Can Getting Healthy be Fun?

Talking about losing weight is easy, but as the obesity rates in the U.S. attest, living up to that talk is something else entirely. Most people try, fail, and try again, stumbling each time back to old habits. It’s surprising, and depressing, how hard simple things like eating less and exercise more can be. But perhaps the solution is more than just willpower, or eliminating temptations. There might be a need for a new kind of tool that approaches the challenge from a smarter perspective.

One on the horizon is healthmonth.com, and it takes a tech-savy, yet easy and fun, approach that might make all the difference. As the name suggests, it’s modeled on the calendar. You sign up for free, set up a few basic behaviors you’d like to change, and track your results. This sounds simple, and it is. But the the big difference is unlike other tools, that use the metaphor of a to-do list, Healthmonth frames your health as a kind of interactive game. An interactive game you play with yourself, or your friends. It provides rules, based on theories of human behavior and science, that you can customize to your own particular goals.

According to the site’s creator Buster Benson (who I’ve written about before),  there are four key ingredients needed to make change happen, and rarely do we get them all at the same time. They include:

  1. Good information
  2. Ability to make better choices
  3. Motivation
  4. Fun and sustainable triggers

Most of us can summon one or two, but few have reliable sources for all four. His goal in designing the website was to build one tool that helped with all of them. By using simple user interfaces to create and follow rules, and integrating social media features so you can share your activity with friends, he may have created something very clever and surprisingly powerful.

One mistake I’ve made in the past is trying to improve too many things at the same time . But with Healthmonth, as you create rules you get feedback on just how realistic or not what you’re doing is going to be. As you pick individual rules, such as eating more vegetables, or going to the gym 3 times a week, depending on how hard the rule is to achieve, you get a certain number of points. Like a video game, your total score for all of your self created rules determines how well you are doing, and how much healthier you are getting. Friends can form teams to watch each others scores, engage in friendly competition or even share rules.

If this sounds interesting, now is the time to give it a try.

Healthmonth.com is currently in a free beta release, and there are a few days left before the next game begins on November 1st. You can do it solo or find friends to form a team and help each other along. The first few rules are free, but if you want more you pay a few dollars to get more. Seems worth a try: I’ll let you know how it goes at the end of the month.

Help Wanted: Designer for my next book

(This post has been entirely revised and updated – you should go here)

I’m looking to hire someone to play a unique role in my next book: The Designer.

The plan is to self-publish a collection of my best writings to date, from essays, to blog posts, to magazine articles. But the goal is to avoid the traps of most “blog posts in a bundle” books – which usually stink. They have a reputation for not being well designed, edited, or curated, to work as a book. We intend to blow those perception to smithereens.

I’ve hired an awesome editor as the first key member of the team. Now it’s time for the next key member: the designer.

The role: A book is a kind of user experience, starting with the cover, but extending to every font, every layout, every chunk of whitespace. Typically designers come in late, are forced to work quickly and without much input – it’s no wonder most books are so ugly, so sad, so unloved. This role will different. You’ll be involved early. You’ll have power and influence over what’s in the book, not just how it looks. There will be no bureaucracy: it’s just me, you, Krista (editor) and a few other hand-picked people we choose.

Here are the responsibilities:

  • Drive the visual design and user experience of the book
  • Have primary authority over the cover design, typography, layout and interior choices
  • Manage the challenges of print and e-book (kindle/pdf) design
  • Contribute to the vision for the book itself
  • Suggest and provoke me to write new material
  • Collaborate with me, Krista and other team members
  • Use the readers of scottberkun.com to contribute ideas and feedback

Here are the rewards:

  • More influence over a book’s design than you will ever have
  • The potential to do great work with great people
  • Redefine the contribution of design to modern book publishing
  • If you’re a fan, you’ll get a unique opportunity to define one of my books
  • This is currently not a paid role. If this offends you, I understand – don’t apply. I am convinced the opportunities on this project outweigh what you’d expect to be paid for a similiar role on a lame project. (See On working for free for a longer explanation)
  • You will be paid a flat fee – it won’t be much but it will be something.
  • I’m considering a bonus structure for team members based on how well the book does (perhaps something when it breaks even, and something else if it makes a 10% or more profit). But I can’t promise anything at this point.

