Friday 29 April 2011

Said Detective Colombo to the CEO...!

Colombo

Ah, sorry to bother you Mr. CEO, Sir… 

Excuse me Mr. CEO, Sir? Um . . I know you're busy, and important and stuff. I mean, running the business is very important and - ah - I hate to bother you, Sir. I will only take a minute. Ok, Sir? See, I have these missing pieces that are holding me up, and I was wondering, Sir, if you could take time out of your busy schedule and help me out. 

You know, no big deal, just some loose ends and things. Hey, you have a nice place here! The wife sees houses like this on TV all the time and says, boy, she wishes she had digs like this, you know? Is that painting real? Really? Wow! I saw something like that in a museum once.

Oh, sorry Sir. I didn't mean to get off the track. So if you could just help me out a minute and give me some details, I will get right out of your way. I want to close this case and maybe take the wife Coney Island or something. Ever been to Coney Island Sir? No? I didn't think so...

Well, listen, anyway, I can't seem to get some information I need to wrap this up. These things seem to either be "Not known", "Not clear" or "Not understood"  I'm sure it's just an oversight or glitch or something, so if you could you tell me where these things are I have them written down here somewhere - oh wait. I'll just read it to you.  

Could you please help me find these things, Sir?
  • What are you are aiming to achieve? The outcome of it all? This business of yours? Sir…?
  • The measures that might tell you that you are getting there? Where are they?
  • And Sir? - what's the actual need you are trying to fulfil?
  • What is your vision exactly?
  • Does the world actually actually need what you are aiming to do?
  • The story. What's the story really Sir?
  • And your strategy? No-one seems to know what that is. 
  • The people in the business don't seem to care Sir? Why should they?
  • The road map you say you have? Where is that?
  • The alignment. Where is that Sir?
  • And the things that differentiate the business from all the others? Can you tell me that Sir?
Oh and one more thing Mr CEO Sir, I can't seem to find the criteria you used for any of this. Can you explain that to me, Sir? but hey - listen! I know you're busy! If this is too much for you right now  - I mean - tell you what. I'll come back tomorrow. Give you some time to get these things together, you know? I mean, I know you're busy. I'll just let myself out. I'll be back tomorrow. And the day after. 

What's that Sir? 

Who wants to know these  things? Well the people in your business, the customers and partners who rely on you Sir. You know, the ones that keep you alive?

Att00001

Posted via email from Just Thinking!

Monday 25 April 2011

Innovation? - An Egyptian Pyramid Of A Definition.

Innovation

Innovating requires a fine kind alchemy - a mischievous blend of three things -1. Making countless mistakes. 2. An ironic sense of humour and 3. Obsessive creative endeavour. These three dimensions form a kind of diabolical tension. A triangle that becomes a circular and perpetual crusade in my brain. A vicious circle.

1. Mistakes need to be utterly soul destroying - becoming triggers for the next idea. Ideas come from our thoughts so having our minds challenged refreshes the spirit and forces us to fix the aching void of failure. Of course this takes a masochism of an unenviable type.

2. Irony seems to force the best kind of comedy from me. That comedy translates into a creativity which in turn comes from the deep depths of I know not where. I know irony is not to everyone's taste and which is why it suits me and probably confirms my endless joy from it. I like to leverage the heady mix of adrenalin and disruptive energy shocks and provokes so much.

3. Creativity is the result and forces the crusade to finish building the pyramids of idea in my head. Ideas so outrageous but that will fix the problem and answer the brief. The fix needs to be breathtaking and when it isn't it's just another another soul destroying mistake. 

I laugh ironically.

Posted via email from Just Thinking!

Saturday 23 April 2011

Apple - Please Make Pens!

Wtf

Forget Afghanistan, Lybia and the Middle East. What in the world is going on in the pathetic dry-erase pen manufacturing world?

The 'dry-erase' marker market! A mouthful? Well cop this! Did they invent that term because of the fact that there is no ink in them - or were they being ironic about their supply of quality product? The Writing Is On The Wall - Badly!

