Archive for the ‘Entrepreneurship’ Category

The Rudy Defense

Monday, December 19th, 2011

When my son, Adam, was 12 years old, his AAU basketball team played in a tournament in Las Vegas. The boys were having a hard time in the tournament, and their coaches wanted them to stay upbeat. So on the morning of the tournament’s final day, the coaches lined up a conference room at our hotel and played the classic sports movie “Rudy” during the team breakfast. This put everyone in a good mood. The boys were getting up to leave the room and I said, “Wait a second, everybody stay in your seats,” flung open the door and announced, “Boys, meet the real Rudy!” I will never forget the looks on the faces of that team and those coaches when my pal bounced into the room. I guarantee that no one remembers what happened on the basketball court in that tournament, and that everyone remembers the pep talk they got from Rudy, about aiming high and never giving up. This post is written in gratitude for the gift Rudy gave my son and his teammates that day…

GameChangers - 031

Rudy and me a couple of years ago at Notre Dame

A story broke last week about Rudy Ruettiger, title character in the film, Rudy, running afoul of the SEC because of a sketchy foray into the beverage business a few years ago. Rudy is a friend of mine, and has been since our days at Notre Dame. And I can tell you this:

My path crossed Rudy’s a couple of times when he was involved in the ‘Rudy Revolution’ (name of the drink) fiasco. I actually drank a couple of cans of the stuff. (It was okay, on a par with other energy drinks, taste-wise.) He believed in his beverage with the same fervor he has for everything he does. Rudy, as we all do, may have human failings, but lack of conviction isn’t one of them. Naivete might be his failing in this instance, but it’s not a crime.

And while I don’t know any of Rudy’s partners in the drink project, what kinds of promises they made investors, or how they spent the money they raised, I can tell you that Rudy himself was focused on manufacturing and marketing the drink. Never once did he talk to me about stock, or about how his partners were raising money. He was all about the drink.

The incontrovertible truth (to use a phrase from Rudy the movie) is that Rudy, his partners, and their investors were flying into the teeth of a market locked up  by Coca-Cola and the other beverage giants, and $11M–the ‘profit from their scam’ according to the SEC—is not anywhere near enough money to impact that market, especially one jammed with so many other competitors trying to get a piece of a lucrative pie. I personally know three other groups that were trying to launch a new drink in that same time frame, and all three investments tanked.

I know that, based on Wal-mart’s response to their initial pitch, Rudy’s team spent lot of time and money re-concocting Rudy Revolution to be a nutrition drink instead of an energy drink, which was their original intention. After which Wal-mart rejected them again, this time because they could not manufacture in sufficient capacity to be a Wal-mart supplier. I know that Rudy’s team had trouble trying to get even short runs of manufacturing, as bottlers were working in round-the-clock shifts just to meet demand for Monster, Rockstar and other established brands. Rudy told me his team was desperately trying to make output deals so they could get distribution, and were getting nowhere. I know that a potential partnership with a North Carolina bottler fell through because Rudy’s group and the bottler could not, together, raise the money to build and operate a new plant devoted solely to making Rudy Revolution.

The reality: any business plan that trades on the fame of a minor sports celebrity and banks on Wal-mart distribution is a lousy business plan, but if lousy business plans (and all their fictions) are illegal, most MBA schools should be on 24-hour lockdown.

I last saw Rudy a couple of months ago in Vegas. He told me at the time that he’d settled up with the SEC, so the reality is that this story is old news. In fact, Rudy did the honorable thing.

My intuition is that the SEC went after Rudy because he’s not politically connected, and an easy target. Nabbing a naive public figure like Rudy is a lot simpler, and plays a lot better in Forbes, than taking on Wall Street and the banking industry, where the ‘pump and dump’ heists are worth billions and the criminals are shrewd and politically connected, and much less inclined to settle up honorably. Right SEC? The bigtime miscreants, for whom $11M is probably the cost of one U.S. Senator’s election, are still in the game.

Birds on the Brooklyn Bridge

Sunday, October 2nd, 2011

Occupy Wall Street is, I think, a protest against Unsustainable Games (UGs).

When people say ’sustainability,’ they can be referring to a lot of different cosmetic concepts (monetary policy, geothermal energy, funding for education or manufacturing, urban gardening, solar power, vegetarianism, LED lighting, gender and sexual equality, etc. etc. etc.). In fact, we know this ‘multi-causism’ to be characteristic of the OWS scene. The meta concept is, for all these causes, the same: Are you playing constructive or de-constructive games? Zero sum or positive sum games? Are your games sustainable or not? OWS is, ultimately, itself a game, one designed to focus attention on the UGs of Wall Street.

