Getting in Touch with Your Inner Superstar

A review of "Principles of Applied Stupidity"

well i am very grateful to Robert Huebscher and David Raileanu for doing a review of "Principles of Applied Stupidity" in their newsletter which I guess gets read by a whole lot of people! 

http://www.advisorperspectives.com/newsletters09/How_to_Succeed_Without_Knowing_Anything.php

David makes some very good comments and gives great feedback which i am always eager to hear especially on such an unusual topic . . .  and of course promotion is always appreciated! 

--jl

A Fond Christmas Memory

Many years ago I had a very large apartment and it was perfect for throwing parties. One year I decided to have a Christmas party.  I billed it as a tree trimming party but the idea was, bring an ornament, and hang out, eat, drink, chat, and have fun.  But I decided it might be useful for the socially challenged to have some less social-skill-demanding activities, so I set aside the dining room table, and 6 chairs, for folks to make christmas tree decorations if they felt like it.  No big deal.

Well much to my amazement, those 6 chairs became the focus of the evening.  People I normally thought of as calm reserved mature adults were sitting there– for hours–  totally engrossed in fumbling with blunt school scissors, white paste, construction paper, and glitter. There was a waiting list created for each seat.  People were distracted in talking to me for fear they might lose their place in line.  Food and drink had to be brought to those at the table for they refused to get up. 

In one of the seats there was a conglomeration of an architect, an interior decorator, and 2 helpers working ALL NIGHT on a single ornament: it was a little house, only about 3 inches wide and high, complete with an internal diorama, snow on the roof made from aspirin bottle cotton, with aluminum foil icicles and skis on the side of the house.  Another team of people worked for 3 hours straight creating a santa doll.  And someone else had a santa’s mailbox, complete with letters to santa enclosed in tiny envelopes, and a flag, with stamps.  

Many people introduced others at the party to arts and crafts traditions they had grown up with– for example, we had quite a few people making little gingerbread men from yarn and crepe paper.  The star on the tree was created with a cardboard cutout of a star covered in shiny aluminum foil, mounted via an inverted dixie cup stapled to the back. 

Well you don’t have to hit me in the head with a ball bat more than once.  I got the message.  The next few years I provided tons of material from craft shops, and 2 tables with as many chairs as I could muster, and you never saw a bigger beehive of santa’s workshop activity.  I still have many of the ornaments.  I admit, there was a lot of junk, but some of what these folks created was just spectacular.  I think my favorite is a lace snowflake made by a woman of italian descent.  Every year I take it out and see both a little piece of Burano lacemaking tradition and a memory of a friend and a fabulous party.

Of course time marches on and bit by bit my friends started to get married and have kids, and folks started bringing their kids to the party.  Sad to say, once the kids took over the crafts table, the adults all held back and did not let their creativity flow any more, as the demands of “being the adult” quickly repressed that energy.  I couldn’t get rid of the kids, so I just stopped having the parties.  But I know that that cutting/trimming/pasting imagination is still there in everyone, if you just create the right circumstances for it to be released. 

Happy Holidays – jl

Fear of Failure Part II

I have blogged in the past about fear of failure but as I look into this issue I keep stumbling over the same thing so I thought I would look at it again.

I am realizing more and more that fear of failure is actually fear of displeasing people in authority, or fear of exposing one's vulnerability.  It's fear of shame and disconnection, not of the failure itself.  Once you make that distinction, you can start to use trial and error methods to much greater effect, as you will no longer be afraid of experimenting. 

I realize failure is sometimes failure of a large new project, but who said all big projects must succeed?  If you have failed once or twice, well, congratulations, that proves you're human.  We all make mistakes and fail, and while some folks are ashamed of that, there's no reason for you to be.   

I no longer get "writer's block" because when i get stuck, i put rough drafts out for people to read and criticize, and I observe their reactions. Yes, what they read is a failure, but in seeing how and why an idea fails, I often get input, guidance, and ideas on why it is a failure and how to fix it. People love to point out errors and offer advice, and you're crazy not to take advantage of that infinite resource.

