No Map. No Guide. No Limits.

We talk about hero journeys on this site. And the word “hero” has been thrown about a lot, since Captain Chesley Sullenberger successfully landed his A-320 in the Hudson River without a single fatality in January. So it seems worth pondering for a moment … what, exactly, constitutes a hero? 
There is, of course, the person who’s a hero in the epic “hero journey” sense … someone who undertakes a tough, uncharted journey of exploration, achievement and self-discovery; overcomes obstacles and tests; learns hard lessons about themselves and life; and then brings that wisdom and strength back to the world to benefit others.
But we use the word “hero” much more broadly than that. So much more broadly, in fact, that a single post isn’t going to get to the bottom of how and why we confer the status of “hero” on some people and not others. Let alone whether we use the term too loosely, how those “heroes” themselves view their actions, or what the impact of our crowning may be on those we seek to honor with the title. But here are a few opening thoughts on the subject. 
[click to continue…]

In the process of researching some completely unrelated info on Bruce Springsteen, I stumbled across this creative gem of an essay posted by Rick Newman on his blog back in October of 2007. Newman is the Chief Business Correspondent for U.S. News and World Report, as well as—clearly—a big fan of The Boss. 
Newman goes to school on how Springsteen has managed to keep his “brand” and “product” appealing, despite the passage of so many  years. And his conclusions are both entertaining and instructive for anyone trying to figure out how and where to innovate within an established business. (It’s also a nice piece of ironic poetry, having a business correspondent writing a column about the guy who gave the term “Boss” a whole new meaning.) 
My favorite part? His observation that Springsteen ends each song in a performance with “1-2-3-4!” because he’s actually starting the next song before the audience can catch their breath (or get their attention diverted) by the ending of any one number. “Nobody sits down or gets a breather until the man on stage decides it’s time,” Newman writes. “By keeping the crowd on its toes, the band keeps demand at a fever pitch-kind of the way Apple does, with its rapid flow of new gizmos pushing older products out of the way. But with way better buzz.” 
Not every CEO can match the lightning-intensity energy of Springsteen, of course. He’s like a 95-mile-an-hour-fastball pitcher, in that regard. But Newman also notes that Springsteen clearly loves what he does, and that passion not only fuels his energy and staying power, but is contagious, keeping his “customers” coming back for more. 
Newman’s post is worth checking out. It’s short, entertaining, and brings a Springsteen concert vividly to mind. Hard to argue with a combo like that.

A woman named Alexandra Penney, who at one time was the editor of Self magazine, has been posting occasional essays on The Daily Beast under the title “The Bag Lady Papers.” The general gist is that Penney invested all her savings with Bernie Madoff and, consequently, lost everything. In December, a friend pointed me to Penney’s first post on the subject.  And at first, I found some level of sympathy for the woman. I don’t care how much money you start with—having to let go of things you like very much is hard. Downsizing and adjusting is hard—even if it’s by choice, to afford a more meaningful career or a child’s college education. To suddenly lose one’s savings, in your 50s, is a huge hit. 
But still, I was surprised at the extremity of her reaction, which, she said, included thoughts of suicide. Suicide? You might have to give up your studio in SoHo, your laundered shirts, and your cleaning lady, and you’re contemplating suicide?  Wow. What on earth would you do if something really bad ever happened? 
I recognize that people respond differently to adversity, and some kinds of adversity can be scarier to some folks than others. There are the legendary tales, made current again by the suicides of some recently-ruined financial titans, of Wall Street bankers jumping to their deaths after the 1929 stock market crash. But it’s the equivalent of someone who’s just been in a plane crash in the mountains jumping off a cliff rather than even trying to fight for survival or a way out of the woods. Which I know actually happens in real life, but it’s still a puzzle to me. 
[click to continue…]

Getting laid off after 10 years at Microsoft doing a job I loved has been bittersweet. I’m sad and angry, sure. But I’m also excited. It feels like the Golden Handcuffs have finally been unlocked. Better yet, they’ve been handed to me on a silver platter … and I can sell the whole shiny package on Ebay and live off the proceeds for six months.
Since the layoff, I’ve spent a lot of time pondering my future. Specifically, the various entrepreneurial ideas I obsessed about but never had (or made) the time to pursue while I worked full time. Each day brings with it a sense of freedom and possibility I haven’t felt since I was a kid at home on a snow day.
[click to continue…]

One of the biggest challenges for any adventurer, commander, or entrepreneur is making decisions—sometimes very quickly—about which way to go when there isn’t a clear or sure path ahead. How do we make those calls? Just going “with your gut” or emotions can be a disaster. One of the reasons pilots of small airplanes (and mountain climbers) don’t have a better safety record is that they suffer from things like “get-there-itis”, which is the gut desire to a) believe that you’re tough enough to overcome the challenges you’re facing and b) avoid giving up the satisfying goal of getting to your planned destination, even when circumstances make that goal a riskier proposition. That, along with other factors, tends to make people say, “Yeah, I can do this,” when the facts don’t necessarily support that conclusion.  Yet, very smart people who rely purely on technical data can be equally wrong—or lost, if there isn’t any good technical data available. 
What applies to sports doesn’t always apply to business or life. But in today’s New York Times Sports section, Jonathan Abrams offered yet another interesting angle on this subject, at least as it applies to basketball superstars. 
Abrams interviewed numerous pro basketball players about their decision-making processes on the court, in the midst of a game. Did they think about which way to go, or which strategy to employ? Did they think through each free-throw? Strategize whether to take the two-point or three-point shot? Or did they just rely on “instinct” to guide them? 
[click to continue…]