If the pen is supposed to be mightier than the sword then I'm about to become history. Exploitation of artists was supposed to have been eradicated years ago. I should grow up and stop being so naïve.

Q: Why have the world's manufacturers of dry erase markers (whiteboard pens) gone stark raving mad and stopped making yellow? Indeed why have the same 'baboon-brained' manufacturers also stopped making decent pens - at all. I don't mean to insult baboons. They won't even speak to us about it. I can only assume they don't give a flying chisel-tip about any of this.

Holding_tools_-_decision_art

The perfect pen was this. 
(Paper Mate or EXPO – now owned by Sanford – all owned now - by Newell Rubbermaid.) 

I could hold them in my hands all day. They were rubberized, shaped correctly and grippable. Each one had an eraser on it. They were well built and initially had excellent ink coverage.

Now they have stopped making them. The supply chain dried up along with their remaining pens. They choose to leave us stuck with badly designed equipment, low quality ink, ugly and painful to hold pens -  cheaply made unhelpful and crass rubbish that is unfit for the task! We buy boxes of them that just don't work, they are already dry straight out of the box. We are suckered.

I know why.

This is the main tool of my trade so I would be pissed wouldn't I - but it's become an analog for so much tack out there in the world. To me this is the pursuit of profit at all cost. It is the standard cynical abuse by manufacturers in any market when they gain a monopoly.

I've written before about the typical lousy state of meeting room tackle - that’s why I take all my own. The countless badly abused flip charts that are wobbling their way to their graves, shocking and rubbish markers with no ink - products that everyone hates. Countless pens get thrown to the floor by irritated executives who can't get the lid off or on - and when they do they don't work. All of this bollox is contributing to low standards of execution and worse it is ultimately resulting in squalid thinking.

Well WTF!!!

Do something you lousy, lazy, cheapskate, userous dry-erase manufacturing bastards!

Can anyone point me to a quality chisel-tip dry-erase marker with a spectrum of colors (including yellow) that I can call a professional product and that I can actually buy during my lifetime?

Decisive_art_1

Posted via email from Just Thinking!

If Apple Made Cars?

Icar

I will never rent a Citroen C5 again. 

I can't imagine why a motor manufacturer would name a car after Sir Clive Sinclair's failed electric folly but there you have it. The centre of the steering wheel is large, ugly and square, the bit you hold is round. The bit in the middle stays put when you turn the wheel. So if, like me, you hold various parts of the wheel in different ways as you maneouver hairpin bends at 100mph you will break your wrist and fingers with guaranteed and crushing whelps of pain!

Ouch

Utterly ridiculous design. Think about it.

If Apple built a car - oh my goodness. You would be able to see behind and in front of you at the same time. Sideways too. Everyone would marvel as it docked with a shoosh in your house or (with the mobile dock) anywhere the hell you damn well please.

The Sat Nav system is a full HD wind-screen with anti-glare lick my face super gloss device. Angry Birds would be swiped (or pinched) off with a very satisfying flick of your little finger as they hit your screen. There would be a delicious schloop sound. Stephen Fry tweets curious sites of historic or general interest at you - as you wish.

In an iCar you don't need to concentrate on the road, that's handled by the on board magic mouse. You are left free to download apps of your choice and arrive at your destination refreshed and ahead of the pack. You often don't need to travel though because - with Total Surround Screen Technology (TSST) and Telepresence (T) the inside of the iCar is a fully equipped conference venue fully integrated with social media and augmented reality.

There's an app for giving you the impression of driving to the office as fast as Lewis Hamilton - with all the effects but the iCar manages you within the sedate traffic outside via the Slow Leopard OS feature.

C5_21

You can choose whatever weather you would like to be displayed through the sun-roof display. You are adding automatically to Google Earth as you go. Foursquare and Gowalla are in fact sponsoring your fuel - Apple Juice.

It's impossible to get a ticket because the body of iCar is so aerodynamic as to ensure they can't be stuck to it. Traffic wardens are PC anyway so they are completely incompatible anyway.