I put a video up on youtube of me talking to some folks about failure, you can see it below . . .  even this was a failure in that it was not perfect and could be better, but with all its imperfections I am still miles ahead of all the folks who are still getting ready to get ready.  -- justin

The Massive Economy of Imperfection Concealment

Well I am sitting here waiting to hear from the printer so I can see the proof of the cover of the 3rd edition of “Principles” and I thought, well, I can make productive use of my wait time by house cleaning, but why do that when I can blog instead?  So here goes.

When “proofing” a book it is very easy to get into a major stress-out, because unless you find and remove all typos, errors, misspelled names, formatting problems, and the other infinite potential screw-ups that occur when you write and publish a book, those errors will be printed out hundreds or even thousands of times and one’s imperfections and mistakes will be out on public view for all to see.

Much of what we learn in school (certainly almost all of what I learned in the music school experience) is merely the art (?) of imperfection concealment.  Since so many of my teachers in all courses of study emphasized the importance of not making errors, even if a paper or a presentation was otherwise dull as dishwater, I believed in perfection (read: obedience) as the way to truth and enlightenment; but I have since discovered this is a lot of hogwash.  People will spend endless amounts of money to avoid that awful feeling of making a visible error, but in the end, seeking perfection is self-indulgence.  It’s a fear of being seen for what you are.  And in general, it’s not something that people want to buy. 

Of course, the weird lesson I learn, and other people who publish admit to the same thing, you can never get all the errors out of a book.  After 5 editions I thought I had all the errors out of Real Men Don’t rehearse but then just last week someone told me that I referred to "Bugler’s Holiday" as being in 4/4 when in fact it is in 2/4.  YEESH. 

So I approved the proof the text of “Principles” yesterday, even though I found 3 typos in the proof that I obviously hadn’t caught previously.  I could have said “stop the presses!!” and fixed these obvious errors, but it would have cost me $60 plus a week’s delay.  So the hell with it.

I confess, doing so is very very hard.  If I wasn’t under such severe time and financial restraints I would no doubt, out of sheer habit of training in imperfection concealment being the highest priority, have said, “ok, let’s do it over.” But seeking perfection is really the sign of the amateur.  Not once, in all my years of publishing, has anyone ever said, “Justin, I found a typo on page 83.  I want my money back.”  In all my years as a bass player, no one ever said, ‘you missed a note on page 6, we’re docking your pay.”  It was understood that you give it your best and move on. 

The guys who print my books have even better typo stories to tell. They once printed a book and the author’s name was misspelled on the spine. 

Such errors feel horrifying when discovered, but the thing is, no one but the author noticed or cared about the error.  So why spend the money on a new print run just to make believe that you are not imperfect?  It really doesn’t matter.  Perfection is not the goal. 

But all that being said, still, that gut-wrenching fear that comes up when we feel exposed . . .  the fear of having a slight flaw being in view . . .  is a powerful one.  It was instilled in us by our compatriots in the 2nd grade, and it’s a hard memory to get rid of.  And many people who are selling stuff will use it to their advantage. 

If I want to sell you something, whether it’s a new car or a new bit of knowledge, it is essential that I make you feel that your current car or knowledge is a piece of junk and you should be ashamed of it.  The fear–of being embarrassed, not the actual need or value of the new car/idea, is what makes the sale. 

Something I learned in the professional performance business is, it’s not making yourself immune from any criticism.  It’s not about achieving the “success” of total precision and perfection.  No.  It’s about connecting to your audience, and if you are perfect you will not connect to anyone, as no one in your audience is perfect.  They may admire you from afar, and that has economic value sometimes, but in the end you’re not performing, you're offering escapism.  You're not creating any real value by merely creating an illusion of perceived perfection.