Requirements (read them all – it’s a test):

  • You are a visual design god/goddess (in the opinion of people other than your Mom and your cat)
  • You enjoy collaboration with smart, fun people – good feedback inspires you
  • You love books
  • You are really fucking smart
  • You are really fucking funny/sarcastic
  • You are not offended by the word fuck
  • You are organized, self-directed, and can lead a project with many parts
  • You’ve always wanted to contribute to a beautiful, well-crafted, book that defies convention in favor of smart, clever ideas for book design
  • You are psyched about this for reasons other than money
  • Bonus points for being a fan, or being familiar with my writings

FAQ

1. Why aren’t you (Scott) working with O’Reilly Media again?

The main reason is to do an experiment – what happens if I/we have control over the entire process? I’m sure I’ll learn things about writing books I couldn’t learn any other way. What would happen if I/we didn’t need anyone’s approval for anything? I want to find out.

2. How will you self-publish it?

There are great options these days that make self-publishing transparent to readers – fans can buy the book via amazon or kindle and never know. Details TBD by the editor/curator (Krista).

3. When does this start?

It’s already moving. Krista and I are working on outlines. The train is moving and picking up speed.

To Apply:

  1. Email me: info at scottberkun dot com
  2. With the subject: I kick ass at design
  3. Must include: a link to your design portfolio, your favorite cartoon character, and who in the world you’d most like to see naked
  4. Deadline Fri: November 5th

Update on my next book

A few months ago I put out a call for an editor to work with me on the next book. More than 30 people applied, which was amazing, and after a long and tough process (I chose three people as finalists and worked with each on a small project), I hired Krista Stevens for the job.

She has an amazing combo of experience, asks tough questions, and is fun to work with – I’m confident this project is going to turn out fantastically well (or if it doesn’t it will be my fault, not hers). Whatever happens I’m sure it will be interesting and we’re going to have fun doing it.

The project is rolling and we’re working on possible book outlines – I can’t say much other than one goal is intelligent provocation. People tell me they like the way I think about things, and one goal is to offer my best thinking on a wide array of topics and themes. We’ll be revising some of the best things I’ve written online, but will also be writing significant new material.

The plan does include involving you guys – to give feedback along the way – so stay tuned for that. More soon.

How to speak to a bored audience

In a series of posts, called ask berkun, I write on whatever topics people submit and vote for.

This week: How to speak to a bored audience

All audiences are bored. If not now, then soon. Listening is boring, and listening to boring people talk about boring work in boring ways is even more boring. As a speaker I go in thinking “these people are probably bored to death from the last speaker”, as I would be. Here’s a fun trick: next time you are in an audience at a lecture, look to your left and your right. You’ll notice how bored everyone is, even if the speaker is doing well.

The surprise is there’s a huge advantage if the audience is bored. Their expectations are low. If you do anything interesting at all, such as not suck, you will stand out. If you prepared correctly (meaning you practiced, have clear points, are enthusiastic about them, and understand why the audience showed up) you’ll seem interesting. All things equal I’d rather follow a very boring, pretentious speaker than a fantastic one.

Most speakers fail to give the audience what they came for, which is usually: practical answers to the questions they have on your topic, and it’s the hope of hearing these answers that  compelled them to the lecture in the first place . People perk up instantly when you start giving them what they came for. If you choose this as your opening comment, you’ll have them from the start (“There are 5 things I think you want to know about X and here they are. Number 1…”).

And when they hear you answers are good, practical, interesting, and useful you will have their full attention. It’s that simple. But few speakers have good material. Few speakers have good thinking on the right questions in their material. Pretense, fear and ego blind smart people into doing stupid things, in lectures and at large.

The other challenge is it’s hard to judge an audience while you are presenting. The vibe you feel on stage can be different from what the audience is feeling. All performers know this, and prepare themselves to go on with the show with enthusiasm even if they don’t get the energy from the room they hoped for. If you go to Japan or Scandinavia, where the culture is more polite, you could be Chris Rock or Louis CK and not get much energy back from the room, despite how awesome they thought you were.

