I can sell the problem and the worthiness of the problem.
The opportunity we're going after,
and the fact that it has a chance,
is constructed in a way in which it can survive with integrity… instead of just being crap.
I'll pour my heart and soul into my work as much as anybody you've ever met if you show me a problem that's worth solving.
And if it matters to people, I will lean into it.
If you're leaning into it in a way where we can be can be successful, you will see me not manage the contract dollars. You will see me manage the outcomes regardless of where the dollars fall.
But you better prove to me that this is something I can go home and when I stand in front of my family, my kids, my parents- I can say, I don't know if we're going to crack this one. But this is what we're working to solve for. And this is how we think it would matter.
How does this materialize into a narrative and dialogue that we can engage locally and globally. Essentially, the launch of our brand and thought leadership.
Some of this stuff is going to have to start to materialize in articles, journals, podcasts, talks, …all those kinds of things.
The business community, in pursuit of efficiency, just resorts to copying.
The whole notion of of intellectual property was intended to give things time to survive so that people could make money, but it's become a protectionist strategy.
It's actually now for something that's contradictory to what it was created for.
I find that really frustrating.
The most brilliant people of every era stand on the shoulders of the giants before them. They don't directly copy the people before them. They, might mimic it for a while, to find that channel or group, but then they all end up finding their own thing.
In school copying things is called cheating. In business, it's a race. It's a business strategy. It's common for one to say, “How do we do that fast?”
What I realized is cheating, or more poignantly, copying becomes a habit.
Sometime in the 90s marketing largely became the business of convincing people to buy the shit that we already make.
I firmly believe that what we talk about as design today is what marketing was intended to be.
Who is it for?
How do we make it to satisfy their criteria?
And how do we collaborate in an engagement where ideas are materialized, and then tested with them?
For whichever version of the solution solves the problem we've defined, or the opportunity we've defined in their world, now you've got a collaborative landscape.
But the notion of what companies say when they say collaborative- the construct is cooperative, let there be no mistake about it.
A collaborative process means that we actually make things and test it with the people it's intended for, instead of all the intermediaries who are trying to bring it to life.
If we report to each other than it's just cooperative, we're just cooperating for each other.
It's a cooperative process, even though they call it a collaborative process.
Now that everybody's looking at it, let's get everybody involved.
And that's when that's when it slows down.
That's when it becomes about pleasing people inside the company instead of people in the marketplace.
That whole process undermines everyone's intent.
How do you actually see things through and get enough people rallied around it? As soon as something starts to make sense to an organization, like building a future… what they do is they staff a whole bunch of people on it from different departments part time.
A critical role that we play is me saying,
Hey, I'll stand up and say that.
I'll take it on the chin.