Traffic jams become enjoyable with the right music for the road conditions. Road movies are unlimited and free.

"We've got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses. Hit it" - Blues Brothers

Auditorium quality sound is played through the seats and directly connected via your Apple 'BodyPad' driving suit. Designed in California - Black Cru Neck and Denim ensemble - BUT - here's the scoop - it's actually a total immersion, multi-media touch sensitive interface to iCar. This comes as standard on the iCar CoupeAir.

All current versions allow you to configure your own dashboards and select your own background colors.

All your devices - wife, husband and kids would fit and operate seamlessly without further configuration. A Ski rack comes as standard and you would get nearly 60 MP3. That's awesome.

The only queues you will meet from now on will be those other folk queuing get their hands on one. Although V.1.0 doesn't allow it, the plan is for future versions to neatly fold away into your shirt pocket and recharge from the heat of your body.

Yes the batteries only last 40 minutes at the moment.

C5

Posted via email from Just Thinking!

Friday 22 April 2011

11 Years Thinking Change

11_years
Really odd that I needed to leave the creative industry to become creative. 

More odd that 11 years on, the more I work with seemingly 'non-creative' industries (Government, Mining, Financial Services, Pharmaceutical Industries for example) the more creative I become - and can be.

These 11 years have been interesting - and while the following 'Ages' are not as crisply segmented as they sound - they are fairly close to what I now know about what creativity really means, and how that emerged.

Year One: The Age of Context. Coming from the creative industry everything was about the idea and its cleverness or the sheer awe of its production. It wasn't essential that it met every dimension and it could be argued (and was) that it didn't need to. I didn't agree. It irked me that I was responsible for solving the wrong problem really well. I needed to think bigger.

Context became a big part of my life. The first year of the business was all about mapping the context and building what is now the Discovery Framework, which was all about the surrounding context within which to think. It often shocked people and me that so much from one industry could be so relevant to another. Many people remarked on how rethinking their own context generated fresh thinking. Creativity. I thought I was onto something.

Year Two: The Age of Facilitation. In the early days I had great friends and colleagues who would facilitate while I sat quietly and built the content into the context of the framework. This was all about 'active-listening' - translating the conversations forced by the contextual frame. It occurred to me that creativity was about knowing where to hunt for the truffles. Where a fresh idea might be lurking - and how to trap and then skin an insight. It meant asking a question and then a better question and then…

I freely admit that I was happier butting in and I couldn't stay quiet. I know I was frustrated and I was frustrating others, but I needed to keep the questions digging deeper and deeper. I needed to actually step it up. The age of facilitation meant I had to move from sitting at a drawing pad in the corner to getting into the art of facilitation. Could I do both? Ask the questions and complete the framework?

Year Three: The Age of Collaborative Endeavour. By now I had been completely seduced by the power of context and the sheer effect a visual interpretation of the conversations was having. We were now beginning to see the importance of having the right people in the program. Inclusion and ownership – engagement and understanding.

We were observing how behaviours were altering in some situations and not others, how groups reacted differently when their leaders were present and how we could leverage these dynamics. At this time we had started to become much more structured and the context was being informed by better thinking ahead of time. We were working within more collaborative systems and architectures. We were growing.

Year Four: The Age Of Structured Thinking. Now it was all starting to make sense. We had become very much more capable of being prepared for the work that was coming along. Bigger and bigger issues, larger and larger enterprises. We could understand the context, we could appreciate the bigger picture. We realised that we knew nothing. That helped.

We seemed able, because of the frameworks and the discussions, to better 'think' about a smarter idea, a new scenario, a more deft turn of phrase or something completely new and fresh. To start to think like this requires this emergence, this journey. We were better able to work together to cause this ideation through the structured and visual surfacing of seemingly curious ideas that then became less curious.

We could analyse these things more objectively and now we started to create decision architectures. We had grown to respect far more what a well considered framework could produce. It didn't restrict creativity it made it happen. Whether we built them ahead of the sessions or during - these 'tools' formed the basis of what we now know why frameworks work to solve issues. We were also starting to be able to describe what we did.