The protesters arrested yesterday on the Brooklyn Bridge represent the most creative generation living in the most creative nation on earth. No doubt they have roots in every language, race, religion, culture, science, art form and evolutionary instinct in the human species. And daily, on Manhattan Island, they are forced to confront the 1-percenters who control 99 percent of the nation’s wealth, people who are, for the most part, not creators, but extractors. That’s what their games are designed to do—-extract. These people getting arrested on the Brooklyn Bridge? they’re doing it to point out the difference between where the money is and where it needs to be for us to get a bigger bang out of the creativity they represent. 99 percent of our creativity belongs to 99 percent of the people. That’s a biological fact, Jack. It’s the ultimate sustainable resource. The protesters know this and are calling it to our attention with one of the games they and their friends originated, flash mobbing.

The OWS players understand that if the ratio of ‘99 percent of the wealth to 1 percent of the people’ ratio stays where it is, we will never get out the doldrums economically, because we’re getting no Return on Creativity. No ROC. Because we are putting most of our money where 99 percent of our creativity isn’t. For the ratio to change, the game must change. The OWS players grew up on games. They are the gamingest people in the history of the world. You think they don’t know a bad game when they see one? Wall Street plays bad games. They want game change.

Game change will come about only when we find ways to invest in the creativity of the 99 percent. We cannot afford to have the most creative Americans sitting on the bench right now. We need them in the game. Just not the old games. New ones. The OWS players are screaming at the coaches to put them into a game they can play.

The old game, in addition to being unsustainable, has left a bitter taste in the mouth of the world. Those protesters sitting on the Brooklyn Bridge? They’re bitter too. They’re bitter because they have the ability to change the game and they know it. They understand the scope of the work ahead, and are in a hurry to get on with it.

They have good taste, let them cook with it, and bring the world to our table again.  They have stories to tell that are not the same old stories, let them tell them. They have visions that are not blueprints of the past, let them build them. They hear music that has never been sung and have crazy ideas that no one else would even think of attempting. Let them sing. Let them try. We need that now. We need them. And every day the ‘1 percent to 99 percent ratio’ stays where it is, we are one step closer to losing them.

They are getting arrested for squatting on a symbol of America’s great creative past like birds who have come home to roost, when what they really want to do is fly.OWS1

The Cynical Girl

Friday, September 30th, 2011

Laurie Reuttimann came to my attention a couple of years ago when I was looking for gamechangers in the HR field and her blog, Punk Rock HR (tagline: “Teamwork is for suckers.”), snagged my attention. Her stuff was hilarious, honest, and in an envronment that can be obsessed with compliance and normative behaviors, breathtakingly contrarian. She retired Punk Rock HR in June, 2011, and today, goes by the handle of Cynical Girl. CynicalGirlHeader1

I could give you a million reasons why Laurie Reuttimann is a gamechanger, I’ll give you one. She understands the difference between business objectives and business outcomes. So often, we muddle the two, and think they are the same thing. They are not.CynicalGirlHeader2

Laurie’s objective with ‘The Cynical Girl game’ is to,”build a portfolio career. You should build one, too,” she writes in her last Punk Rock HR post.

The outcomes will be things like people changing their own games, finding work, passing her links around, friending and following her online, sharing an occasional smile, and using our newfound cynical outlooks to not automatically buy into the bullshit, especially our own.CynicalGirlHeader3

Objectives are singular. Outcomes are infinite. Focus on objectives to realize outcomes.

Or don’t. The Cynical Girl doesn’t give a damn. She’s too busy babysitting cats to babysit you.CynicalGirl1

Red Shoe State

Monday, September 26th, 2011

A good friend of ours grew up in a big family in the Midwest, the Middle Child of nine children. Five of Nine. As happens with Middle Children, he got the least attention of all the children, except when he did something out of the ordinary, or when the Oldest Boy needed someone to pound on after their dad had pounded on him.

Being extraordinary became a way of life for our friend. To this day, it doesn’t matter what scene he’s in, it doesn’t have to be world-shaking, it can be as simple as taking a walk in a park, he will find a way to make that walk unlike any other walk through any other park. Today, he and his family live in a beautiful home on Mullholland Drive overlooking Los Angeles, he is a millionaire many times over, and a philanthropist with a giving heart, especially for people who get pounded by life.

