Tag: people

Derek Sivers:

…When we yell at a website or company, using our computer or phone appliance, we forget it’s not an appliance, but a person that’s affected. It’s dehumanizing to have thousands of people passing through our computer screens, so we do things we’d never do if they were sitting next to us.

I think it’s important that we actively work against this ever deepening trend that people think internet “anonymity” is a license to be a jerk. It’s not new, but I hope one day it’ll be old.

Seriously:

It didn’t take long for that plan to backfire. Apple fans reportedly have hijacked #holidaywindows and are writing tweets such as “Get a Mac” and “Windows is lame.” And they’re showing up in the Big Apple.

How dense do you need to be to realize that putting up a live Twitter feed in a very public space is rarely going to yield great results?

The case also highlights the distinction between understanding and listening to customers. “Adrià’s idea is that if you listen to customers, what they tell you they want will be based on something they already know,” Norton observes. “If I like a good steak, you can serve that to me, and I’ll enjoy it. But it will never be a once-in-a-lifetime experience. To create those experiences, you almost can’t listen to the customer.”

Don’t take this the wrong way — Adrià most certainly pays a lot of attention to his customers. It’s at the core of what he does. But what he doesn’t do is listen to their input, he instead works to understand their needs and desires, and creates his own experience to satiate them.

You can listen to customer feedback all you want, and it might give you an okay product. It’s when you understand your customers and forge your own pathway based on that understanding that can lead to something really special.

One of my favorite essays from Rands so far. He’s talking about people who not just don’t click with other personalities on the team, but in fact have very different goals and philosophies which make them the square peg in your organizational culture’s round hole.

We need these folks, but it can’t be at the cost of the existing culture. Yes, this toxic person might have a core cultural contradictory belief that is key to the future of the business, but assess the risk. What if the cost of integrating that idea is half the team quitting because they can’t work with the idea’s toxic architect? Is that a viable solution?

This is a really, really tough topic, and Michael’s nailed it here. Sometimes, an individual can be incredibly talented in various ways, but still be toxic to the rest of the team, which makes it even harder.

A great read by Michael in this week’s ALA:

In reality, most meetings aren’t high-pressure, survival-of-the-fittest lynchfests. Many meetings are well structured affairs with hardly a drop of blood spilled. But each time you speak in a meeting, you get a moment in the spotlight to demonstrate that yes, you understand what’s going on, you are clear about the rules of this particular game, and you’re in it to win.

Sage advice, and a great analogy.

The always-smart Seth Godin writes about the two ways to work with talent: giving the blank slate mission, where you have folks do their thing and hope for the best; or the well-baked and defined mission, which is more predictable in its output. On the results:

The strategic mission takes more preparation, more discipline and more difficult meetings internally. It involves thinking hard without knowing it when you see it.

The clean sheet of paper is amazing when it works, but involves so much waste, anxiety and pain that I have a hard time recommending it to most people. If you’re going to do this, you have an obligation to use what you get, because your choice was hiring this person, not in judging the work you got when you didn’t have the insight to give them clear direction in the first place.

Perfect. The client who wants the designer to just do their thing but doesn’t have time for frequent input is an impending disaster.