Archive for the ‘story’ Category

What is a Theme?

Monday, July 11th, 2011

SarahLawrence2Last week GameChangers got hired to conduct a ‘thematic exploration’ of a client’s brand. Most of us, at one time or another in our educational lives, if not our working lives, have had to wrestle with themes. What are they? And, when it comes to business, what purpose do they serve?SarahLawrence6

Themes are Big Ideas. That’s part of it, but only part of it–because ideas can get too big, and, like a balloon so large it cannot be inflated, they will never find their definition, nor serve their purpose.

‘Stardom’ is a Big Idea. So is ‘Food.’ They are not themes. They are un-inflatable balloons, weighted down with so much meaning we can never get them off the ground. What makes a Big Idea buoyant? What gives it definition and gets it off the ground? Explorability.SarahLawrence5

The Big Idea must be Explorable (by at least two people at any one time). When a theme is Explorable, we can map to it. It can help guide us, and give us our bearings. At any given time, we can assess our position with regards to it. Themes, by virtue of their Explorability, suggest action. We can do something about them, through them, with them.SarahLawrence3

‘Reality Show Stardom’ is a theme. ‘Food of Love’ is a theme. (‘Love of Food’ is another theme altogether.) When a Big Idea is Explorable, we can tell, and others can tell, objectively, whether we are engaged with the Big Idea or not. If we are studying dance at Sarah Lawrence, we are, in all probability, not exploring the theme of ‘Reality Show Stardom.’ It’s easy, by contrast, to imagine a hundred moves that do explore that theme. If we propose marriage over dinner, we’re sailing in the ‘Food of Love’ balloon. If we’re eating Cheerios and checking the box scores from last night’s game, we’re in a different balloon. Explorability gives Big Idea shape and definition, and carries us into new territory.SarahLawrence4

Which brings us to the business purpose of a theme:

The exploration of a Theme transports us. That, by itself, would be enough to make the exploration of a theme a valuable exercise. The buoyancy inherent in a Big Explorable Idea gives wings to our actions and adds to our sense of purpose. If a theme is strong, rather than get lost in the exploration of an idea,we have the potential to discover ourselves it it.

There’s a second big reason that Themes are important to business and brands: Themes are the glue that bind your brand to your customers. They are common ground that you explore together. Social media are the mechanisms, a garage full of vehicles, so to speak. Themes define the conceptual, physical and virtual territory you and your customers can explore together.

The narrative belongs to the customer. By exploring Themes that are authentic to your brand and relevant to your customers, you increase the probability that your product will play a meaningful role in their lives.

All photos in this post are from http://www.slc.edu/graduate/programs/dance/

All photos in this post are from http://www.slc.edu/graduate/programs/dance/

Fresh Quote

Sunday, June 12th, 2011
Jason Terry

Jason Terry

Interviewed after his Dallas Mavericks’ victory tonight over the Miami Heat for the NBA championship, their star shooting guard Jason Terry was asked how they did it, and he said (I’m paraphrasing)…

“We found a home for everybody’s stories. Everybody’s story came together here. Dirk (Nowitzki’s), Jason (Kidd’s), mine, Shawn Marion’s, Stojakovich, Berea, Tyson Chandler, Deshawn Stevenson’s–all our stories, together, made this happen.”

This is a really great expression of a team concept, especially, for a pro athlete in the wake of a big victory, when the cliche is to spout cliches, thank God and sponsors, credit the opponent for a hard-fought game, and then say something about going to Disneyland. A quote about the secret to the Dallas Mavericks’ success that they that they built a narrative consisting of all their individual stories? That’s an athlete’s voicing  fresh thought. And it’s an idea that can benefit any organization.

We saw this theme again seconds later when the Mavericks’ owner, Mark Cuban, deferred to the team’s previous owner and founder, Fred Carter, by asking Mr. Carter to accept the championship trophy. When Cuban was interviewed by the TV announcer, he couldn’t get the team’s coach, Rick Carlisle, to the mike quick enough. For someone known to love the sound of his own sound bites, this ‘best supporting actor’ role is a new one for Cuban, and he wears it well.