Earlier this year, I met the Oldest Boy, now a middle-aged man who still lives in the Midwest, who struggles to keep their old family business alive, and exudes disappointment and alcohol. He told me a story about the Middle Child:

“My parents and I went to visit him after he’d moved to Los Angeles,” said the Oldest Boy, “He and [his wife] had no money. They pretty much didn’t know where their next meal was coming from. He didn’t even have a decent pair of shoes to wear. So my parents said, ‘Let’s go get you a pair of shoes anyway,’ and we took him to a shoe store and let him pick out a pair of shoes, and he picked out a pair of red shoes! Red shoes! The guy’s going to have one good pair of shoes and he picks out red ones?!’ The Oldest Boy laughed at this as if the Middle Child had done something incredibly stupid, something that was still worth teasing him about, maybe even pounding him for.

Back when it could have changed his life, the truth was right there in front of the Oldest Boy, and he missed it. What he missed was his younger brother’s knack for doing things that were out of the ordinary. Our success comes from consistently making extraordinary choices. Those choices do not have to change the world to be extraordinary, they only have to change the game. When you can only pick one pair of shoes, pick the red ones.RedShoes1

Why Arianna Is Only Half a Player

Wednesday, September 21st, 2011

She sold her HuffPost to AOL for $315M, and didn’t offer as much as a thank you note, forget about any money, to the people who, like myself, had posted most of the content that created the value behind her brand.

Today, the HuffPost ran this headline:HuffPostGameChangers1

GameChangers LLC owns the trademark ‘GameChangers’ in 17 different trade categories, including business education, seminars, improvisation for business, training, etc. I’m not going to say that HuffPost’s repeated use of the phrase ‘Game Changers’ in its editorial violates our trademark (though I implied it in a snarky comment on her story today). And I don’t know for sure, the difference, litigationally speaking, between ‘GameChangers’ and ‘Game Changers’ with the words spaced. We don’t own the phrase, didn’t coin it, and lots of people use it–including every sports announcer who ever lived, and the Bloomberg Network, which DOES for sure tromp on our trademark (but how are we going to sue or even slow down a billionaire politician’s billion-dollar company in the legal arena? If you’ve got ideas, let me know.)

I do know that last year my HuffPost producer, Willow Bay, brought up to Arianna the HuffPost’s use of the ‘Game Changers’ branding and proposed a conversation between the two of us about a possible collaboration. Nothing. Zippo. We shouted into the maw and got nary and echo.

In improvisation, we honor taking. You’ve got to take strongly, and politeness has nothing to do with it. Be aggressive. Play hard. Go for it. Claim turf. ‘Take care of yourself first,’ in the words of the legendary teacher, Mick Napier.

The thing is, we honor giving, too, and if anything, we honor it more. Yes-and. Connect. Make others look good.  Share the narrative. Give gifts.  Politeness, the consideration of others, has a lot to do with it.

One without the other makes you only half a player.

This is just my experience speaking, it does not represent any kind of larger dataset, for all I know Arianna has given $314M to Sloan-Kettering Hospital since February. It is pretty direct experience, though, so it must mean something. What it means to me is that Arianna is Half a Player. She’s fantastic at taking, and needs to work on her giving.AriannaHuff1

De-Severance

Tuesday, September 13th, 2011

Dr. David Boje, the author of Storytelling Organizations, is on the faculty in the College of Business at New Mexico State University, and he is also a skilled blacksmith, who comes up with many of his ideas while he’s working in his forge. Among his creations are kung-fu swords forged using 1075 high carbon steel. Boje uses the phrase ‘de-severance’ to describe the work of the blade. By this, he means that the purpose of the blade is not cleaving, but connecting–connecting fire and steel, art and craft, action and purpose, history with the moment of creation. The act of de-severance connects a blacksmith in Las Cruces, N.M. in 2011, with every other blacksmith who ever forged a blade at any time, for any reason.

As you go about your business today, wielding a sword forged by your your authority, your education, your responsibility, your intelligence and experience, don’t think of this sword as a severing device that you use to slice, dice, and eviscerate. Don’t go medieval on anyone’s ass, or be chopping off  heads to generate fear among the populace. Instead, think of this sword of yours as a de-severing device, a weapon of compassion, one that joins–SwordsCollage1

the fire of purpose with the steel of structured action;

the art of entrepreneurship with the craft of leadership;

the genius of others with your own;

your history and your future;

your intuition and your intellect;

your character and your role;

your brand and your customers.

A weapon of choice isn’t the same thing as a choice of weapons. How you choose to use your weapon is way more important than what weapon you choose to use.

