The best way to give your team permission to fail, is to fail in front of your team. Your vulnerability attracts theirs.
I have observed that some leaders display flaws, significant weaknesses, yet somehow develop healthy, thriving organizations. On the other hand I have observed that some leaders display an almost invincibility, serious capabilities, yet somehow foster a weak fractured organization. I think we directly equate talent with success. But this thinking oversimplifies the matter. It is possible to lead from weakness, rather than strength. It is difficult to convey how this is possible, but I suspect that every leader is replete with weaknesses. Some however are transparent. In the end; they endear such trust, that their core values are communicated in ways that impart life to an organization.
The hallmark of the rational agent is choice. How can reason be separate from choice? Even the acceptance of a proposition represents choice. We need to delve deeper into the nature of choice. Indeed for the rational agent, choosing is existing. The present-tense is a steady stream of choice.
When crafting theoretical statements, you need to know the difference between an elegant choice of words (that is something you select), and a properly accurate (and hopefully true) statement (that is something you discover). If you do not know the difference you will get caught in a semantic veil. The beauty of your words will obscure the accuracy of your claims. Honesty is beauty of a higher order.
As I seek to try and build a beautiful organization, I realize that structure is closely associated with one's concept of beauty. Structure is foundational to design. I find it difficult, however, to devise the ultimate structure for my multifarious operation.
Every form seems flawed. I've learned to survive with ambiguity, and the tradeoffs associated with business, but I suspect that there is a different kind of problem at work here. Overt structure can distract from seeing the natural structure associated with wholeness, health, and beauty. This requires one to think more of business as organism rather than organization.
If the human body were "organized", we would all be dysfunctional, if not dead.
The value proposition begins as an abstract concept, but the moment it is engaged by the prospect it enters the time-space continuum. It moves from "thing" to predicate. At this moment (pun intended), time becomes a key element. The value proposition's force is sustained by velocity. This principle can be understood with four simple observations:
1. At various points in the micro-yes series we may have difficulty adjusting the force of the value proposition so that the perceived value outweighs the perceived cost. This is because of business rules and/or various constraints.
2. The key is to build enough forward momentum from the previous series of micro yes(s) so that the prospect will "roll on" through these potential "chokepoints."
3. Now, if we aggregate too many of these chokepoints, or if we embed a chokepoint with too much constriction, purchase progress stops.
4. The momentum is initiated by the value proposition, but it is mitigated by the friction of the process.
At MECLABS, we have pioneered a fundamental understanding of the micro-yes/conversion sequence, but we need to account for the importance of velocity in the purchase process.
The leader is constantly faced with the inertia of reality. Every initiative drags. Every deadline is challenged. Every idea is undermined. Books on leadership do not go far enough. The leader must generate "inertia-overcoming" herculean energy matched with Wittgensteinian clarity.
Sometimes a leader must diminish himself. His goal is not to raise his visibility, and thus his capability in the perception of his team, but rather it is the inverse. As he diminishes himself, team members rise up. Sometimes the worst possible thing you can do is impress your team. The leader needs to know how to make himself small so he can make his team big.
The leader knows “where” before he knows “how,” but he knows “how” before he knows “when.” It is the “when” element which makes fools out of wise men. We often know what will happen, but we seldom know when (precisely when). If we are not careful, our careless assignment of timelines may undermine our team’s trust. The leader needs to separate the “what” from the “when”; else the latter will jeopardize the credibility of the former.
Messaging is intention actualized. One might argue that messaging may disguise a true intuition; however, the intention to disguise is a part of the message formation. The marketer needs to understand the essential nature of their work. We are doing more than toying with some product campaign; we are working near the very core of existence. Messaging is projection. It is a projection from the internal to the external. There is much in our work related to ontology, to metaphysics, to epistemology. It is important for marketers to realize the deeper implications of their discipline.