The Miami Heat, by contrast, are a team of individual stories that have not yet found a way to co-create a championship narrative. In the wake of the season, the stories about them will be all about divisiveness, disappointment and unfulfilled promise,  about who was responsible and who should take the fall.  The team’s stories, in other words, will continue to exist independently of one another, without really benefitting the franchise brand.

Your company, your brand, your team, isn’t a single story, it is a narrative composed of all your stories, and your customers’ stories, too. Evolved leaders like Jason Terry and Mark Cuban don’t inflict their story on the organization, but rather, create an environment in which individual stories can flourish in the shared pursuit of the business objectives.

Well-said, Mr. Terry! Well-played, Mavs!

Rory’s Story Cubes

Tuesday, May 31st, 2011

Recently, Reyne Rice of Toy Trends gave me this wonderful gift, a game created in Ireland called Rory’s Story Cubes. It’s super simple to play and endlessly complex in terms of its outcomes. I don’t know what makes a better game than that. And at $7.30 a set, how can you NOT?IMG_3940

The game consists of nine dice, each die with six different icons, 54 in all. Players roll the dice, line up the nine icons they’ve rolled, and tell a story the icons inspire. There are of course all sorts of variations on this version of the game. When Reyne gave me the Story Cubes at lunch she rolled her dice and told a story that involved her background in improvisation and theater. When my turn came, we changed the rule to be: one person rolls the dice, we take turns putting them in order, and then take turns telling the story, with our turn telling the story coming on the dice the other person has placed in the queue.

A couple of days after Reyne gave the gift, I was with a friend who was working through some difficult career choices. I still had the Story Cubes in my bag. I handed them to the friend, and suggested he roll the dice and tell a story about the next year of his professional life. The story he told was amazing and inspiring. What was muddled in his mind became suddenly very clear. What was clear was not the story itself. What was clear is that no matter what kind of roll of the dice he gets, he will have ability to author his own story. And it can be a good one.

Games are a device for exploring narratives. Good games yield good stories like Ireland grows shamrocks. Thank you, Reyne!  Roll on!StoryCubes1

Quantum Narrative, Take 2

Monday, May 30th, 2011

(Note: This is a re-write of a post from January, 2010, which was a typically (for me) crappy and muddled first draft. The re-write is a contribution to an upcoming seminar on “Quantum Physics and Storytelling’ at the University of Bath, which came to my attention via the Storyhood site belonging to PhD candidate, Mike de Kreek, whose work focuses on the relationship between neighborhoods and stories.)

I.  Story

Watson and Crick

Watson and Crick

We create and share stories as a way of interpreting our experiences and making sense of the world. Stories turn chaos into cosmos. Our ‘story sense’ guides us through life. Stories are the basis of community. They energize our relationships. Shape our careers. Filter our music. Impact everything from our spiritual beliefs, to the schools we attend, to the products we patronize.

It is through stories that we assign meaning to objects and events.

DNA, for example, became meaningful on a global scale in 1953, in a story told by scientist-storytellers Watson and Crick in a brand-new, double-helixed protein-based language. Before 1953, scientists knew the DNA story existed, but they didn’t have the tools to see it, the language to describe it, or the storytellers to make it mean something to the masses.

The discovery of DNA—as with any kind of breakthrough in human consciousness—poses an interesting ‘tree falls in the woods’ question. Before we tell a story about something, does it have meaning?

Was DNA ‘meaningful’ before 1953? Definitely. Had to be. Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid was doing its thing before we had the words to describe what the thing was. So if we weren’t telling stories about DNA, how was its ‘invisible meaning’ expressed?

II. Narrative

Here is my theory: Before it gets expressed as a story (and after, too) meaning resides in narratives.

A narrative is a flow of events connected to a theme.

A story is the conscious structuring of events to elicit meaning.

Before anybody ever put the letters DNA into a meaningful sequence, there was this theme, call it, ‘What Are We Made Of?’—a theme as old as the first time a mother wondered what made her babies look different from one another.  Any and all events connected to this theme comprise its narrative.

Before DNA came into being, its meaning was already present in the ‘What Are We Made Of?’ narrative.