Year Five: The Age of Sustainability. Solving the wrong problems well is a fools errand. It's also what many businesses and Government agencies seem to do repeatedly. In truth we are impartial about all the outcomes of our work as long as they can be sustained. This means putting the ownership and capability of the outcomes into the hands of those who must deliver.

We began to engage on many more levels. The people involved in the thinking process were now far more able to 'own' the process for themselves. This meant that we were able to give them more and more accountability for the outcomes. This work was never about us but enabling real creativity on the part of the team considering the 'exam question' we were debating. Creative problem solving is not an event it must live and be watered often once born. If we don't think sustainably then we solve an event. If we think sustainably we can transform everything.

Year Six: The Age Of Partnering. The approach to solving problems this way kicked off with being impartial to a given outcome. A more creative way to think. I was a client myself and deserved every lame solution I bought. With this business I never wanted us to be a solution that conveniently re-engineered the problem so that it looked valid. Whatever we did - we didn't want the curse of the 'expert' getting in the way of being as creative as we could be.

Around this time we realised that we needed to excel at partnering. We had always had an Expert Network to call on once we had identified the real problem. We needed to be able to leverage skills and resources that did have expertise only once we knew what the actual problem was. In finding excellence in our partners we added to the creativity, to the context and to the power of the whole.

Year Seven: The Age of Visualisation. So yes it's always been a visually biased approach but visual doesn't mean just pictures. Words, phrases, data - they are all visual. We are not a graphic recording or big pictures company. We like information design but we are not an infographic maker. In the late half of the first decade of the 21st Century the world became capable of developing high power, multi-media and fast tools for creativity. We also were given unlimited ability for expression - unlimited white–wall space using 'micro–film' electrostatic paper. This allowed scale and that created immersion and enabled a dramatically more interactive experience.

This era ushered in new 'everything' - Data modelling technology, 3D software for film, social media platforms. They all started to become things we could all master and afford. This changed everything. Creative thinking was possible over long distances, by many more contributors and of course visually! And all of this at such high quality that ideas and contributions could multiply with almost no limit. We could extend the known power of visual decision making and creativity beyond the realms of anything we had known. We did.

Year Eight: The Age of Comparative Patterns. As we started to analyse, archive and codify what we really had achieved we saw yet more clues in our 'story so far'. Not only had we managed to solve the frustrations of developing strategy and transformation for teams - we saw the importance of this kind of creativity for more dimensions than business.

We saw a 21st Century that needed more awareness of the systemic stupidity that caused social unrest and inequity and also the critical issues of climate change, ecological disasters and so on. We coined the phrase - 'ethical/social continuum' - meaning we would work with organisations to help them do better things with more moral outcomes. We became keen to enable others to get greater access to what we had learned and we saw that we had many peers for whom what we did would be familiar/complementary. Systems Thinking, Design Thinking and Value Networks for example.

Year Nine: The Age of Transferring Capability. So we had come a long way and we had proven the approach in over 2500 assignments/interventions. We could see that we could share the value. By now we had had over a hundred companies and individuals ask if they could also use the approach. We hadn't really developed it that way but we always knew we could.

This is still a big work in progress, codifying everything, but we were determined even then. We started to finesse the tools. We started to explain what we do differently and translated it all into English. We had always written about what we did but now we started in earnest making it understandable and less technical. We started to structure the objects and build a scalable architecture. It was a huge undertaking but it is coming to fruition.

Year Ten: The Age of Social Platforms. Our work is purely co-creative. That means it includes all and any input from multiple sources. All stakeholders can and should play. It is facilitative and interactive. It is highly visual and transports those involved to new places and greater value.

The advent of truly accessible global tools like social networks with multi-media rich platforms have revolutionised our ability to deploy all of our dimensions at least to some degree. As they continue to become more powerful and integrated they bring with them their own stimulus and structure for added creativity and input. This is one hell of a ride!