If you dig this answer, you should check out Confessions of a Public Speaker – it goes in depth on this approach and the steps you need to get it right.

The quote of the month

“In the range of invention…the man of today is nearer to being a god than at any time in history. Yet never was he less godlike. He accepts and utilizes the miraculous gifts of science unquestioningly: he is without wonder, without awe, reverence, zest, vitality or joy. He draws no conclusions from the past and is utterly unconcerned about the future. He is marking time. That is about the most we can say for him.”

– Henry Miller, The Books in My Life

Interview: man who owns only 15 things

Well known start-up founder and conference organizer Andrew Hyde (@andrewhyde) recently decided to sell most of his worldly possessions. He currently owns only 15 things. Look around your office or home, I’m sure you can see more than that number of owned items around you right now.  I bet some of you have nearly 15 items on you, between clothing and what’s in your pockets.

I interviewed Andrew about his motivations and experiences as an American with so few things.

SB: Given our hi-tech, gadget obsessed, culture, minimalism is not the typical lifestyle a young American would be expected to pursue. How did you get interested in minimalism and what motivated you to make this change now?

AH: I dabbled over the last few years by taking a small backpack on 3 or 4 day trips. I was shocked in how much stuff I had. Even when I had packed my apartment, I was still shopping for more. It wasn’t about need anymore, it was just habit. Realizing that changed the way I looked at buying stuff. I just stopped.

I remember reading a post by Fred Wilson with the message of “when was the last time you didn’t spend any money in a day?” That made me think. I experimented from those thoughts. I left my wallet at home to see how I would ‘get by.’ Turns out, everything I spent cash on was pure comfort goods, and I could a week without spending cash besides groceries. My regular coffeeshop was more than understanding if I forgot my wallet, so were my coworkers and friends. It created a non confrontational way for me to really start aggressively saving.

This whole experience has taught me something very simple: debt kills dreams. Debt is cash, things and fear.

In one my favorite films, Fight Club, Tyler Durden says “the things you own end up owning you” which is likely a riff inspired by Buddhist or stoic philosophy. What do you think of this phrase? And given your current lifestyle, can you think of a different quote you’d offer in response?

The book is also fantastic, a must read for me. Although I love it, I have still never been in a fight. I love the message of the movie- relationships, not stuff, matter, and message runs community.

I don’t have much right now. 3 shirts, a pair of pants and shorts. Some odds and ends. I do some pretty interesting and amazing things everyday, and not once in the last month did I really want anything more.

It has turned by life from stuff centric to relationship centric.

To get down to 15 items must have taken serious thought. Can you describe the process you used? Did you do it all at once, or one or two items at a time?

The 15 items was a simple goal. I was trying to tell my friends that my life would fit into a backpack. It wasn’t until I turned my life into a number before the trip was official. I started with my clothing basics. 2 shirts, 1 pant, 1 short, 1 sandals, 1 sunglasses and underwear. I added a few ‘must haves’ for me like an iPad and camera. I added a backpack, toiletries kit, towel, and a few random things (pen, connector cable, chargers) and tried it out. After five weeks of the trip, there is more that I have not used in the bag than there is in the bag.

Given how few items you possess, has it changed how you look at your friends, family or other people you meet on your travels?

The weirdest thing is I don’t have a home to go back to (homeless, you could say). I see a guy who owns a bag like me and spends his days begging or with nothing to do. I choose to have a bag and travel around while there are many I have talked to that do not choose to live on the streets. The guy is surviving, and it is really sad to think we are both equal except I have more in relationships and bank accounts. That is hard to see.

It is pretty funny to see peoples faces when I show them by bag and tell them it is everything I own. People either get happy or confused. The happy ones challenge themselves to think if they could do it (with wonder) and the confused tend to tell me that I shouldn’t travel to ‘dangerous’ countries like Colombia.

One of my favorite interactions was at JFK. I talk to a lot more people now that I don’t have a job, it is just interesting to see what people are up to, where they are going, what they are living for. A middle aged guy said I was elitist for traveling. I was standing there with everything I owned on my shoulders, being called elitist.

Update: Check out Hyde’s book on what he’s learned in his travels: This is a book about travel

Clients who ignore you: how to handle?