Before 1953 and the birth of the DNA story, this potent narrative produced such meaningful artifacts as Mendel’s genetics experiments with pea plants, Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings’ offspring, X-rays, ancient Egyptian seeds that had been placed in fermenting yeast to alter their growing traits—and the musings of every mother who ever wondered what made her babies look different from one another.

A narrative connected to a meaningful theme like ‘What Are We Made Of?’ has transformative potential.

We need this distinction between story and narrative because thanks to the internet, we have the tools to experience and the language to express meaning as never before. Things that meant something before the internet don’t mean as much now. And things that didn’t exist two years ago mean a lot today. We live an an Age of Meaning, and narratives, as the ultimate source of meaning, are ultra-important to our understanding of the networked world.

How narratives live in networks will a huge factor in how we connect and engage with one another, how we make sense of, and transform, the world in the 21st century.

III. Artifacts

In addition to stories, narratives deliver meaning in all kinds of other media—memes for example. Memes are not stories, but are important to how we connect with one another in networks. A hamster eating popcorn and a dancing baby are not stories. A rumor is not a story. A headline is not a story. A link isn’t. A tweet isn’t. A status isn’t. A sales transaction, in and of itself, isn’t. Yet these forms and many others can, like stories, hold meaning and therefore they have value. We call stories and all the other meaningful media generated by narratives ‘artifacts.’

Artifacts are memorable, shareable expressions of narratives.

The popular meme of a hamster eating popcorn is an expression of a narrative with a theme we could call ‘Loveable Pets.’ We smile at a dancing baby because it’s a quick glimpse of a narrative with the theme ‘Precocious Children.’

All narratives contain enough meaning to generate a practically limitless quantity of artifacts. What hangs in the balance is the quality of the narrative. Does it inspire or repress? Is it productive or reductive?

IV. Narratology

Our ability to store and experience narratives in networks has opened a new era in the ‘narrative sciences’–filmmaking, journalism, theater, business communication, publishing, branding, education, gaming, etc.—that mirrors what happened to the science of physics in the early part of the previous century.

‘Narratologists’ today are discovering, like Einstein’s community of physicist friends did, that stuff is connected in ways we had not previously had the ability to imagine. Networks abound with invisible and non-linear (the U.S. military calls them ‘asymmetrical’) relationships that have the potential to mushroom in a heartbeat into massive manifestations of energy with the power to create and destroy worlds.  Conceptual worlds. Virtual worlds. Physical worlds.

The distinction between story and narrative is also important because in a networked environment, it is increasingly difficult, perhaps impossible, for any one individual, organization or agency to script, and control stories and other artifacts efficiently. That is how business used to get done. When the number of communication channels were finite, ‘script-and-control’ models were optimal. This is no longer true. Your network’s appetite is bigger than what you can feed it purely in the form of scripted-and-controlled content.

Continual co-creation is essential.

V. Script-and-Control vs. Continual Co-Creation

With an infinite number of channels available to us, narratologists can put new, more flexible story strategies into play. In this environment, ‘co-creation’ models are optimal. Continual improvisation and collaboration are required. In the new narrative-focused models, the emphasis is not on authorship, but on participation. Communication is not a matter of control, but of liberation.  Only a co-creation model can generate enough meaning to satisfy a robust network’s appetite.

A big reason Walt Disney decided to give up filmmaking to focus on his new theme park in Anaheim (coincidentally right around the time of Watson and Crick’s DNA discovery in 1953) was that, unlike his films (“Snow White” had a jiggy couple of frames in it that bothered him the rest of his life), the theme park would, in Walt’s words, ‘always be in a state of becoming.’ With the opening of Disneyland, Walt Disney got into the co-creation business.  Together, Disney and the guests at his theme park explored a narrative you could call ‘The American Dream.’

Since its opening in 1953, Disneyland has hosted over 600 million visitors, and it’s safe to say that most of those guests have generated artifacts in one form or another that depict ‘the American Dream.’ It’s a Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow. It it’s a Small World after all.  It’s an actor’s life for Me!  And a pirate’s life! And a Bug’s Life!

Over the past 56 years, the content Disneyland paid for—in the form of photo shoots, television programming, cast performances, etc.—is Dwarfed by co-created content. Google lists ‘about 58,000,000’ search results for ‘Disneyland.’ How much of that do you think Disney paid to produce?

