They say they want different, but do they really?

The following is the original and the rewrite can be found by clicking here.

I heard someone say this other day, "People say they want a different way of thinking and operating at work; when it is offered up, it turns out they really don't". I have also experienced this first hand and want to ponder it for a while - At face value this simply doesn't make much sense... but then again, maybe it does. 

Humans have been very successful and are at the top of the food chain mostly because we have been able to control our environment - Be it keeping the rain off our heads, the wild animals at bay, or building a state-of-the-art process to manage customer orders and ship within 12 hours (guaranteed). We control and bring predictability to things. We are successful for it, and this "request for different" simply seems to flies in the face of it. So begins the "rub"*. 

This "perceived contradiction" is created as we work hard to bring control and predictability to what we do, and then want to work outside of what we have created to bring improvement and growth; all the while putting up roadblocks to prevent it from happening. Examples abound of "the wild project" that could not get support, but with some inventive "skunk works activity"** becomes a big hit that everyone rallies behind. The fact that no one originally wanted it, is forgotten.  

I call this a "perceived contradiction", as this dynamic may seem as much, but will argue it is more of a check and balance to manage success and sustainable growth - Successful and viable businesses need to have systems, processes, operating mechanisms, business rhythms and measures that are all in control or they simply will not be sustainable. The coveted new idea or different way of thinking can, and will play havoc on the way a business is run if not kept in check. These roadblocks that arise and push back on a "different way of thinking" are to vet out what is viable and what is not. Simply put, the good will find their way, and the bad will "die on the vine". 

When you hear someone say, "They want a different way of thinking" or "They want to do things differently" take this into consideration:

• They truly mean it.
• Up front you should know that anything new, different, and "outside the box" will be challenged, dismissed, and you will hear various versions of the word "no".
• The burden is on the person with something different to "sell it", not for others to "buy it". 
• Without breaking the law or the guiding principles of the company it is "on you" to make it work... this is where that expression "Good People Find a Way" probably came from.

So how do you work through this "perceived contradiction" to make different a reality? Success stories abound, so know that it is done all the time and these are a few things that come to mind: - 

• Be persistent. If you are not willing to be the champion and a loud advocate, it simply was a "passing idea"
• Not everyone will say "no", search them out and leverage their voice, skills and funding (if they have it) and build momentum.
• Just make it happen and prove its success. You know that old adage "It's better to beg for forgiveness, than ask for permission". ***

So good luck with your different ideas and remember - The company is truly a a safe place to vet everything out, as when you get into the open market, it is a ruthless, hostile and unforgiving place.

gpe

* An idiom derived from how irritating it is for the animal when you rub it's fur the wrong way, 

** A skunk works is a group of people that, in order to achieve unusual results, work on a project in a way that is outside the usual rules.

*** There is no doubt that there is "risk" that comes with this, but anything worth doing, always comes with risk.

A growing awareness of being an entrepreneur...

I will say up front, that I struggle with the word entrepreneur for a number of reasons, one of which, I constantly spell it wrong. With this said, I find myself "playing on the entrepreneurial side of the business fence"; I am building a business to support small and medium sized business leaders with their "commercial problems". I thought I would start with this particular idea, as I can leverage my experience; as they say, "go with your strength". You could say the plan is to become an entrepreneur to support entrepreneurs.

One of the biggest struggles I am having with the word entrepreneur is the definition. Is it a person, a state of mind, or representative of the life stage in a business? 

• Is an entrepreneur a person who is interested in making money, but simply has the inability to work for someone other than themselves?
• Is it simply the state of mind of wanting to creatively build something from an idea or concept, opposed to administrating a business process or business function?
• Is being an entrepreneur an aspect of the size of the business? When it is tiny you are an entrepreneur, as it gets bigger you manage to an entrepreneurial spirit, and finally when it is large you are "corporate".

As with all things, it's probably a combination of the above and a few other things that haven't come to mind. There is definitely one thing that has become apparent... the word "entrepreneur" is a badge of honor for those building a business from an idea or passion. There is also no doubt, no mater how you define an entrepreneur, they by necessity are salesmen. Being an entrepreneur is a sales activity, as you are selling your idea to anyone who will listen; building awareness, looking for support (either in money or in time), and building a viable revenue stream. 