In a series of posts, called readers choice, I write on whatever topics people submit. This week’s reader’s choice post: Handling clients who ignore your process.

How do you think that a client should be managed if they just do not want to understand the process or how things are being build? How should you react if a client always asks to shorten timings and they do not trust the people that are setting up the schedule just because they are not aware of the production process and are not willing to learn and understand?

There are only three answers.

  1. Your process sucks.  Maybe they have good reasons for ignoring your process. It’s possible they see its flaws or it’s too complex for what they need. This might not be true, but it’s your job to consider the possibility they’re right, even if they’re only 10% or 15% right. One trick is to anticipate the likely points of tension during a project before it starts, and discuss them with your client before they happen. Then when they occur, you’ve preloaded their expectations for how to handle.
  2. You need to stand firm and, with patience and empathy, explain it better. You might be right, but if they don’t understand why, it doesn’t matter. You can’t expect people to pay extra money for what they don’t understand. The skills of teaching and persuasion are unlikely to come with whatever domain expertise you have, so go work on those. Or find another consultant who is better and involve them (watch and learn). The last option is to share the  tradeoffs and let them decide: “yes, we can get it done tomorrow but we’ll have to cut one of these three features” or “yes, we can get it all done tomorrow, but the quality of each feature will drop”.
  3. Find new clients. There are some clients not worth having. If you find one, your goal is not to do business with them again. If they refuse to respect your expertise and don’t trust you, a good working relationship is impossible (If your boss doesn’t understand this situation, as in never willing to get involved and help, start looking for a new job).  The occasional big fish who is difficult is hard to avoid, but generally there’s little reason for a good firm that does good work to endure insane clients.

Is the web making us stupid?

The University of Washington launched a new TV show, Mediaspace, and the producers asked me to do a 2 minute commentary for each episode. This is from episode 1, where they interviewed Ben Huh, founder of I can has Cheezburger. The show is broadcast live, with realtime twitter conversation, and rebroadcast on UWTV.

The idea was to have an Andy Rooney type closing segment to finish each episode.

Monologue on the web making us stupid:

One of the silliest notions we have about media and change is that each new thing is either wonderfully good or horribly bad. The web itself, in the opinions of pundits, will either radically improve the world (Clay Shirky), or destroy our minds (Nicholas Carr). If you pay attention long enough, you see everything gets cast into these polarized, and while entertaining, mostly useless frameworks.  They’re fun, they spur debate, but rarely do they progress the conversation.

The truth is, all things have some good and some bad and them, and that goodness and badness varies depending on who you are.  It’s common sense to take this view, but since it’s a not fun view, it’s a way of thinking we often ignore. This way of thinking requires patience to sort out who is helped by something new, and in what situations.  I can has Cheezburger might be silly, and you might not find it funny (I don’t), but why is the fact that millions of people find something funny, that I don’t, a problem?  I’d rather they find something funny and laugh a little more, than find things that enrage them, and make them hate a little more.

Lowbrow humor has always had a place in high-brow culture, and to assume some people who like lol-cats can’t also like Monty Python or Tchaikovsky reflects a limited imagination of the wide range of tastes most people have. The notions of a guilty pleasure reflects our puritan roots more than the nature of the pleasures themselves.

Most important of all perhaps is the recognition that what’s most popular is rarely the best. This has always been true from books, to newspapers, to radio, tv, and the web– there is a lowest common denominator required for mass popularity and once you recognize the difference between the popular and the good, the existence of amazingly popular blogs about silly things seems fairly ordinary in the history of American media.

A better question perhaps is how can we use the lol-cats and the chat-roulettes of the world, these super easy forms of content creation, as a cultural Trojan horse of sorts. Showing the young they can be makers, but not just of the trivial. Once you learn to make something, anything, the possibility exists the next thing you make will have more meaning than the last. And that’s what I’m hoping our technologies do for us: help us to create meaning. But where are the tools for making real works of art, or expressing thoughts and ideas with deeper and longer effects than just a few moments of laughter? That’s what I’m still looking for. If you’re looking too, let me know.