As Viola Spolin (coincidentally born in Chicago just like Walt Disney), said of improvisation, advice Disneyland and its guests have taken to heart, “Act on environment, and environment will act on you.”

How much meaning can we liberate from a narrative in the form of stories and other artifacts? is a question we should ask ourselves, in one way or another, at the beginning of every working day.

V. Characteristics of Stories and Other Artifacts

StoryBalls1They unfold in linear time, with a beginning, middle and end.

They are designed.

They are made for sharing.

They are repeatable.

They are authored.

They have texts.

They tend toward genres and formulas.

They are inhabited by a finite number of players.

They are iterative.

The provide context and structure.

They are mappable in conceptual, physical and/or virtual geography.

They are hierarchical. Characters and objects in them gravitate toward high or low status, events toward high or low importance.

They are ‘causative’ in two ways:

1)  Everything in a story happens because of something else;

2) They can cause predictable emotions and reactions.

In the sense that they are causative, artifacts are Newtonian.

VI. Characteristics of Narratives

NarrativeManifold3_bwThey have no beginning, middle or end.

They have infinite beginnings, middles and ends.

They are not bound by time, space or geography.

What is observed of them changes depending on the observer.

They can occupy two or more places in space at the same time–they happen here at the same time they’re happening across the room or the planet.

They are generative.

Themes are the ‘glue’ that hold them together.

They resemble the playing of a game by a vast number of players (think of the artifacts generated by a popular MMORPG and you get the idea) more than they do the dynamic between author and audience.

A narrative is non-causative, that is, everything is related, but how and why things relate depends on the environment and the players.

They emphasize thematic consistency over literalness.  There is no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ way to explore a narrative.

Narratives are quantum phenomena.

VII. What’s the future of narrative?

In a complex communication environment, narrative, and the artifacts it generates, are the best way to resolve complexity, and in fact, this is what Gen Why? kids do extraordinarily well.  Their sense of narrative is unprecedented, and their personal narratives are the stars they steer their ships by.

In an interesting post on filtering, Tim Kastelle and John Steen explain that there are five kinds of filtering: Naïve, Expert, Network, Heuristic and Algorithmic, and, further group these five genres of filtering into two categories, Mechanical and Judgment-Based. That’s How we filter. Narrative is What we filter. Most people give no more thought to how they filter than Grandma gives to the air filter in her car. What they think about and act on, the way Grandma steered her Cadillac to a particular destination, is narrative.

The science around all this is still in its infancy. You can see glimmers of it in transmedia, massive multiplayer games, distributed production models, theme parks, social media, alternate reality games, activist brands, smart badges, business in China, remixes and mashups, augmented reality, micro-loans and the video of your dance in the musical, Hair.

As to what the future of narrative is, it’s a trick question, because there is no future to narrative.  Narrative happens in the Now. It is the world as we experience it in this second. This heartbeat. This breath.

The Future and the Past belong to stories. The Now belongs to narratives.

Like Disneyland, narrative is always in a state of becoming.

VIII.  Ze Zen

We are spider-like, connecting our webs and heeding their vibrations.

We are dowsers, feeling for the tug of an invisible stream.

Everything is a coincidence. This is not a coincidence.

When the story is ready, the storyteller will appear.

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?

Revolution 2.0

Thursday, February 10th, 2011

We don’t normally delve into politics here, but what’s happening right now in Egypt is too universally relevant to ignore.  So park your politics at the door and drink up…

WaelGhonim1

Wael Ghonim

Wael Ghonim, Google’s marketing manager for the Middle East and North Africa, had been held captive by the Egyptian government for 12 days.   Recently released, he has been doing interviews describing what’s going on his country in which he describes it as an internet revolution, ‘Revolution 2.0′  is the name he has given it.  Here’s a 5-minute CNN interview with him (sorry for the link out, embedding has been disabled).

‘Revolution 2.0′ is a classic example of how a scene breaks down when a leader doesn’t share the narrative with a team.  It doesn’t matter whether the scene plays out over 30 years, as with Mubarak’s reign, or whether it’s the duration of your company’s offsite, the dynamic is the same:  Scenes in which one player tries to script and control the narrative are doomed to fall apart in a networked environment.