So no, my book is not perfect.  But what the hell.  Typos give readers a sense of superiority.  I have never once gotten an email from a reader saying "congratulations, I found no typos," but I have made many a connection to a customer who wrote to tell me of typos.  It’s a great icebreaker.  They get to help, and they become part of the team.  So the errors actually have value.  Look folks, I did my best, and that ought to be good enough.  To make it perfect I would have to publish it in 2012.  And even then, it might not be readdy. 

 © Justin Locke


 

Some oceanographers are less equal than others

So I was watching 60 Minutes last night and there was Robert Ballard chatting about finding the Titanic.  He pointed out that everyone else was doing things the same old way (using sonic echo technology), even though repeated applications of that approach had failed to find the ship.  So he tried something else (looking for debris trails), and while other expeditions had spent months looking for Titanic and had failed, he tried a different method and found it in 12 days. 

Later in the interview, he was asked about his critics, and he said, “in academia, there is no ‘I.’  There is only “we.”  

Boy did that tell a story.

There is a lot to be said for fitting in and being one of the gang, but if you succeed where others have failed, don’t expect a lot of applause from those who feel that loyalty to the system is more important than results. 

I have said it before, I will say it again: to be innovative, you have to be disloyal to the past.  And generally speaking, disloyalty is generally frowned upon, especially by those who are the most loyal.  They want you to be loyal too.
 
I truly believe that it is not a lack of opportunity or ideas or energy or talent that holds most people back.  It is an unwillingness to be disloyal to the old ways.  It’s a very powerful force, and Principles of Applied Stupidity are all about overcoming that force. 

I leave you with a quote from Dr. Ballard: italics mine: 
"All kids dream a marvelous image of what they want to do. But then society tells them they can't do it. I didn't listen. I wanted to live my dream."

© Justin Locke

 

Solving Problems is Not Recommended– A New Principle of Applied Stupidity

Have you ever gotten onto a plane and opened up the airline magazine, hoping to kill some time doing the crossword, only to find someone else has already done it?  Annoying, wasn’t it?

We tend to think of problems as bad things but in fact human beings love problems.  Some people talk about “teaching problem solving skills,” but this strikes me as odd.  There is nothing better equipped to solve a problem than a 2 year old, especially if that problem is how to get up on the counter where the cookie jar is located.  They need no training in problem solving skills.  Our biggest problem is finding ways to stop them from solving every problem.

Bill Gates had more money than God, and could have lived the rest of his life in Bora Bora, waited on hand and foot.  So what does he do?  He gives most of it away to a foundation, and then goes out looking for the biggest and toughest problems he can find.

The point here is, human beings are born problem solvers.  So if you want people to be engaged, don’t offer a solution to be implemented.  Don’t solve the problem.  If you want to lead, offer a problem to be solved.

Now it is true that this idea runs counter to standard educational industrial complex theory.  In school you are of course rewarded for “solving problems” (or at least going thru motions that lead you to a foregone conclusion).  But school problems, like the tape of last night’s game after someone has told you the outcome, are of little interest.  We know they have already been solved, so they aren’t very interesting.  We like real problems.  We also like to find our own solutions. 

So if you are managing people and they seem disengaged, ask yourself, is there a problem to be solved here?  Or is there just a same old solution to be implemented – while keeping one's mind “occupied” with a Rubik’s Cube under the desk?

We all like to feel like we’re smart, and we like to demonstrate that by solving problems.  But consistently, the best leaders and managers I have encountered applied stupidity, i.e., they repressed their own urge to solve the problem. Instead, they always dumped the problem-solving task on me.  I fell for it every time, working myself to death, because I just love to solve problems and show off how clever I am. 

I have since learned to embrace my inner idiot and sit back, look helpless, and let other people solve the problems.  They are having a great time, and all I do is figure out more problems for them to solve. 

The job of a leader is not to solve a problem, it is to define the problem.  It’s up to the followers to get together and solve it.  Problems are the great motivator in life.  Problems make people to want to work together.  Solutions, like done crossword puzzles, are of no interest to anyone. 

