Notes written from inside a box of tissues.

*sniffs*
*clears throat*
Well, I FEEL okay on this sunny Monday in Austin, but the head cold I’ve been fighting through the weekend seems determined to prevent me from thinking any Deep Thoughts today.* Therefore, we’re going to go even more tapas-style than usual with some one-bite tidbits.
~ ~ ~
Writing about how people use Twitter, my colleague Russ Somers hits the Qwitter nail on the head with this post:
Baby Won’t You Unfollow Me Down
. . . I’ve never seen a Qwitter attributed to politeness or pragmatism. Instead, it’s personal. ‘@personx can’t handle my politics/religion/sense of humor.’ Anything can be twisted to fit this.
He’s nice enough to cite my own earlier post on this subject, which boils down to my saying “but correlation does not imply causation — much less animosity” over and over.
Bigger point to ponder: feedback data can be explicit (”You’ve tested positive for Hepatitis C”) or directional (”I seem to lose Twitter followers whenever I start ranting about politics”)
How often do we misunderstand one for the other?
And how many of our tools (like Qwitter) encourage that misunderstanding?
~ ~ ~
A quote worth pondering — maybe more than ever, given the current confusion in many parts of the commercial world:
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work. You have to start over, beginning with a working simple system.
–John Gall
Does this apply to your own work?
~ ~ ~
This post by Seth Godin . . .
. . . If you take a job, you’ve bought into what the company does. You’re responsible.
. . . got me thinking about on observation from Geoff Colvin’s book Talent is Overrated, which I read over the weekend and which I’ll review here when my brain is working better. Here’s Colvin, with my emphasis added:
Average performers believe their errors were caused by factors outside their control: My opponent got lucky; the task was too hard; I just don’t have any natural ability for this. Top performers, by contrast, believe they are responsible for their errors. Note that this is not just a difference of personality or attitude. Recall that the best performers have set highly specific, technique-based goals and strategies for themselves; they have thought through exactly how they intend to achieve what they want. So when something doesn’t work, they can relate the failure to specific elements of their performance that may have misfired.
Just so.
~ ~ ~
Stay tuned — more notes from inside the tissue box to come.
~
* How often I manage Deep Thoughts under normal circumstances — or indeed whether I ever do — is left as an exercise for the reader.
~
Photo by nishidaryuichi.
Category: Social media, The working lifeIf you liked this post, please consider subscribing to the RSS feed so you can receive future articles delivered to your feed reader.
2 Comments so far
Leave A Comment

Tim,
since we are pondering deep thoughts (I’m suffering from that head cold as well), I wanted to share one of my favorite quotes from Gary Hamel. It seems very relevant in today’s business climate.
“Strategic resilience is not about responding to a onetime crisis…it’s about continuously anticipating and adjusting to deep, secular trends that can permanently impair the earning power of a core business. It’s about having the capacity to change before the case for change becomes desperately obvious.”
I’m a big proponent of not retrenching in today’s climate. Now is the time to be investing in core infrastructure and refining processes to provide the agility and flexibility that companies will need when the economy turns around. Other companies, who are retrenching, will still be trying to work themselves out, while the ones who aren’t retrenching will be leaps and bounds ahead of their competition.
Hope you feel better.
Michael — I agree with what you say about retrenching, and indeed I think it’s crucial that companies not make the mistake of thinking that prudence is the same thing as retrenchment. It’s always (? – I’m pretty sure) to lock yourself down in terms of how you relate to your market; Hamel is right to stress constant adjustment.
At the moment, it makes sense to play one’s cards conservatively *enough* that you don’t break the bank. But that doesn’t mean avoiding all risk — which is a fantasy, anyway.