Not that I’m putting myself in the same lame league as a world-class scene hog like Hosni Mubarak, but ‘scripting’ is my own biggest challenge as an improviser performing on stage.  For much of my career, I got paid for telling stories.  I made a career out of coming up with ideas that others on my team were tasked with implementing.  I led by articulating a vision that others would follow.

And then…

Through improvisation I have come to see that when you participate in a narrative without controlling it, the stories tell themselves.  I understand now that collaboration is the shortest path to implementation.  I realize that vision is only as good as what you can see in the moment, and that the best leadership is actually skillful following in disguise.

‘Revolution 2.0′ is a demonstration of the power of a shared narrative, and a global referendum on what leadership will look like in the Networked World. The Egyptian narrative belongs to the Egyptian people and the harder Hosni Mubarak works at controlling it, the more obvious this fact is going to become.

(UPDATE:  AT 8 AM PST ON FEB 11, 2011, HOSNI MUBARAK RESIGNED.  THE PEOPLE OF EGYPT ARE OVERJOYED.  CONGRATS TO WAEL GHONIM AND ALL EGYPTIANS ON THE END OF A BAD SCENE AND THE BEGINNING OF A NEW ONE!)

Farminess Guide

Tuesday, January 25th, 2011

Farminess1Nothing ever goes away.   The essential nature of a thing does not disappear.  It changes.  Evolves.  That’s how nature rolls.  It is through change that a thing makes itself timeless.  It is through change that it makes itself known.  It may take a different shape, or be reflected through a new reality, but whatever it was that made a thing what it was in the first place will still exist in the world.  For example, Communism may have fallen in the Soviet Union, but it is alive and thriving in every petty bureaucrat, baked into every Bridge to Nowhere, and encoded in every lie told by a government to its people.  Magic Johnson may no longer play basketball, but the exuberance with which he played the game is, today, alive in some gangly kid from a small town in Hunan Province, who’s sharing her own brand of hoops magic with her teammates and fans.  We may lose a loved one, but we do not lose their love.

If only because it invokes a sense of nostalgia in me personally, I’m happpy to report that the small family farm is thriving.  As a rural lifestyle it barely exists, of course.  Most of the economic vitality over the next century will be in urban areas.  The essence of the family farm–call it ‘farminess’–has morphed into something new.  In fact, in my observation, the essence of the family farm is maybe more present in the world today than ever.  Very few of those reading this will have grown up on a family farm, so there is no way for you to recognize this essence.  Not having experienced the change from what it was to what it is, it will be almost impossible for you to see.  I’m writing this post as a kind of guide, to help you see and appreciate the farminess that’s present today in the networked world.

Nobody said it is an easy life.  Your fortunes hang on every harvest, and when the harvest isn’t good, you may have to take a job off the farm for a season or two.  One bad hailstorm can wipe out a year’s crop; one virus can decimate your herd.  It is, however, a good way to experience life.  Your property is  intellectual not earthen, but it is just as tillable, and contains more growth-friendly enzymes and more potential for generating wealth than the sweetest acre of Nebraska farmland ever did.  You get to be around your family a lot, and they get to see and experience what you do for a living.  Everybody pitches in.  The sense of community is strong.  The work ethic is strong.  The food is healthy and delicious.

Here’s a Farminess Guide, seen through the change from what it used to look like, to what it looks like today…

40 Acres and a Mule—>A Server Farm and a Team of Siberian Engineers

Milk Cow —> Computer. (“Give, Asus, give!”)