If you are leader, never solve a problem. 

© Justin Locke

PLEASE NOTE the 3rd printing of “Principles of Applied Stupidity”will be available on or about December 14th.   We are currently sold out!!  Who would have thought??!!

Why I don't deal with discount book resellers

When I first self- published my book Real Men Don't Rehearse, I was of course very driven by the presumed glamour of having my book sold in major bookstores.  So I climbed thru many a major hoop to make that happen.  But  as of today, no more.  My choice.

A few places have a few copies of my book on hand (I guess) but once those are gone it’s all over.

My major issue with book retailers is about the fact that they insist on selling my book at a discount price, sometimes less than a dollar above wholesale, and that is what this post is about.  "List" price becomes meaningless in this world, or perhaps I missed the meeting where it was explained. 

The real issue I have with discounting the price of my book, and books in general is, it turns the thought contained in books (not just mine) into a commodity.  Step right up, get yer philosophical perspective, only $9.99.  Why pay more when you can save big on truth, insight, and personal awareness?  Time Life Books presents the top 100 reasons for civil disobedience.  Why spend a year studying with spiritual masters when you can learn just as much in 30 minutes, from this one CD, for just $14.95?

When books become discounted commodities, they and their authors inevitably lose independence.  They cannot be different, as the ever-narrower margin demands that they do high volume, which means they must appeal to everyone.  If they do not have mass appeal, they are no longer self-sustaining, which means books . . . BOOKS, these primary vessels of delivering complex ideas . . . must inevitably seek outside subsidy.  And that is dangerous.  It means the end of free speech. 

It’s not that great books will not get written.  But the authors have no way of making serious money directly from the book.  Again, they lose independence of action because they have to play a discount game with distributors.   It's a rather broad statement to make here, but the people who have patents on machinery or drugs have a much better system of recouping their investment. 

Part of the problem is all the highly perishable celebrity-driven literary kudzu that takes over the bookshelves.  Yes, those books should be sold as a cheap generic commodity.  But not all books should be marketed that way. 

Well, all is not lost.  I am taking a cue from Dr. Bose.  He sells a clock radio for $500.  While every other maker of sound equipment has dropped prices endlessly, his price has remained the same for at least 10 years now, and he seems to be doing great business.  And you can only buy that clock radio directly thru him, so no discounts.  This has not stopped sales.  Of course, it’s a great and unique product.  People have tried to copy it for cheap but they have all fallen by the wayside. 

So, I am now sold only thru My website, Amazon, and a few select music and bookstores that don't discount my products.  I think my books are worth what I charge for them. 

© Justin Locke 

overcoming failure is getting to be fashionable

it's interesting how many twitter tweets there are these days re: webpages and blogs that talk about overcoming failure. 

There is a fairly commen theme to these posts, which is "I never experienced failure before . . ."

Well this is technically incorrect.  no one who can walk or talk is a stranger to failing.  it's just that we learned to associate "failure shame" with certain social situations.    So here is my response:

where did we acquire fear of failure?  it's not intrinsic-- toddlers learning to walk have no fear of failing (or climbing a counter to get a cookie), they just focus on getting what they want til they get it.

Fear of failure is not fear of the failure itself; if it was, no one would ever do a crossword or sudoku puzzle ever again.  what happens is, we learn to be afraid of what other people think of us when we display imperfection.  We associate shame with failing to meet some arbitrary standard within a limited time frame.  THAT is what we fear.   it's not about the event, it's about the social consequences. 

failure is always an arbitrary judgment made in the context of arbitrary time limits. 

what's worse, in school we learn primarily to avoid "failure" (i.e., the resulting shaming disapproval from authority for not doing tasks perfectly), rather than failure recovery, which would make us more independent.  I have never seen a bureaucracy teach independence.  only in sports do we teach a few kids how to recover from failure. 

what is going to happen from this current momentous collective economic experience is that a lot of people are going to rise from the ashes of their first real "failure" (i.e., deviation from meeting outside standards) and find inner resources they never knew they had.  once inoculated, the fear of failure will leave them, and with that will come new and far greater personal empowerment.

