvements are taken care of. It's easy to make a dollar, it's a lot harder to make a difference, has been the mantra for many of today's leaders looking to change, to disrupt and to innovate. If the people part is done well, some companies grow, to local, regional and global entities on the backs and shoulders of the most important part of any business.
Next time you rage against the machine, against the company, consider who is standing on the other side of the door. Could be someone you know.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Having a go.
I'm sitting on the sidelines waiting to play our next game of basketball at the Pan Pacific Games, watching a couple of teams go through their paces when I notice a debate occurring on the losing side's bench. Seems not everyone is happy with the outcome that's about to happen, i.e. a loss, and it's vexing some on the team, while others agree with the coach who is satisfied everyone is "having a go". The great Aussie idiom of doing one's best under trying circumstances, aspiring while looking failure in the eyes, a determined effort to be proud of, so others admire your conviction and courage. This has been the backbone of a nation for so long that many have forgotten, forgotten about, have a crack, have a shot, have a stab, speculate, strive and challenge for the golden ring.
Forgotten not just on the sporting field but also in business, where admiration for effort has been lost, replaced by a win at all costs atmosphere creating a fear of failure mentality that stifles innovation, creativity and "having a go". For many in business, to fail is to be inadequate and deficient. For many in business failure is not an option, curtailing their ability to learn anything new for they are likely too cautious to ever achieve even the smallest of accomplishments. No matter how impossible it might be to go through life without failure, many businesses still subscribe to the don't fail or else mantra, giving their employees no wiggle room to be successful and to drive the company forward.
The list of corporate failures, Steve Jobs fired from Apple, Richard Branson, high school drop out, along with sporting failures, Michael Jordan cut from his high school basketball team, are at the top of a long list of people not giving up, "having a go" and eventually succeeding. Failure to the successful is just a matter of perspective, a matter of experience from which to learn, they succeed by a different mantra of fail fast and fail often. The admiration and appreciation for the effort and commitment in business today, is too often waylaid by an emphasis on bottom line productivity, revoking any atmosphere developed around authenticity and innovation. It's the reason that legacy companies are challenged by the fecundity of online innovation, born of serial failure and eventual success.
No matter how many points that team eventually lost by, their CEO, the coach had the right idea, fostering an undertone of accomplishment and eventual success to come from the hard lessons of defeat. Lessons learnt "by having a go", not backing down and trusting in your team mates to back you up. It's the team companies that are the bench marks of success today, from Zappos, 37 signals, Pinterest to Fast Company, who have leaders pushing their staff beyond just everyday work, beyond just 9 to 5, into areas where failure is an option embraced for its a ability to teach.
The real test is the learn, are you willing to learn by failing, is your company willing to fail and learn from that failure? Is your company creating the right atmosphere of safety, allowing failure to be part of a winning culture? If not, then consider joining the above basketball team for their eventual win will be the sweetest thing.
Forgotten not just on the sporting field but also in business, where admiration for effort has been lost, replaced by a win at all costs atmosphere creating a fear of failure mentality that stifles innovation, creativity and "having a go". For many in business, to fail is to be inadequate and deficient. For many in business failure is not an option, curtailing their ability to learn anything new for they are likely too cautious to ever achieve even the smallest of accomplishments. No matter how impossible it might be to go through life without failure, many businesses still subscribe to the don't fail or else mantra, giving their employees no wiggle room to be successful and to drive the company forward.
The list of corporate failures, Steve Jobs fired from Apple, Richard Branson, high school drop out, along with sporting failures, Michael Jordan cut from his high school basketball team, are at the top of a long list of people not giving up, "having a go" and eventually succeeding. Failure to the successful is just a matter of perspective, a matter of experience from which to learn, they succeed by a different mantra of fail fast and fail often. The admiration and appreciation for the effort and commitment in business today, is too often waylaid by an emphasis on bottom line productivity, revoking any atmosphere developed around authenticity and innovation. It's the reason that legacy companies are challenged by the fecundity of online innovation, born of serial failure and eventual success.
No matter how many points that team eventually lost by, their CEO, the coach had the right idea, fostering an undertone of accomplishment and eventual success to come from the hard lessons of defeat. Lessons learnt "by having a go", not backing down and trusting in your team mates to back you up. It's the team companies that are the bench marks of success today, from Zappos, 37 signals, Pinterest to Fast Company, who have leaders pushing their staff beyond just everyday work, beyond just 9 to 5, into areas where failure is an option embraced for its a ability to teach.
The real test is the learn, are you willing to learn by failing, is your company willing to fail and learn from that failure? Is your company creating the right atmosphere of safety, allowing failure to be part of a winning culture? If not, then consider joining the above basketball team for their eventual win will be the sweetest thing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