In the “silver lining” category of the recent economic downturn, consider this interesting fact. In 2007, 58% of Harvard’s male graduating class, and 43% of its female graduating class, went into the fields of finance and consulting. When asked why, Harvard’s new president, Drew G. Faust, quipped that the easy answer was the same one given by Willie Sutton when asked why he robbed banks. “Because that’s where the money is,” he replied. In contrast, only 39% of last year’s graduating class chose those fields. Why? Perhaps because there’s less money in those banks, these days.

So why is that good news? Because stripped of the temptation presented by huge amounts of fast cash, those graduates might now think a little more clearly about what they’d really like to do. After all, if you’re not going to make huge money, actually enjoying what you’re doing becomes more important. And selecting a passion-driven vocation or career is less risky, and less agonizing a choice to make, if you’re not (foolishly?) walking away from huge piles of money in order to pursue it. The bar to entry goes down. [click to continue…]

I recently came across a Washington Post quiz, published at the height of the dot-com boom, that purports to help you determine whether or not you have what it takes to be an entrepreneur. 
The interesting thing to me is that the way it was skewed assumed anyone “suited” to be an entrepreneur needed to have a pronounced level of cockiness and competitiveness. I disagree. Now, perhaps even the writer who compiled the survey, or the person who originally composed it, has since modified their views, given all that’s transpired in the business world since that time. 
But entrepreneurs come in many shapes and sizes, and not every entrepreneur is a hard-driving, venture-capital-funded start-up fueled by audacity, ego, and an intensely competitive spirit. Joel Spolsky, a software developer who writes an interesting blog on various innovation, entrepreneurial and technology issues related to the software industry, wrote a fascinating article in May of 2000 comparing two distinctly different entrepreneurial models. Spolsky labeled the two different approaches “Ben and Jerry’s” and “Amazon.” The Amazon model entrepreneur would fit the Washington Post survey results. But the Ben and Jerry model—which is equally valid—is a slower-growing, grass-roots, organic approach to starting a business. And Spolsky argued that the only really important issue for an entrepreneur was to decide which model their business fit, and act appropriately for that model. 
I’d argue that there are any number of variations on that theme; that the two models outlined by Spolsky were illustrative opposites, but that there are many different kinds of entrepreneurs in America. Are there any common traits that I think matter? Yes. Self confidence. A willingness to take some risks. A desire to be in control. A comfort with uncertainty. Self-discipline. Focus. Determination and perseverance. An ability to see what doesn’t yet exist, and believe it can become real. A preference for fulfillment versus security. An optimistic spirit. A creative, innovative, and flexible mind. And, if the venture really going to be successful … a deep and abiding passion for the effort.

I heard a presentation a few weeks ago by a start-up company called the “+3 Network.” The idea of the network is to provide a vehicle to connect individual people who exercise with both charitable causes and corporate sponsors. For every mile that an individual runs, bikes, kayaks, or otherwise accumulates in their personal exercise and logs into the company’s online network, a chosen sponsor company will donate “X” amount to the athlete’s chosen charity. If you buy a GPS and validate your uploaded logged miles, the amount per mile increases.

It’s kind of like a fund-raising walk or marathon, without having to show up anywhere on any particular date. The site also offers a kind of social networking among members, so there’s that. But what struck me about the people listening to the presentation was that there was far less talk of “Gee, this will let me make my running(biking/kayaking) serve a good cause” as there was “Gee, this will actually motivate me to exercise.”

Fascinating, how having a goal … or computer network … or way to get “rewarded” for every mile traveled … might influence people to actually exercise. Of course, the real question to answer (which the company is still too new to have an answer for) is how many of those people really stick with it, if they weren’t motivated enough without the network.
[click to continue…]

I was in New Orleans this past weekend, caught up in the “ramp-up” Mardi-Gras celebrations that will culminate in the Big Party on Fat Tuesday—February 24^th. It was my first visit to New Orleans since Katrina, and the evidence of the disaster, and the abandonment that followed, lingers almost everywhere you look. The cleaning lady in the hotel still teared up at recounting the story of her teenage sons who got stranded on a rooftop for three days and finally swam to safety, but were unable to find her for weeks. Houses are still damaged and abandoned. Whole neighborhoods remain wiped out. 
And yet, the party continues, even in the shadow of the storm. I walked through the French Quarter, where a newly renovated one-bedroom condo in an old brick house with a courtyard and wrought-iron balcony could be had for $380,000. That’s either mighty brave or mighty foolish, buying in a place sure to sustain more, and possibly more devastating, hurricanes in the near future. And yet, there weren’t a slew of “For Sale” signs in the Quarter, like there are in Las Vegas or Florida’s tract housing developments.
[click to continue…]