I'm all for failure.  failure is good.  people who don't know failure have never tried to do anything really hard.  they exaggerate its power.  I love failure, i expect failure, because it is a predictable temporary by-product of doing something really worthwhile.

I am a successful self-publisher only because i failed miserably at it several times first.  now, I look around and see so many people trying to avoid failure in reaching a high goal, but the only way to do avoid failure is to follow a known path, which assures mediocrity . . . and . . .  failure.

If you have failed at something and still kept at it til you succeeded, congratulations.  That has more meaning to me and my spirit than all the perfectly-followed-the-procedure-laid-out-for-me failure avoidance in the world. 

(c)  Justin Locke

www.justinlocke.com

Are You Sick of Innovation?

Being a professional speaker, as I survey my competition, as well as the internet in general, there is a word that I come across a great deal, and that word is... “innovation.”

This is one of those words that is just getting over-used to the point ridiculousness.  Regular readers of this blog know that I occasionally rant about overuse of words, such as “hope” and “excellence.”  Well, here I go again.

I occasionally get told about a book or a speaker, and this mention will include the statement, “Justin, this book/speaker will change your life.”  Well, good for them, but oh-so-subtly embedded in this glowing recommendation is the implication that my life, as it currently stands, stinks.  Okay, that may be true, but I find it hard to believe that everyone else’s life stinks too.  I’m willing to bet that there is a substantial number of people for whom change and innovation would constitute a loss or a demotion.  There must be some happy people on this planet whose lives do not need to be changed.  Innovation is not necessarily a good thing all the time. 

This mantra of the need for innovation has gotten to be something of a religious movement.  While I’m on the subject of religious movements, I would like to point out that the Catholic Church has been doing booming business for quite some time now, and they are the most un-innovative group you’ll ever want to see.  Another good example of a non-innovation is the Coca-Cola Company.  Does anyone here remember “new Coke”?  It was innovative, and everyone hated it. 

Digital natives, please note: there is a market for things that never change. 

The Internet and the digital revolution in general offer me enough intellectual challenges everyday as it is.  I really don’t need any extraneous innovation.  Just to give you a close to home example: Typepad, the folks who host this blog, completely changed the user interface a week or two ago.  Here I was, all set to post a blog I’d written, and instead of just hitting control V and posting and getting on with my day, all of sudden found I had to take half an hour to sit down and learn a whole new interface.  Is the new interface better than the last one?  Not that I can tell.  Does my blog look any different?  No.  Did I lose some features in the old system that I really liked?  Yes.  Innovative?  Yes.  Customer happy?  No. 

The same thing happens on facebook.  No matter what they do, they can’t leave success alone.  They fiddle with the interface, causing a massive drop in productivity nationwide as people have to stop everything and learn the new system which, with the exception of the “hide” option, so far as I can tell, has not offered any truly improved service.  It’s just harder to find the button you want.  

There is another phrase I would like to present to you, which is “the Hawthorne effect.”  This refers to the fact that if you make any change at all in a workplace, it doesn’t matter what that change is, you will see about two weeks of improved performance.  After which, once everyone gets used to the new system (and they are no longer being observed by people monitoring the change), they go back to their normal pace of work.  I’m convinced that some management consultants think that if we just make a change every two weeks this will be the ideal situation for productivity enhancement. 

There is a lot to be said for constantly offering something new. There’s also a lot to be said for Norman Rockwell and Lawrence Welk, neither of whom died poor. 

But, you still want innovation?  Okay, here is something that nowadays is VERY innovative: take a good look at what you have always had to offer that is unique . . . that is so rare and wonderful that you should never ever change it.  Appreciate it, and defend it from those who seek to make you into what you are not.  Nowadays, the courage to stay the same is really different.   

