Too Busy To Innovate

The boss wants innovation. Big ideas. To make the agency famous.

 

The CMO wants thought leadership. To make clients and prospects feel we offer an advantage.

 

The CFO wants me to do my time sheets.

 

The client wants me to revise the PowerPoint and send it over by EOD.

 

The PM wants me to stay within budget do time sheets too.

 

The wife wants me home by 6 so we can make the dinner with friends.

 

The body wants a cup of coffee even though it knows caffeine and sleep don’t play well together.

 

It’s a never-ending, somewhat vicious cycle of want, expectations, and realities. Idealism vs. pragmatism. Reality.

 

Okay, I’m tired. My brain hurts. But I know, in the end, I’ll be measured by the difference between keeping up and staying ahead. The difference between meeting deadlines and providing thought leadership. I have to find a way…

 

I’m not alone.

 

These days, clients, and the business-at-large, want—even demand—that their agency (me) give them ideas that are newsworthy and ‘game changing’ while largely ignoring the realities of how agencies make money. Innovation is the expectation while the bottom line is the noose that most often chokes proactive thinking.

 

Trust me, I’d rather be making ideas than generating quotes and approving project plans but the latter takes up more of my time. I’m just too busy generating revenue to find the time to sit and think.

 

But no excuses…I am paid to make ideas that work, not documents that take work. I have to balance the two demands while finding more time to focus on the focus—ideas.

 

The good news is human nature drives me to do what makes me feel good so I do my busy work during the day and do what I love before and after—think, ideate, invent, explore, challenge, play, dream, envision… Luckily I have a passion to think different. Or just think. Innovative ideas don't happen 9-5 so if one hopes to do well in this business, accept the fact it's as much a calling as a job. More so. And I love it.

"You can manage passion but you can't create it" has always been my litmus test in hiring creatives. If passion isn't there the time sheets will get done but the ideas won't happen. So the answer to the problem is passion. Which leads to a drive that surpasses being too busy to innovate.

 

Now, gotta do those time sheets so I can get back to making ideas that work.

Posted via email from Stephen Speaks's posterous

The Anti-social socialites

The Antisocial Socialites.

 

Walk into any city coffee shop and you’ll see individuals planted in every nook and cranny, faces glued to their laptop, phone, iPad or other. If you walk by casually and steal a glance over shoulders you’ll find the majority are perusing their Facebook, IM’ing, texting, gaming, or checking email—socializing online. Then stop and listen…hardly a sound other than the background noise of barista's barking “Venti non-fat, no foam, no water 6 pump extra hot chai tea latte”.

 

It’s eerily quiet, otherwise, as folks are busy 'socializing' but not talking.

 

Now, go to a small town coffee shop and you’ll be struck by the distinct difference of people gathered in small groups around worn-out tables chatting away to the point it’s difficult to shout your order of “coffee, large.”

 

I’ve been struck by this noticeable difference since relocating to a smaller town but still doing most of my work in the major cities. It’s been enlightening to see the differences between the connected worlds of folks communicating across the world while others only talk across a table.

 

Which leads me to this observation: as society becomes more connected are we actually withdrawing into personal shells and in essence becoming more and more antisocial, while claiming to be more social?

 

It’s an interesting paradox. And somewhat comical when you think about it—the changing of social behavior to wanting to be connected to people but not necessarily be with people. The phenomenon of a greater rate of communication, virtually, while ignoring the age-old patterns of strangers gathering to discuss all things in common, based on local geography, is a defining societal shift. Great debates about politics, religion, social issues, and more have always found a stage in the local hangouts—the public square (bars, coffee shops, the donut shop...). It’s how things got done, how minds were changed, and how society progressed.

 

Now the debate is more polarized by the ability to post articles, place one-way opinions, and spout off with no real dialogue. It’s a lot easier to state an opinion when you can just post a link to an article vs. really understanding the subject and being able to discuss against varied perspectives.

 

Perhaps I digress.

 

I’m just finding it interesting to watch how so-called social spaces are really nothing more than tiny portholes of 30-some character blurts—a veneer of dialogue—a security fence from getting too deep into another’s mind and real personality let alone an informed opinion. Many are ‘socializing’ without ever actually speaking to one another and discussing anything.

 

Next time you’re at any coffee shop, try pulling a chair up next to a complete stranger and see what an actual conversation feels like. You might want to leave the device put away.

Posted via email from Stephen Speaks's posterous

All God's Creatures Have a Place in the Choir

I heard that in a lyric recently. It made me think. 

It made me think about the current state of politics in America--where people spend more time criticizing the views of others than espousing their own beliefs, in the 'public square'. It appears that being a critic is more politically correct, and safer, than stating one's own beliefs. But I can see why--when one does state an opinion and the massese descend on it in critique...well it's a vicious cycle.

The current presidential race is proof of this phenomenon--there is rarely a point-blank listing of positions by a candidate. All of the air time is spent railing on the opponent and how bad they are, or how dangerous they will be if elected. Or in stretching the truth to put a negative spin of misinformation out there to cloud the details of their own record. It's a sad state--and sadder that the majority of voters rely on the media for deciding, for them, who to support.

I don't like it.

This world is an amazing collection of individuals with different experiences and perspectives. We do better when we all discuss the issues fully vs. fighting over them. Instead of fearing diversity we should embrace it and appreciate the exploration of various ideas. We need to discuss and discuss and discuss more--but avoid resorting to personal attacks on the voice, or the person using it. That just leads to states of dictatorship.

America was founded on the belief that every voice had the right to be heard, Sure, it also guaranteed the right of others to voice disagreement--but not to disparage the person as inferior if the perspectives conflicted with there own.

Feel fre to disagree with me, even argue with me...but don't attack my person. 

Posted via email from Stephen Speaks's posterous