Year Eleven: The Age of Consciousness and Empathy. Standing as we often do between many powerful egos and ambitions we see amazing opportunities for additional value in all this. We are now both more subtle in the discussions and more urgent with the structures - forcing greater tension between the outcomes and the realities of what the enterprise seeks to achieve.

Each of the previous 'Ages' have stayed the course. They are all continuing to define creativity in our assignments. They are all the mainstays of how we create value, increase opportunity and deliver innovation to our chosen markets.

Who knows where next?

Beauty

Posted via email from Just Thinking!

Sunday 10 April 2011

Problem Solving using Visualisation. The Menu!

Pixar2

Well first let's agree what visualisation means. To me it means words, phrases and anything image-based - that we can use to capture, convey, stimulate and align people and their ideas.

And let's agree that 'ideas' are any clear thought, viewpoint or suggestion that moves the dialogue forward within the 'framework' we've chosen to manage this thinking within.

The definition of 'framework' is a simple device that bounds the discussions and forces the teams minds to reason and process (in or out) what is a good - or a not so good - choice.

If it's good we visualise it into the framework. If not then it's not. The team agrees this criteria.

Choices are everything and anything that we know (*) we can carry forward and that each pass the test. The test of being valuable or correct in answering the question we have posed.

The question posed can be anything deemed agreeable to the team to spend quality time discussing. Let's call that the 'exam question'

The questions can be at any altitude - How do we survive as a species? - to How can we create a strategy for the firm? How do we build better customer experiences? - to What is the Vision that will inspire our people and transform our market?

Then all you need is to get people in the room who who give a damn!

(*) Or what we need to know or go and find out through agreed cycles/iterations.

4d_overview_image

Posted via email from Just Thinking!

Saturday 9 April 2011

Getting To Balance. Wabi-sabi!

Dove_of_peace

Often overused word - balance. 

We know we need to be more balanced. Well I agree completely. The yin - the yang. The dark - the light, the masculine - the feminine. Good cop - bad cop. The east – the west. And. I want to explain a more subtle and personal version of it. One that has been in my life forever and I wonder whether it resonates with you!

Because my need to get an idea down is almost a neurosis - I have this frenzy - a thing going off in my head - (in fact my whole body) - I have to scribble - get it down. This rough thing is enough to make me want to rethink it. I will scribble it again. A chicken-scratch in the sand. 

But when I look back it every iteration is still full of meaning to me. Right up to the final thing but not worse or better – just part of the arrangement of things.

Olympism

A diamond in the rough.

Recently I've been contrasting this 'raw material' with fully thought through bits and all the intermediate bits to tell entire stories. This juxtaposition is many times more powerful than a consistent set of things at a consistent standard of finish. Hybrid is good. The roughness of it is somehow much more authentic. Much more approachable. Like a beaten and battered leather armchair is far more comfortable than a new one.

This intrigues me because that's how I feel about everything in my world. The deliberate placement of things that are seemingly careless but just feel right alongside the other thing. This is called 'wabi-sabi' in the Japanese culture and it's genesis is wrapped up with the incredible tea ceremony. Studied carelessness.

I apply this to my work. 

If I could draw a completely accurate and straight line in a strategy session I wouldn't. The imperfections in it denotes a much more natural state. As we work with teams we see a much more human sympathy with the imperfections. I always hated using a ruler in my technical drawing classes. My art teacher told me the ruler was the work of the devil. (I loved my art teacher!) If I enter a place that is just too perfect it makes me uneasy. In fact anything that is aiming to be just perfect is just not. I strongly recommend Leonard Koren's book 'Wabi-Sabi for Artists, Designers, Poets & Philosophers.' It is in many ways a doctrine for my entire world-view.