You can watch the entire first show here.  Or just my segment, below:

Scott Berkun – Media Space from MCDM Mediaspace on Vimeo.

Ray Ozzie, Microsoft and change

I’d occasionally get asked what I thought of Ray Ozzie at Microsoft. I’d say this “Great guy, a worthy legend, but he’ll have little effect”. Why? They’d ask.

And I’d say: “because he’s not a VP for an actual product.”

You can’t lead in the abstract. You have to get skin in the game.  Today MSFT announced he’s leaving and I’m not surprised.

In the past I’ve criticized on idea of job titles like VP of Innovation or Chief Innovation officer. Chief Software Architect, Ozzie’s title,  had similiar problems. It means little to those with real power inside a company. Makers of things, like developers, give the most respect to people who ship things. What does a VP of Innovation ship? What does a Chief Software Architect ship? Nothing. Slide decks and vision plans don’t compile. You can prototype and speculate all you want, but that’s at best indirect influence on what the rest of a company is doing. You can’t be a leader from the sideline. Give advice? sure. Make demos? Absolutely. But if a real risk needs to be taken you are not the person with the power to take it.

We’d have to ask people across MSFT if Ozzie had an impact on them. As an outsider, I can’t say with any certainty if he did or he didn’t.

But I know for progress to happen you must get in the middle (or be the leader of the thing that is in the middle). I don’t know if Ozzie was offered ownership of a product or division and said no, or if that was never in the cards from Ballmer. Either way, the fate was set early on as it is whenever a high profile outsider does a tour at a company (Bill Buxton, and others at Microsoft Research, come to mind). You can earn your salary and have value, absolutely, but if you are not a key person on a key project, less can be expected of your net impact on a company as a whole.

For the industry I’m happy to see Ozzie leave – I’d have been happier to see him as CEO, or VP of a product, at MSFT, that would have been fascinating to watch – but since he’s leaving my bet is he will take full charge of some new thing and that will be the best for all concerned. I look forward to what comes next Mr. Ozzie.

The fallacy of “They Don’t Get It”

A phrase often uttered in frustration is “They don’t get it.” When spoken among colleagues, a chorus of heads will likely nod in affirmation. And while conferring over beers or lattes, someone will respond “Yes, what is wrong with them?” as everyone’s mind spins on thoughts of how obvious it is, and how stupid they must be.

From political movements, to particular professions, they don’t get it is a pseudo-rallying cry of the ignored and the powerless. But it serves only to bond people in their despair, instead of rallying them towards progress. To say “They don’t get it” is giving up. It spreads assumptions about the nature of ideas out into the world by pretending there is no alternative, despite the vast history that contradicts this notion.

There are four traps lurking inside that are easy to disarm with questions:

  1. Who are they? If there is more than one of them, they are in fact different people. Some of them will get it better than others. Even if they are all fools, one will be least foolish, and that person is where progress begins. There is always someone who is the most open minded in any group. But if you lump them together into a uniform Borg-like entity called “They” it  guarantees you will stay stuck in the same place. Insisting on a “they” protects you from having to take responsibility for the work required for progress to happen.
  2. What is it? Similarly, any idea is comprised of smaller ideas. If you lump them together with one name, as in “They don’t get Design” or “They don’t get the First Amendment”, you’re pretending Design or the First Amendment is an all or nothing proposition, which ideas never are. Until you break a large idea down into small bite-sized pieces, you can’t see which parts are understood, misconstrued, or ignored. Until that moment, you don’t understand the problem well enough to try and solve it. You really don’t know what the it you’re so angry about is.
  3. Us and them. Socrates feared people who were certain about their own knowledge. He saw them as the least-wise people there are, as certainty creates a closed mind, blind to new knowledge or change of any kind. It’s possible that they see you in the same exact way you see them. They wonder why you don’t get their it.  If nothing else, you and them share this view of each other. This is great news – you now have something in common! Their militancy in their thinking might mean you are more like them than you realize, an observation which should motivate you to rethink your attitude.
  4. You might be wrong (or are right, but not in the way you thought). The high school social studies exercise of arguing both points of view on an issue is one shamefully lost in the adult world. Even Jesus would say you should have compassion for your enemies, in part I think, because empathy for their position will help you see your own more clearly, and the resulting clarity increases the possibility of the resolution you claim to seek. You still might not agree, but if you understand them, the way you try to engage with them will change, and for the better.