© Justin Locke

How to (and How Not To) Introduce a Guest Speaker (From a Speaker’s Point of View)

Your guest speaker is an important element of your event, and the introduction to a speaker can have a huge effect on how that speaker is, at least initially, perceived by your audience.  A good introduction makes it easier for your speaker to make immediate impact, and a bad introduction can handicap your speaker, in terms of having to recover from initial lost focus and/or low audience energy levels. 

Having been introduced many times myself, and also after reading what popped up on Google when I typed in “introducing a speaker,” I thought I would share a few brief thoughts on the subject from a speaker’s point of view.  This is of course highly subjective, but for what's it's worth, here goes:

To start with the negative end, there are two types of introductions that should be avoided.  The first one is:

Just too long. 

I have received introductions that were lengthy speeches all in themselves, going on for five minutes or more.  These would recount details of individual phone calls I had with this person, the entire process of the committee deciding to hire me, and a listing of every book or play I’ve ever written and every city I’ve ever visited. 

Now I am the first to admit that being up in front of a crowd with a microphone is delicious.  So I can see how for some people, the opportunity to speak to a crowd is just too good to pass up.  You may also feel like you need to help the speaker by telling the audience (at length) how much you like them.  But this is redundant.  If the speaker is good, they should be able to achieve that rapport with the audience on their own, without your help. 

The second type of difficult introduction is:

Way too glowing. 

When you have spent a lot of your organization’s money on a speaker, it’s understandable that you would be eager to justify the massive expense by telling everyone in the audience just how fabulously wonderful the speaker is.

However, while I enjoy recognition as much as anyone else, in this context it is inappropriate, at least in my humble opinion.  When an "introducer" focuses too much on my biggest successes, and never says anything about my failures or shortcomings, there is a subtle implication that I am somehow better than everyone else, and right from the get-go that creates a divide between me and the audience. 

I realize that an event owner can’t just stand up in front of a thousand people and say, “this guy was walking past on the sidewalk and we asked him to come in and give a talk.  Will you please welcome Justin Locke.”  But bear in mind, overly glowing introductions have the danger of belittling your audience, so it’s always good to keep the praise and listing of achievements in check.  I would much prefer that the audience thought of me as a “regular guy” who is here to share some slightly different perspectives.  Given a choice, I would much prefer that people discover I’m a good speaker than be told I’m a good speaker. 

Audience belittlement aside, the other disadvantage of an overly praising introduction is, it sets the bar of expectations very high.  This is not good audience management.  If you tell everyone that the next speaker is just sort of okay, and that speaker comes out and is actually pretty good, everyone will be thrilled because the speaker exceeded their expectations.

On the other hand, if you introduce your speaker as the second coming of Christ, and that speaker is merely fantastic, you have inadvertently created disappointment. 

Part of being a professional speaker is being able to set the mood and establish rapport with the audience.  Obviously, if your speaker is not a professional, that’s a different situation.  But if you have a professional speaker, you may as well let them earn their money.  Don’t feel compelled to set the mood.  If your speaker is good, they can, and will prefer to, do that on their own.

Now there is never a one-size-fits-all to apply here.  Some speakers aren't speakers per se, they are known for doing something else, and their mere celebrity presence is the draw and "product" of the event.  In those cases, perhaps a longer intro by an MC is appropriate.  But for me, a recounting of what I have done in the past in other fields is not my product.  My product is the experience you are about to have, and a smoothly delivered introduction is the overture; it's part of the show.   Work with your speaker to get a good "handoff."

There is an old axiom in show business, which is “get to the [expletive deleted] point.”  One of the best examples of a speaker introduction is how late-night talk show hosts introduce guests or stand-up comedians.  There are usually no more than three or four brief elements to such introductions: 

1) (if not famous:) our next guest is (name),
2) he/she has appeared at (one or two brief references to their achievements),
3) he/she is here to tell us about (today’s topic, their book, issue that they will help you with),
4) (applause cue:)  will you please welcome (name again).

© Justin Locke