Embrace Eccentricity

Tuesday, September 6th, 2011

Had a great talk today with Betsy Baytos, one of the most creative people I know. Her creativity defies categorization. After beginning her career as a Disney animator, she went on to dance on Broadway in Stardust, she designed the Coca-Cola Polar Bear, she was Sesame Street’s dancing Betsy Bird, she has designed all of Jimmy Buffett’s Parrothead merchandise for the past 16 years, she did dance choreography for characters in Disney’s Princess and the Frog. Since the mid-Nineties, she’s been putting together interviews and collecting footage for a film documentary, Funny Feet and Rubber Legs, about the history of ‘eccentric dancing’ and its relationship to modern hip-hop and break dancing. Oh, and a project with Shirley MacLaine that’s so crazy good, I laughed out loud when she described it.

“You’ve got to do a lot of different things,” she said.

“There’s a lot of fear in business. Most people are held back from their creativity by their fear. They focus on the most insignificant things. It’s such a waste.”

“The answers aren’t found in technology.”

The talk with Betsy was a reminder that creativity has no natural boundaries. We build the barriers around it ourselves. The limits of our creative potential are all self-constructed. The good news is that if we built the barriers, we can also break them down. So give yourself the Baytos Test: Confront your fear. Quiet your ego. Kick your subjectivity and self-consciousness in the ass. Embrace your eccentricity…and dance! Doors will open, and you won’t even have to knock.BetsyBaytos1

ERGO YOUR IDEA

Tuesday, June 21st, 2011

The first time I experienced demand for new system architectures was when we had eight ‘information architects’ on the staff of our internet company, iXL, from 1997-2000, and they were booked solid  for most of that time. We all loved working with them. It was the ultimate white board exercise. They were the first people in the history of the world to have this particular job, and so, with absolutely no standards to which they had to be held, they excelled. People like Josh Galban (today, a product designer at MatchCraft), Ben Bratton (an urban architecture professor and writer-in-residence at UCSD) and Anuradha Sachdev (an experience designer at iCrossing) were among the infonauts who guided us toward  those early user experiences. Because there was no ’stock’ of knowledge about their nascent profession, they had no choice but to learn, and what they learned has been enriching them, their co-workers and their employers ever since.

I think there is a similar need for game designers in business today.

Networked structures and systems are as different from Industrial Age systems as a jellyfish is from a jetty. Networked companies must adapt. Continually differentiate their brands. Quickly recognize and act on opportunity in a constantly-morphing business environment.

Networked companies absorb and ride change like seagulls adjust to the wind.

Continuing our trip to the beach…a rigid, hierarchical approach to business has about as much chance in this environment as a sand castle does at high tide. The flow of change is that strong, that tidal. The new structures must be fluid, like the roiling environment they navigate every day. Fortunately for us human beings, we are 90% water. Fluidity is in our nature. It’s there. All we have to do is recognize and embrace it.

Games are among the most dynamic and productive structures that can be introduced to a system. They legitimize authority, lend themselves to accountability and encourage autonomy–energies that must work in concert for a networked organization to succeed.

At GameChangers, we design improvisation games to help clients achieve their business objectives. Our definition of a game is E-R-G-O. Environment, Roles, Guidelines and Objective(s). If you can define those, game on.

Ideas are cheap; execution is hard. Games require execution. An idea is like a game that’s never been played. We never consider an idea–for either ourselves or our clients–without looking at it through the ERGO lens. Whether an idea is any good or not is a a subjective discussion. The experience of playing a game, by contrast, can be analyzed objectively.

GC_GameGrfx1In a networked world, the power of an idea, its ultimate meaning, resides in ‘how much game’ it’s got. How much ‘play’ it generates. Games create focus. Elevate performance. Stir emotions. Reward innovation. They result in great stories. The value proposition is the size of Monstro the Whale.

(NEXT: POOR GAME, RICH GAME)

Walking Western Avenue

Monday, June 6th, 2011

We live and work in what you’d call the northern edge of South-Central Los Angeles, in one of the city’s oldest neighborhoods, West Adams.  Western Avenue, the main north-south artery nearest us, is one of my favorite streets in Los Angeles. If you want to get a feel for this city, there’s no better way to do it than to travel the length of Western Avenue.  From the exclusive girls school up in the hills on its northern end to the hustle and flow of the ‘hood in the south, and every immigrant dream in between, Western is a ribbon of culture lining the belly of this beast of a city.