References

(Seattle) This Sunday – at Ada’s Books 4-6pm

I’ll be at the lovely new bookstore, Ada’s, on Capital Hill, from 4-6pm. They have Myths for sale, as well as a selection of my favorite sci-fi & science books, but happy to chat with anyone about anything. So come on down.  Possibility of going our for some beers afterward.

Google map here.

Ada’s Technical Books
713 Broadway East
Seattle, WA 98102

Contact: 206-322-1058, contact@seattletechnicalbooks.com

Q&A from Myths webcast

Here’s the Q&A from my Myths day podcast about the new edition of The Myths of Innovation.

Apologies for the delay in getting this posted. You see, Bono asked me to call Jon Stewart to let him know Oprah misses him (this is a bad inside joke in reference to a bad joke I made during the webcast).

Here’s all the questions posted in the chat room – with my answers. Other questions welcome – leave in comments:

Naomi Maloney: Q. Aren’t we really talking about IDEAS?

Sure. But that’s just more vocabulary. What is an idea? When you’re dead, is an idea you had in your mind more important than an idea manifested somehow in the world?

You can spend weeks debating which vocabulary is best for thinking about creativity – it is fun to a point. But then you realize you haven’t done any real work towards solving any real problem. I’m happy to yield to other people’s vocabulary if it gets everyone to actually make or design a prototype for something sooner. Most people have an idea for a book / movie / company / product / thing, but never manifest in the world in any way. The hard part is rarely the idea. Or what vocabulary they’re using. The problem is asses in chairs, or at whiteboards, or in code, or in a lab, actually making something.

Venus Picart : I heard during an MIT conference that innovation is not innovative unless it finds a market.  But nowadays, that is heavily dependent on funding, aka VC’s.  the purse strings are controlled by not so innovative people.  Can you comment briefly on that?

Finding a market is a fickle thing. Most major innovations were around for awhile, but it took years to find a market. Fax machines, copying machines, cell phones, digital music players – the list is long. Despite what people at conferences say, you can not predict nor control markets. To be an entrepreneur means you are willing to take risks, in hopes that if things pan out you will benefit from them. But even with a great idea, and a great product, and great timing, most new ideas and companies fail. At least at first.

That said, there is always room for the self-funded entrepreneur. You can find them in film, in books, in every industry. They make up for their lack of resources with cunning, daring and unencumbered brilliance (No committees, no approval requests, no gates). 37 signals is as well known for not taking VC funding, as they are for their products. The web does democratize information – PR has changed. The barriers to entry are lower than ever in history for many kinds of ideas.

You might have to make your idea smaller, or pick a different market, but there is and will always be ways to be successful funding your own ideas.  Taking VC or investment gives away the most precious thing you have: your own control over your own ideas.  What good is a $20 million budget if you can’t use it in the way that best serves your vision? You’d be better off with $500 and downsize to a studio apartment, if you can keep your independence of thought.

David Cox: Have you read Bruce Sterling’s Shaping Things? What did you think of what it was arguing for?

Nope. But I hung out with him in a bar once. He’s a very smart and entertaining guy.

Ray Luong: do you see video game design as a vanguard to learning about innovation? a lot of game teams seem to exhibit many of those traits you talked about today.

The problem with major video games is they are obsessed with the movie industry. They have modeled many of the processes and strategies after movies (e.g. game studios => movie studios). They aim so much of their effort at trying to be like film, which results often in beautiful games that are awful experiences to play. They also suffer from aiming at 15-21 year old men, or people who like to escape into realities designed for 15-21 year old men, and that’s limiting in various ways.

Games like Braid, Limbo, Portal, or Shadows of the Colossus, that take big risks on gameplay are definitely good stories for how to develop different ideas. But they’re mostly from the independents – not from the majors, who mostly make the same kinds of first person shooters and roll-playing games they have for years.

Scott Clamp: Q: Do innovative people have a more diverse social network (cross-pollination of ideas) or do they have a loner mentality?