As I continue to wade into this pool we call entrepreneurship, a number of business fundamentals have come to the forefront... some of which if I am honest with myself, took for granted when I was surround by a corporate structure - 

• You have to build your business infrastructure yourself, and the expertise to get it done may not be close at hand. The trap I have already seen is that "having a brilliant idea" and "being able to build a business" are two independent skill sets; having one does not mean you have the other. More often then not skills to build a business will probably have to be brought in and those early decisions will reverberate for years. The people who you want to partner with initially, are crucial.
• For those organizations that are five, ten or more years in business, (with a proven model and customer base), a "forecastable" revenue stream comes across as "straight foreword". When you are much earlier in the business developing process though, the cold reality is that revenue is hard to realize. There is a large amount of work between that first product idea and having someone ultimately pay you money for it.
• The timeframe between your idea and "exiting" as a millionaire is counted in years, not months. Yes, there will always be exceptions, but it is better to settle in for the long haul. The big dream is very important, and will carry you far, but as they say, "Rome wasn't built in a day".
• Most likely you will have to involve investors or bankers so ensure you spend their money wisely - You will need to borrow more of it down the road. To this point, it is being said money is readily available; although this may be true, you will still have to sell your idea and it's value. An investor will always be looking for a return.
• I am learning quite a lot... with so much more to learn.

Can I call myself an entrepreneur at this point? Sure, why not. Can I call myself a proven, success entrepreneur? Nope... but give it time and I do have an idea after all. Wish me luck.

gpe

Change and Adaption*

The following is the original and the rewrite can be found by clicking here.

I thought I would start with this quote by Gaius Petronius Arbiter... he was a courtier in the court of the Roman Emperor Nero and died in 66 A.D. by his own hand. It turns out that there is no actual proof that he ever said or wrote this, but it is such a great quote we will just take the Internet at face value. It goes like this:

Petronius Arbiter - the man who may or may not have uttered the quote

"We trained hard, but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams, we would be reorganized. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing; and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress
while producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization."  

Anyone who has ever been on a team or in an organization will love this quote, no matter who said it. We all have been in this very situation where there is change going on for the sake of change, leaving us no further ahead (but exhausted). - That new leader who has come into an organization and has driven change to make his or her mark or that leader who cannot endure the pressure as they wait for a plan to get some traction - What Petronius says, does happen. But I do think we should also appreciate that the world, life and the universe is always changing and a vast majority of the so called "re-organizing" is the result of trying to adapt to that ongoing change, and not so much the result of a personal agenda.

Change for change's sake goes on, as well as the normal flow of change though the ongoing progress of things; be it technological change, cultural change, social change and the like - Then of course, there is dramatic change... you know, like an economic depression, a merger or an asteroid. No matter what the reason for any change, or whether you look at the word change as a noun or a verb, at the core it's all about making or becoming different. 

There is that word "different" again... and as you know, if you want to drive creative solutions you need to look at situations and problems differently. Change is at the heart of everything it seems, and anyone believing that there is a thing such as a permanent status quo is misaligned with the way our universe actually works. So back to Petronius, his fantastic quote is more a reflection of the ever constant of change and how it impacts us; as he says, it creates "confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization". There are a couple of truisms here that we have to accept...  there is will always be change and we dislike change with its unpredictability.

I'm going to loosely throw out the word "Adaption" as our method for adjusting and managing change and how we ultimately deal with some of the "confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization" that Petronius mentions. We all have different capacities and tolerances when it comes to Adaption to Change, and I wanted to draw on some of the characteristics of people who are very adept at it.

So what does strong Adaption to Change look like in a person?

1. An innate understanding that change is an ongoing event, offering growth and opportunity even if its through adversity - This may be as simple as being an optimist versus a pessimist.
2. They do not believe in the concept of perfection and understand that their way is not the only way. You know those people who just absolutely need to have it their way... they tend not to be so good with managing change. Control is an illusion.
3. Operates from core convictions, such as integrity and morality, that are well defined regarding what they will and will not do. This creates a compass as to how to move through change and reduces the chances of getting "lost" - And makes sleeping at night easier. 
4. A core belief that their skills will allow them to work through any situation - The simple belief in ones self.
5. Take personal ownership of the situation, without trying to assess blame or energy on the phantom that is to fault for the change - It is important to understand why the change and the situation occurred but not dwell on it.

I would never suggest that there isn't change that pushes us back, knocks us down or gives us a bloody lip, but as they say, "The sun comes up the next day"**, so one way or another you have to deal with it.

I still very much like the quote from Petronius.

gpe

* Adaption means the same as Adaptation but doesn't sound like I am discussing the Pepper Moth and how its unique adaptation was forced by the industrial revolution. The industrial soot from the factories darkened all the trees so the moth's wings changed from white to grey to maintain its camouflage advantage. (Sorry... it's the Biologist in me)

** If the sun doesn't come up we have a problem of cosmic proportion and this is all a moot point.