Quilting Bee —-> Scrum

Hayride —-> Rave

Dead Animal Truck —> Wayback Machine

Manure Spreader —-> Drudge Report

Eating —-> Exercising

Local Bank —-> Kickstarter

Pitchfork Through the Foot —–> Piercing

Seed Planter —-> Twitter

Church Social —-> Facebook

Trips to Town Once a Week —-> Trips to Wherever, Whenever

Trespasser —-> Hacker

Successful Farmer Magazine —-> Lifehacker

Spring Flooding —–> WikiLeaks

4-H Club —-> Club Penguin

The Weather —-> The Cloud

Old Grey Mare Who Ain’t What She Used to Be—> Silver ’72 Dodge Charger Awaiting Conversion to Biodiesel

Skunk —-> Spammer

Pine Tar Stain —-> Tattoo

Outhouse —–> Biodigester

Pond —– > Hot Tub

Barn Raising —-> Agile Development

Growing Season —-> Year to Quarter

Butchering Day —> IPO

Cropland —-> Network

Whiskey Still —-> Marijuana Plant

Barn —-> Studio

Smokehouse —-> Food Dehydrator

Gas Tank —- > Solar Charging Station

Grainery —-> Database

Windmill —- > Wind Turbine

“We will kill the old red rooster when she comes.” —-> “She’ll be bringing Chinese takeout when she comes.”

Any fellow farm kids have anything to add to this?

Stay farmy, my friends, and I’ll see you around the bonfire I mean at Burning Man.

Ngrams

Wednesday, January 5th, 2011

Google Labs, ever exploring the syntax and context of language, offers an algorithm it calls NGram, which maps the frequency of words or phrases in books published from 1800 to the present.   I Ngrammed a few words to see what kind of trajectory the app would plot.  Here are some of the results:

‘Happiness’ seems to have peaked in 1820.  The next few years will determine whether it’s making a comeback, or continuing its downward trend.  Relative to the results of other queries, this is a smooth curve, which suggests that we can only see the change in frequency over long periods of time.  We don’t notice that ‘happiness’ is less frequent from one year to the next, but it is.NGram_Happiness

You can also plot multiple comma-separated words or phrases on an Ngram.  In this graph, we see that ‘good’ (blue line) fluctuates over time, while ‘evil’ (red line) is constant.  This suggests that if ‘good’ and ‘evil’ were investments (which in a way they are) good has more upside, while evil offers a low but predictable yield over time.Ngram_GoodEvil

But then there’s this:  ‘Virtue’ is the blue line; ‘Vice’ is the red.  No doubt about what sells.Ngram_VirtueVice

‘Improvisation’ shows a steady upward curve, with spikes up and down in the last 7 years.  Based on the 200-year trajectory, we are due for an even bigger upward spike in the near future.  Let’s ride that wave!GoogleNgram_Improvisation2

Here’s the Ngram link. Play with it!  NGrams are useful for observing how ideas fluctuate over time in terms of their significance and meaning.  When expressing your brand’s narrative, it is wiser to invest in trajectories than it is to take positions.  What’s trending today on Twitter is a position.  The events that led to the trend are its trajectory.

The Oakley Coda

Thursday, December 16th, 2010

Back in October, when the 33 Chilean miners emerge from the mine where they have been trapped for 69 days, they are all wearing Oakley sunglasses.  Every journalist covering their emergence comments on it.   Every photo of every rescued miner–and how many impressions is that worldwide?  Billions? Trillions? Chillions?—shows them wearing their Oakleys.  I’ve been following the narrative for a while, and long after the rescue has ended happily, I am still curious how those sunglasses got on those 33 billboards faces for all the world to see.LosMineros_Oakleys

Three weeks ago, I contact a friend, Kurt Kochman, who used to work at Oakley (he’s now the Web Customer Experience Manager for Skechers) who puts me in touch with an executive at Oakley, who puts me in touch with a PR person from Oakley named Diane, who puts me in touch with journalist in Chile named Jonathan Franklin, who Diane says, “Knows the story better than we do.” Hmm. A non-Oakley person who knows the Oakley story better than Oakley does? This is my kind of branding. No wonder I wear Oakleys.

Jonathan Franklin

Jonathan Franklin

The Chilean miners, it turns out, come out of that mine wearing Oakleys because Jonathan Franklin works his way through school in the 1980s by selling sunglasses.  There’s a lot more to it than that, of course, but that is how the thread begins. “I’ve always been a fanatic for sunglasses,” says Franklin when we speak on Skype this week. “When I was in college [at Brown University], I made my living selling sunglasses.  I had a company called All I Wear. We had ten or twelve students covering campuses up and down the East Coast. I’ve also been a street vendor of sunglasses.  Good ones. Vuarnets. Ray Bans. Oakley wasn’t on my radar yet.”