Many breakthroughs occur when someone takes an idea from one domain or industry, an idea that is well accepted there, and brings it into a different domain that is new to the same idea. The more diverse your social network, or the kinds of books you read or conferences you go to, the more opportunity you have to find ideas of this nature.  The number of famous loners is small – even Newton, who was as reclusive as they come, studied in university for years and had colleagues and supporters who helped him develop his work – certainly in his early years.

Tim Ake: Q: I just purchased the book, but it says that it is v.1 – will we get the updated version?

Hmmm. The paperback edition says First printing: August 2010, and the cover has black and red text on grey. Not sure where any of my books say v1. If you managed to buy a copy of the 2007 edition, sorry but there’s not much I can do for you.

Eric Wayte: Q:  What’s your take on Oracle’s strategy of innovation through acquisition?

Most successful companies, certainly tech companies, use their financial advantage by acquiring other companies. It rarely works in a way that benefits consumers – but it does benefit companies, sometimes. If nothing else, taking a potential competitor off the market means they won’t hurt you, and won’t ever be available for your competitor to buy. Sometimes acquisitions are purely about talent – they want the people, not the product (although this almost never works out as the people leave once they max out on their signing bonus).

In short, few acquisitions work out. There are too many variables and culture changes required (Microsoft did actually have a few good ones: PowerPoint, Frontpage, Hotmail). But most don’t work out well. But strategy wise, if you have a big resource advantage, it’s a move your enemies can’t match: it can intimidate competitors, draw media attention, and make people look more carefully at what else you’re doing.

Eva Springer: Q: Why don’t you talk about play?

I only had about 40 minutes! Hard to talk about everything you know.

John Walker: Q: How do copyright laws complicate your notion that new ideas are combinations of old ideas?

The history of copyright makes clear that the intention was to protect intellectual property for a limited time – to reward them for their efforts, but to eventually release copyrights into the public domain. The problem isn’t the idea of copyright – but the changes we’ve made to make it close to permanent (see chart):

It’s clear many kinds of ideas are not patentable. I have my name on a handful of software patents, and I can tell you these are far from the best ideas I developed, or worked on. For example, the idea of a browser, or a web page, or web page layouts, or a thousand kinds of things are not patentable and can be reused in dozens of ways.

Anita Kuno: Q: When you are in a situation when the team doesn’t trust each other, what percentage of teams listen to your advice?

Hard to know. Trust is tough. Relationships are tough.  Half or more of marriages in the U.S. end in divorce.  People dealing with other people is never easy. I feel that making people aware their real problem is trust, or communication, instead of obsessing about which management methodology they’re using, at least gets them looking in the right place for the causes of their misery. Fundamentally if you work with people you don’t trust, and can’t fix it, you should leave. You’ll never be happy or do good work with people you do not fundamentally trust.

Michael Gaigg: Q: Scott, many great ideas are based on existing ones – Do I or how much do one need to credit the base product/idea?

Depends. It’s very easy to credit in most mediums. Books and webpages have links. Films have credits. Albums have liner notes (well, back when there were albums). Always credit generously. Most people find it an honor to have anything they’re made mentioned at all. Simply say “inspired by Fred, Sally and Joe” if you don’t feel comfortable being too specific.

Jason Shaf: Q Scott, Do you follow anybody on Twitter?

Ummm – have you used twitter? You can see who I, or anyone follows, by looking at their account – here’s my list.

Benetou Fabien: Q: Do you think Steve G. Blank’s book the 4 steps to epiphany is an efficient way to innovate?

Haven’t read his book, however I have had people recommend it to me.  I can only say I utterly hate the title. Taken without knowledge of the contents of the book, which might be great, the title expresses an attitude in complete opposition to what the history of invention and entrepreneurship supports, and what I teach.

Q: I loved the webcast and these questions are awesome, what should I do to get more?

Well, there’s this thing called a book, and another thing called amazon. Together it means clicking here gets you 200+ pages of way better stories, thoughts, answers and more.  And free sample chapters for the book are here (PDF).

Myths Day results (Thanks!)