Just to make my point and to encourage you to find out more about it he describes the universe of wabi-sabi as follows. 
  1. Firstly the Metaphysical Basis – Things are either developing toward or evolving from nothingness. 
  2. The Spiritual Values. Truth comes from the observation of nature. Greatness exists in the inconspicuous and overlooked details. Beauty can be coxed out of ugliness.
  3. The State of Mind. Acceptance of the inevitable. Appreciation of the cosmic order.
  4. Moral Precepts. Get rid of all that is unnecessary. Focus on the intrinsic and ignore material hierarchy.
If you want to buy the book - http://amzn.to/dSaROE If you want to find out more about the dude - visit Leonard Koren's Blog http://www.leonardkoren.com/

In search of a global Wabi-Sabi.

Imagine if this set of characteristics, these values and these ideas, were how we all lived our lives - and how we treated and combatted this increasingly commercial world. What if instead of craving that latest fridge-freezer we didn't. What if these values were how we all felt and – what if the media and the politicians urged these thoughts and not patronising denial, deep crust pizza or train smash TV.

"A comprehensive aesthetic system, its worldview, or universe, is self-referential. It provides an integrated approach to the ultimate nature of existence (metaphysics), sacred knowledge (spirituality), emotional well-being (state of mind), behavior (morality), and the look and feel of things (materiality). The more systematic and clearly defined the components of an aesthetic system are - the more conceptual handles, the more ways it refers back to fundamentals - the more useful it is." - Leonard Koren

I couldn't put it better if I tried. So I won't.

"Wabi-sabi is the Japanese art of finding beauty in imperfection and profundity in nature, of accepting the natural cycle of growth, decay, and death. It's simple, slow, and uncluttered-and it reveres authenticity above all. Wabi-sabi is flea markets, not warehouse stores; aged wood, not Pergo; rice paper, not glass. It celebrates cracks and crevices and all the other marks that time, weather, and loving use leave behind. It reminds us that we are all but transient beings on this planet-that our bodies as well as the material world around us are in the process of returning to the dust from which we came. Through wabi-sabi, we learn to embrace liver spots, rust, and frayed edges, and the march of time they represent." - Tadao Ando

"One grasps the purest essence of a rule or concept by understanding its totality. Then if one desires, the derivative forms may be modified to meet current needs." - Sen no Rikyu 

Posted via email from Just Thinking!

Business & The Holy Grail

Holy_grail

Like many notions these days, the idea of 'NOW' is a fleetingly helpful frame of reference.

For the business 'now' mostly means our current context - a wide definition of now! And yet 'now' must always consider NEXT. The gap between now and next is the plan of how to get there and requires us to think about a few critical things. There is no short-cut to this.

We have to bend our collective minds around the following at least:
  1. What outcome do we want?
  2. How would we measure that?
  3. What's stopping us getting to these outcomes?
  4. What would NEXT look like?
  5. What is vital/imperative to have in place to get there?
  6. What are our strategies and tactics to get there?
  7. How must we re-think our operation and approach to get there?
  8. What does our roadmap need to look like to get there?
Within these major headings comes the more subtle questions around - everything we have to know about our markets, our customers. Conversations about communicating the value, our decision criteria, the distinguishing values, the processes, the systems and the culture we need. Add to this the myriad dimensions/flavours of everyone in the teams opinion and it is a rich discussion.

To make the crucial decisions about strategy in all of this we have to place some bets.

We also have to be as creative as we can be to think beyond how our competitors might think about the same topic. We may even be better off thinking about a better topic.

Just making a better version of the thing that we did before is far less valuable than re-imagining what the better outcome might be anyway. For a better outcome for the enterprise then we need to ask significantly better questions and that demands an open mind and the jettisoning of our prejudices on everything.

To plan a strategy on what we have today and what we know is foolish.

The stuff we do today is probably a commodity. The stuff we think we need to do is probably also fast becoming a commodity. The future strategy has to bend its mind around what really is next. Can we create a new category and vastly out think the competition. Innovation demands we think differently. We have to become alchemists. It's tough.

For example - we need to consider the stuff that gets missed between other stuff. We have to go beyond the stereotypical safety of what we know. Become evangelists for what we can dream that lives outside of our current boundaries. The edge.