Here is what happens between Jonathan Franklin’s college years and the rescue in Chile that results in the miners wearing Oakleys:

2) Twelve years ago, Franklin moves to Chile where he works as a correspondent for The Guardian. He also freelances all over the Americas for publications like GQ, Esquire and Playboy. He embraces the Chilean culture, loves it there, gets married there, begins raising a family there.

3)  In 2003, five years after the move to Chile, while covering a story in North Carolina for GQ about the World SWAT Championships, meets Erik Poston, a sales rep for Oakley. He and Poston bond over their mutual interest in sunglasses technology. “He took time off from whatever he was doing to talk about the optics in sunglasses,” says Franklin. “Oakleys are great in the deserts or the mountains.”

(We call this mutual interest, or agreement, ‘finding the game.’  It is game that will pay off for its players seven years later.)

4)  When he arrives on the scene of the August mine accident in Copiapo, 800 km east of Santiago where he lives, Franklin is the only print journalist given a ‘rescue pass, which means he has full access to the rescue site, and regular conversations with the miners. His pass designates his job on the rescue site as ‘Writer.’

5) A few weeks after the miners get discovered still alive, Franklin sits in on a meeting at which the subject is the design of the rescue vessel [The Phoenix].  “Talk about improvisation,” he says, “there’s never been anything like this. At one point, they said they’d need sunglasses for the guys. They just kind of skipped right over it, said they’d get safety glasses or something.  They had so many things to think about that they just skipped right over the glasses.  I raised my hand and said, ‘Excuse me, I am only a journalist, and I don’t mean to be butting in, but why don’t you get the guys some Oakleys or some real sunglasses?  And they said we don’t care about that.  And I said how about if I’m in charge of sunglasses?  So they said okay, fine, one less thing for us to worry about, you’re in charge of sunglasses.”

(This is classic ‘yes-anding’ by Franklin.  Yes-anding can move a scene in an unexpectedly productive direction.  It can also, as it does here, transform a trivial detail into something important and valuable.  These little twists are the stuff great stories are made of.)

6) “God knows why, but I had saved the guy from Oakley’s business card. So I write him a letter.   I said I’m a journalist, I’m not going to make a penny off this, but if you get me the glasses, I’ll get them to the miners.”

7) Oakley responds immediately. They ask for specs. The Chilean Navy, which is tending to the miners’ health, sends the specs. Anatomical, so that debris and dirt won’t get in. And dark. 1oo% UV and UVB ratings. Research scientists at Oakley go back and forth with the Navy a few times until they get the best lenses on the most appropriate frames. They ship 35 customized pairs to the Copiapo mine.

The glasses arrive at the last minute. A Navy doctor sends them down the rescue chute. When they come back up, they are on smiling faces surrounded by more smiling faces, and the rest…is eyewear history.

IMG_0523“The Chileans were very grateful,” says Franklin. “The miners, before they were released, were very grateful.  And it was good for everyone.  I know Oakley has gotten criticized for exploiting the situation, but the CEO of Oakley, who sent me the glasses, had totally forgotten about it.  He was watching the rescue on TV, and the first miner pops up and he’s wearing Oakleys, and the CEO says to his wife, ‘How about that, he’s wearing our glasses!’  And the second miner pops up, and he’s wearing Oakleys, and the CEO said, ‘Oh, yeah, that’s right, we sent them some of our glasses!’  He’d totally forgotten about it.”

Lots to be learned from the Oakley Coda:

If you add something productive to every situation you’re in, outcomes take care of themselves.

Subject matter expertise is a good point of connection.

Minor roles in one scene can become major roles in the next scene.

Don’t persuade, participate. The best way to influence the game is by playing it.

Give gifts to your scene partners. Your expertise can be a gift.

Be sensitive to context. If you join a scene in progress, have a good reason why.

Meaningful connections have a long shelf life. This is relevant to network economies, where meaningful connections can be ‘parked’ indefinitely, until a scene calls for them.

Narrative trumps nationality.

Do the good thing in the moment, and the better thing will happen down the line.