Yesterday was awesome – 100+ people chipped in to help spread the word. There were over 250 tweets, more than 171 (!) facebook posts, and nearly a dozen blog entries.  

The berkun fan club / pr squad, led by Andrew McAdams, Alex Becker Allison Jacobsen, helped drive the above activity, and everyone on the squad who lended a hand was awesome. Collectively we learned a ton about how to do this and it will be better next time around.

The results: we got the new edition up from #15,000 on amazon all the way to #1049.  Amazing! And the numbers are still strong today (book page here).

  • Facebook posts: 171
  • Blog posts: 12
  • Tweets: 250 tweets (#mythsday)
  • Initial amazon rank: #15,225
  • Final amazon rank: #1,049

I’m supremely grateful. Hope you notice some extra love coming through in the writing here on the blog the next few weeks.

And if you forgot to lend a hand it’s never too late. Every little mention has value, and for the next month or two yesterday’s wave of PR will generate rebound effects, with people posting about the book after it arrives, or they read it. There have been 5 new amazon reviews already this week (Thanks to Mark, Vern, Christine, Heather and John) and hopefully we’ll see more.  These have huge value.

Here’s a list of all the blog pingbacks I got for people who posted on their blogs. If you wrote something and aren’t listed, just leave a comment with a link and I’ll add you in:

I’m going to get some rest now. Thanks all.

5 signed copies of Myths – leave a comment!

I’ll pick 5 people to send a brand new signed copy of the paperback edition of Myths of Innovation. I’ll even write a personal note in there for you, with personalized innovation advice.  Can’t do better than that.

Leave a comment to enter.  I’ll count you twice if you say something clever enough to make me smile.  I’ll count you 3x if it’s about innovation or creativity in some way.

(Closes at midnight PST – at the end of #mythsday).

Or if you can’t wait, help with #mythsday, and buy a copy anyway! The book is currently ranked at #1326! Buy now and you’ll help set the high mark.

Winners announced – comments closed: Go here for the list.

Top Ten Innovation Myths in the U.S.

A surprise for #Mythsday – I’m now writing for the Huffington Post.  First article is fun top ten, slide show thing, with some good stories I bet you haven’t heard before (Sliced bread, Resse’s peanut butter cups, Apple, Ford and more).

Top 10 Innovation Myths in the U.S. @ Huffington Post

Not sure about these slide show things, but apparently they’re quite popular at the HuffPo.

Lets hope this helps with the #mythday goal for the book’s Amazon ranking.  Currently it’s up from 12,000 to 2,230.  Thanks to everyone who has bought the book today! Lets see how high we can go.

Today is Myths of Innovation day! help wanted

If you have been waiting to buy 6,434 copies of the myths of innovation for your entire company, or have a coupon for a hour of advertising on all major networks burning a hole in your pocket, now is the best time ever in history to pull the trigger.

There are people who like my work, some who hate it, but most of the world has no idea who I am. PR helps reach that last group, and you know more people I don’t know than I do.

Today, if you can post on your blog, post to facebook or twitter, or buy the book today, it will help me and my future work more than you know.

Here’s a good example of an easy blog post you can do in 30 seconds. Make sure to include an image of the cover, and link it to amazon.

If you’re on twitter, here’s a sample you can use.

The goal: We’re trying to see how high we can get the amazon rank to go. It started at 12,000. Can we break 5,000? The higher the ranking, the more exposure the book gets across all of amazon.com.

I’ll be posting cool stuff all day, with some more prizes, so stay tuned.

Free webcast begins at 10am PST / 1pm EST.

Thanks! I’ll be watching. Appreciate the help more than you know.

The future of golf: Smash-Putt (Seattle)

If you live in Seattle and like fun you owe it to yourself to check out Smash Putt: a unique arts/sports/golf experience, open for its last weekend of the year (perhaps all time!).

The basic idea: what if you take crazy artists and engineers and let them rethink miniature golf?

You get:

We went last weekend and had a great time. It’s crowded and chaotic, but totally worth it. For extra fun, it’s in the old Immigration building in downtown Seattle, making for a bizarre, but ultimately fun experience.

This is the last weekend it will run in Seattle. Buy tickets in advance here

($12-15 – they tend to sell out if you wait)