PFFlyers1I’m doing a photo essay on Western Avenue for a client of ours. In walking Western yesterday, I had all kinds of rewarding encounters. A street poet named Ron shared a poem he wrote, called Shine that was amazing; a restaurant owner grilling chicken on the sidewalk shared stories of his adventures in the real estate biz; a beauty shop owner opened the door after hours to pose for a photo; a kid showed me his python; another kid getting a tattoo showed me his cool shoes–PF Flyers, a brand I used to wear when I was a kid!; a clothing entrepreneur named Prince confided his strategy for pumping up slow sales; a dude named Noon and I had a half-hour discussion on privacy issues, the school system, the prison system, and the relations between the police and the people of South Central–all because he wouldn’t let me take his picture.

No matter how deeply we dive into virtual worlds and other dimensions of reality, walking around and having conversations with folks is still the best way to learn something you didn’t know.

As Viola Spolin said, “Act on environment, and environment will act on you.”

The Flickinger Factor

Tuesday, May 17th, 2011

FlickFactor1Once upon a time, I met Clem Flickinger, 93 years old, who was the same age as his neighbor, Walt Disney, when they were boys growing up in Marcelline, Missouri. Clem told me that when they were six years old, Walt had an idea for the two of them to stage a circus in the basement of Walt’s house. “The only act we had was Walt’s mom’s cat, which Walt could get to sit on a stool,” Clem said. “The only customer was me. Walt charged me a dime, which was the only money I had. When Walt’s mom found out that he had taken my dime, she made him give it back to me.”

This was the stuff on which an empire was built.

The empire wasn’t predicated on the making of money. Young Walt quite literally did not make a dime. There was a transaction. Money changed hands. But the lasting value, what remained after the dime had been added and subtracted, was elsewhere.

The value was in the creation of a memorable experience, resulting in a story that was still wonderful in Clem Flickinger’s telling almost 90 years later.

The value was in working with animals, and making them characters in your narrative.

The value was in getting your friend and neighbor to play along.

The value was in using the material you had available to you. Cat+ Basement+Stool=Circus!

The value was in gaining the entrepreneurial resolve to hang onto the next dime that came your way.

The value was in getting your family involved.

[Walt was the male runt of the Disney litter, nine years younger than the next oldest boy, Roy, and 12 or 14 years younger than the oldest boys, Herb and Ray. On a family farm like theirs, a six-year-old was practically a non-entity. No doubt Walt's circus got him some attention at the supper table that night, even if it was getting his no-nonsense dad, Elias, riled up again, like earlier that summer when Walt had talked his little sister, Ruthie, into helping him paint a city skyline on the side of the Disney farmhouse with roofing tar, which had earned Walt a righteous spanking.]

There was value in breaking a routine that got you no attention.

Around the same time I met Clem, I listened to a set of rare tapes in the Disney Studio archives, recorded in the mid 1950s, of Walt giving an oral history of the studio. A ghost-writer recorded him as research for book to be called My Dad Walt Disney, which would be serialized in LOOK Magazine under the byline of Walt’s 12-year-old daughter, Diane. In those recordings, Walt had a charming way of tracking his studio’s financial fortunes. As he listed the films the studio had made, he’d say [for example], “Well now, let’s see, Dumbo cost us one [million], and it made one and a half. Bambi cost us one and a half and it made two, so we made a half. Make Mine Music cost us one, but it only made a half, so we lost money on that one.”

Sitting atop an empire worth millions, and soon, with the launch of Disneyland in 1955, about to be worth a lot more, there was still a lot of value in a single digit.

Irving Ludwig, the distribution mastermind from New York, who had triggered the 1960s boxoffice revival of Fantasia (which had been a flop when first released in 1940), and had later moved to Burbank to run Disney’s distribution arm, Buena Vista, once told me that his boss, Roy Disney, paid generous rebates worth millions of dollars to the exhibitors who profited from the Fantasia revival, because, as Roy explained it, “they stuck with us when the studio wasn’t doing as well as it is today.” The value of loyalty, and the relationship with their business partners was worth more to the Disneys than a financial windfall that was, contractually, theirs to collect.

It’s not that the money doesn’t matter. It does. But it’s just a footnote to the creation of lasting value. When you understand what builds and sustains the business, it can be okay, or even good for the business, to ‘give back the dime.’

I call this difference between the value of the transaction and the value of the experience the Flickinger Factor. It is the Flickinger Factor, and not the money, that is ultimate measure of your achievement. Your narrative. Your brand. Your legacy in the world.

So what are you doing today that might be making people smile 90 years from now?