Posts Tagged ‘Good’

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 Mighty And

Monday, November 29th, 2010

Yes“Getting to yes” is a popular phrase among business managers. (It is the title of a 1981 book by Harvard professors, Roger Fisher and William Ury.  A 1991 re-issue added an author’s credit for the original editor, Bruce Patton—apparently it took the authors ten years to get to Yes).  The book dealt with negotiating tactics, and spent a record number of weeks on the Business Week best-seller list.  Over the past 30 years, the book’s title has taken on a lot of meta meaning among managers:  Close the deal.  Don’t take “no” an answer.  Get ‘er done.  Reach agreement.  Earn eyeballs.  Satisfy the customer.

In a networked environment, it’s easy to get to Yes.  Anyone can say Yes to anything.  One could make a pretty good case that in large networks, especially when it comes to innovation, there’s an epidemic of ‘yessing,’ paralleled by an equally virulent epidemic of doing nothing about it.  This is a kind of safe harbor, an advantageous position for piggybacking on successes (”A big fan from the start.”) and distancing oneself from failure (”Not taking the hit for that mess.”)

As a description of a particular point in time, “Getting to yes” is fine (and the 1981 book has still-relevant advice for negotiations and sales).  “Yes” does not, however, describe a process.  It’s a status:  Thumbs up.  Good to go.  Roger that.  A big 10-4.  As a status it is, by definition, static.  And “static,” in a dynamic environment like the one in which business operates today, is death.And

By contrast, “Yes and,” a basic building block of improvisation, describes a process, an obligation by every player in the game to contribute, and actively build on the reality of the moment.  In terms of process, “Yes” is the icing. “And” is the cake.  “Yes” may get all the credit, but “and” does the work.  “Getting to and” invokes participation.  It demands collaboration.  It results in extension of ability and expansion of possibility.  “And” moves the narrative. It unlocks the adaptive processes demanded by a networked world.  Adaptation means movement.  And movement is life.

To live, to grow, to seize the potential of the moment, don’t make things good.  Make them better.

Serious Games

Tuesday, September 9th, 2008

Superstruct1

One of my favorite metaphors for the Networked World comes from a source I can’t attribute. I believe I came across it in Wired Magazine in the late 1990s. In the article, the writer cited a sci-fi story that describes a future in which game kiosks have been installed on busy street corners. The kiosks alert passersby when there’s some kind of rotten thing happening to the human organism — a famine, a war, a currency devaluation, a water shortage, etc. When the alert is issued, pedestrians take to the kiosks and play a massively multplayer game designed so that the playing generates whatever kind of energy or economies are needed to correct the imbalance in the world. (more…)