So in today's world think long and hard about these three questions.
  • Your customers probably don't know the full extent of what you do so what do you think they think you do? Is that the most valuable – will that keep you ahead?
  • If you could imagine the 'bits' in-between your product and your competitors product - and describe the gap between that and what your customers would REALLY like - what would that be?
  • If we could create value in-between the spaces created by our products and our competitors products what would we call that category and can we own that/build that before everyone else?

PS: I wanted to share this - most recent visual tour through what we are up to about all this. "Changing the way business thinks and works to maximise opportunity in the 21xt Century." Nothing small and yet a rapid, simple and logical approach that works.

Thursday 7 April 2011

Mind's On Fire - Part 1 (Extracts from a Discussion With Myself)

My_mind

Although I'm very clear about a 'thing' - there is always the risk of not knowing where to start describing the thing. Anything. I'm talking to myself. Inside my head. Sometimes I'm not listening to myself. Am I making myself clear? No.

I will picture a 'thing' and it will be clear - and whole - and stunningly crafty. As I try to give it form though it will be stillborn, exceptionally dull and scare cats with its ugly and corrugated appearance.

I've realised that I'm very uncomfortable in that final half hour before the session days start. When I'm waiting for the team to turn up for the sessions. They arrive and are often nervous - and that transmits itself into the space. My space. It makes me uncomfortable. I can start to blather about rubbish at that point. A bit like at dinner parties. No agenda. Just small talk. 

I try to make sure I am still working at something so I can avoid this aimless chatter and start the sessions clean. I would just fidget and ruin it otherwise.

I'm now depressed with the lack of memory I have to focus. Do I need an upgrade? Am I on the latest version? I'm good at saying yes to the latest automatically available upload. Have I missed one? Crap.

I got there by train.

I wonder what the person opposite me is thinking. They are sitting transfixed, almost entranced - with a free newspaper in their hand, iPod in their ear, doing their nails, eating a burger - and texting something. We reach the platform. I get out. I move to another platform. More people flashing by, all looking at their iPhones, burgers or the floor. I dodge. I'm good at it. I'm a bullfighter.

I know that I am pushing this point a little too much. The audience agrees with the words. The data supports the claim. They got it so why are you banging on? They are nodding! Yes but I can see someone frowning. I can't carry on unless I know what's going on in her head!

I'm now on the Tube.

The stimulus of this scene always makes me enquire to myself - what are these people really like. I would be certain to like a bunch of them - and yet I never will. It would take an unfortunate and cataclysmic issue, a horrendous event or some chance 'happening' like a heart attack to make us make contact.

If only we could create a platform, a structure that everyone might collaborate around that asked for all to contribute to a simpler story. If we want to get there (Z) and we are here (A) then let's think about these 6 or so big factors. Then a more intelligent journey would be the outcome right? Why doesn't that make sense?

Bizarre to consider.

Considerably increasing that slim chance to meet these people would be the internet and the social nature of that platform and media. I may even know the people I'm looking at now (on-line) for all I know. How about that! I would know them because they share an interest, passion or idea that caused us to connect. In a thread or comment or by clicking 'Like', 'Follow' or 'Friend'. A sixth platform in one day.

London is great when the sun is shining and it's warm. It is also fabulous when there are big thunderstorms and the sky is black and I am in my apartment looking at the river becoming wild. It's especially nice when I get back into London from the wilds of 'Not London'. I'm so familiar with this platform.

That gives me ideas.

And the trouble with ideas are that we cannot quite explain them. We have them, rather like dreams - then they're gone. Or in the describing of them they take on other forms. So when we think them through we have to visualize them in writing and drawings. Or they are diminished.

I have to get everything clear and in shape before I tackle this next bigger challenge. I know I would rather be doing something differently but I have to do that. I'm hungry.

I love social media but am I social?

I draw strategies. These are a bunch of ideas being mashed together through my idea of a rigorous logical structure. I'm always astonished at how hard it is for people to think this logically. If you want to go from A to Z then you have to consider B,C,D etc.

But for some reason people don't immediately default to much that is logical or sequenced.

I shake my head and I'm back.

What?

Posted via email from Just Thinking!