Damn, I can’t think of them all! There’s a lot! Find something for yourself in this story and put it in play. Good things will happen as a result. There is a science to serendipity.

You cannot script a story like this. You cannot bake it into your media plan. You cannot buy it, for any price. No one at Oakley could have caused it to happen. If they had tried to achieve the same outcome on their own, it would have come across as rank exploitation. They would’ve never penetrated the inner circle at Copiapo. Instead, they had a conversation. Way back when, they planted a seed. When conditions were right, that seed grew and blossomed into something beautiful, something money could not buy—an incredible narrative.

If you’d like to soak up more of the Chilean miners’ story, you’ll want to pick up the book Jonathan Franklin is writing. It comes out February, 2011.

Remixing Your Metaphors

Friday, December 10th, 2010

Prompted by a question from a friend of ours, GameChangers conducted a flash survey to identify the metaphors used most frequently in business communication.  The results are no surprise:MetaphorGraph3

Our methodology was to ask six exceptional communicators who work with all sizes of organizations in a lot of different verticals what metaphors they hear most often in their business scenes.  Those surveyed included a financial analyst, an academic, an artist, a social media director for a large tech company, a brand strategist and someone I’d describe as a ‘narratologist,’ who coaches organizations on storytelling. We limited the focus of the survey to internal communication for two reasons:

1) External communication like PR, advertising and social media, is how companies represent themselves to the rest of the world.  In this context, metaphors are frequently used as a means of persuasion, and are often more about what a company or brand wants to happen than what is actually happening. Because these metaphors serve a different purpose and have a different trajectory, they have to be analyzed separately.

2) Internal communication, by comparison, describes a company’s process, environment and character.  The metaphors used internally reflect reality, because they are used to initiate or define action.  For this reason they often represent an underlying ethos, and describe how the people in an organization go about their business.

A few of the respondents’ observations:

“Maybe this would change with a few female managers, but most men I work with are all about ‘playing offense’, ‘launching a counterattack’, ‘leading from the front’,  and ‘winning the battle but losing the war’.”

“Way heavier on war references or warlike verbs:  Insert, manage, acquire, degrade, demand, battle, launch, attack, defend…”

“I also wonder as more women get into biz if the primary metaphors change.  Meaning, less sports and war, more family and home metaphors?  Especially if this whole social thing works out? (tongue firmly in cheek)”

“Think of the top headlines, of any ‘this product is killing this product’, ‘death of X’, etc.”

“Sports also present…anything that’s zero sum and can be ‘won’ lends itself.”

“I also hear (more recently) about scientific references like ‘if you observe it, you change it’.”

‘I do hear a bit about chess and board games, typically in terms of ‘looking at the whole board’, ‘sacrificing your queen’, and ‘thinking through the endgame’.

The business opportunity is clear.  Over two-thirds of all business communication relies on only two metaphors—war and sports.  Not only have we worn them out, they do not address the voracious appetite of a networked business environment for fresh narratives and new ways of relating to the world. To do that, we need fresh metaphors.  They are out there in the world, and in abundance.  Games are beginning to have their day.  And there have always been organizations that see themselves as Family.  The most upside, I believe, lies in the ‘Other’ category.  Big, expressive, thematically rich subjects—music and dance, cooking, biology, quantum mechanics, farming, to name a few—can invigorate your organizational vocabulary.  They help transform your narrative from the mundane and predictable to the artful and unexpected.  And that’s what you want in a story, any story.  So start planting, and see what grows!

(A coda to this post in light of what happened yesterday in Arizona, when a mentally disturbed gunman killed six people during his attempt to assassinate Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords: The metaphors of war—and the violence they glorify—have polarized the U.S. politically to a dangerous degree. Yesterday’s events add a raw and desperate urgency to the quest for new ways of seeing and engaging with one another. The metaphors of war attract fear-driven fringe characters looking for absolutes, either-ors, and final solutions, to the problems confronting us. To these people, nothing says final like the end of a gun barrel. The narratives of war trample on the tender shoots of new ideas, and marginalize people participating in the new narratives, people like Congresswoman Giffords, who champion peaceful co-existence, believe in yes-and, and who understand that yesterday’s solutions don’t work in today’s world.)